Equifax doesn't want consumers to get their $125 • Hacker News Board

Re: Equifax doesn't want consumers to get their $125

#111

Post by harryh » Tue, Sep 17, 2019, 2:04 PM UTC

aloknnikhil wrote: post #106

harryh wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Equifax didn't send you that email. If you read further down in the e-mail it even says "This email is from the Court-appointed settlement administrator, not Equifax."

Fair enough. That just makes the whole thing even worse. There's basically no hope in receiving the compensation anymore.

The vast majority of the settlement is designated for people who experience actual harm (identity theft of some kind basically) from the breach.

It's perfectly reasonable that people who's lives haven't been negatively impacted in any real way don't receive anything more than a token payment.

Re: Equifax doesn't want consumers to get their $125

#112

Post by auiya » Tue, Sep 17, 2019, 2:04 PM UTC

This whole process is a joke. I went and dug up my claim number, entered it into the site to amend, and the site just dies and doesn't allow me to proceed any further. If they had my contact info to begin with, just cut me a check and skip the shenanigans.

Re: Equifax doesn't want consumers to get their $125

#113

Post by raisedbyninjas » Tue, Sep 17, 2019, 2:04 PM UTC

exabrial wrote: post #76

Everyone needs to realize that the whole "fine" was just an inside deal. Who do you think provides credit monitoring services? That's right, credit bureaus. That's why the they're pushing everyone to take the "free credit monitoring", so they recover the loss from the fine. If they were to pay all 140 million people $125, the sum would be $17b or so, which is an appropriate fine.

The life-long increased susceptibility to identity theft is worth quite a lot more than $125.

Re: Equifax doesn't want consumers to get their $125

#114

Post by 99052882514569 » Tue, Sep 17, 2019, 2:05 PM UTC

argd678 wrote: post #104

It seems like companies only get the message when there’s jail time involved. None of the companies would freeze my credit since their web sites said some unspecified value couldn’t be verified for me, despite confirming my data was indeed lost. Pretty sure, like other regulations that include jail time, this wouldn’t have happened or their website to freeze my credit would have worked.

I agree. Until someone's ass is on the line, and I mean in terms of prison time and not merely their job, the rational thing to do for a shitty company that never cared for its customers is to continue with that approach.

Re: Equifax doesn't want consumers to get their $125

#115

Post by amalcon » Tue, Sep 17, 2019, 2:05 PM UTC

exabrial wrote: post #76

Everyone needs to realize that the whole "fine" was just an inside deal. Who do you think provides credit monitoring services? That's right, credit bureaus. That's why the they're pushing everyone to take the "free credit monitoring", so they recover the loss from the fine. If they were to pay all 140 million people $125, the sum would be $17b or so, which is an appropriate fine.

It's doubly painful, because the "free credit monitoring" on offer is provided by Equifax -- the exact company whose competence we don't trust anymore. The compensation for being affected by Equifax's security failure is a gratis security offering from that same company. For crying out loud, they could have at least paid Experian or TransUnion to do the monitoring: while they are just as shady, we don't have immediate evidence of their security incompetence.

It's like if you purchased a product that exploded, injuring you, but somehow the manufacturer was permitted to compensate you by giving you other products they manufacture. Why would you want those products? How do you know they won't also explode?

Re: Equifax doesn't want consumers to get their $125

#116

Post by harryh » Tue, Sep 17, 2019, 2:06 PM UTC

lvh wrote: post #107

harryh wrote: post #61

The title of this post (which, admittedly, was taken from the NYTimes) isn't really correct. The terms of the settlement have been set. Equifax's financial outlay is fixed. All of the post settlement divvying up of the funds is being administered by the government bodies who negotiated the settlement, not Equifax. Equifax's desires about how the money gets divvied up at this point are irrelevant.

Mostly agreed. My understanding is the divvying up is not a govt entity, and the judge still has to approve the settlement, which isn’t a foregone conclusion, so it’s not entirely true that Equifax is out of the woods. Also, the reputational damage hits them even if they’re not the proximate actor here.

I, for one, think it's kind of unfair that equifax is being blamed for the contents of communications it had no hand in crafting. Especially when the major organizations like the NYTimes are so unclear in their headline writing about what is actually going on.

Re: Equifax doesn't want consumers to get their $125

#117

Post by Fjolsvith » Tue, Sep 17, 2019, 2:08 PM UTC

benj111 wrote: post #103

delinka wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Might as well not even vote. Your one votes can't turn the tide.

That's why we get people like Trump.

He sure made some people's lives better.

Re: Equifax doesn't want consumers to get their $125

#118

Post by aloknnikhil » Tue, Sep 17, 2019, 2:14 PM UTC

harryh wrote: post #111

aloknnikhil wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fair enough. That just makes the whole thing even worse. There's basically no hope in receiving the compensation anymore.

The vast majority of the settlement is designated for people who experience actual harm (identity theft of some kind basically) from the breach. It's perfectly reasonable that people who's lives haven't been negatively impacted in any real way don't receive anything more than a token payment.

The alternative compensations was set at $31 million. And the cash compensations per person caps out at $20,000. If we start with this cap, the settlement was supposed to benefit only 1,550 individuals out of the 148 million records that were breached. Even if you assume just $125 per person, that number only benefits 248,000. So the number of people benefiting from this range between 1,550 and 248,000, if the original settlement claims were to be upheld. Instead, every claimant is now being asked to get credit monitoring from the same company that couldn't secure the records. To be fair, the FTC does suggest getting an alternative from Experian, but only in the FAQ.

Re: Equifax doesn't want consumers to get their $125

#119

Post by tathougies » Tue, Sep 17, 2019, 2:15 PM UTC

argd678 wrote: post #104

It seems like companies only get the message when there’s jail time involved. None of the companies would freeze my credit since their web sites said some unspecified value couldn’t be verified for me, despite confirming my data was indeed lost. Pretty sure, like other regulations that include jail time, this wouldn’t have happened or their website to freeze my credit would have worked.

Totally agree. Courts also need to be less hesitant to disband corporations that break laws or court orders. Too big to fail should go the way of the dodo.

Re: Equifax doesn't want consumers to get their $125

#120

Post by mLuby » Tue, Sep 17, 2019, 2:17 PM UTC

beepboopbeep wrote: post #89

TheSoftwareGuy wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do we really know for sure that the other bureau's are really any better, and not just lucky at this point?

I swear this is the motto of hacker news. "Everything sucks and you're wasting your time trying to change it" - HN

In human systems (which software now enables) like oppressive government and corporations, often things do suck and vast powers are arrayed against the individual activist.

In peace and science, social justice and medicine, things have never been better.