Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Equifax doesn't want consumers to get their $125

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 286 posts

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

#211

Post by the_watcher »

journalctl wrote: post #205
the_watcher wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a very, very imperfect method of figuring out the key question here ("Would Equifax just file for bankruptcy?"), but their enterprise value is ~$20B, and paying out $125 per person would cost over $18B, so it seems pretty clear you'd need to reduce the per person payout. It would take more work than I can put in right now to decide what it should be, but finger in the wind halving it seems like the right star…

Would bankruptcy be so bad? “Sorry, Equifax. Due to some recent financial irresponsibility, we’ve unfortunately had to lower your score. To zero.”

Clarified above, but I was thinking about likelihood of receiving the settlement, not fairness to Equifax. A settlement number so punitive it would put them out of business would substantially reduce the chances of those impacted receiving more than a token amount.

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

#212

Post by takeda »

the_watcher wrote: post #203

Something I've wondered always wondered when reading through class actions: do multiple class actions suits over the same set of facts ever happen? Are they possible? It seems technically possible: Class action settlement reached, somehow a huge portion of the impacted class opts out of the settlement (extremely unlikely, but possible). Opted out class members somehow organize a subsequent action. Is the above possib…

I am not a lawyer, but to me if you signed up for class action, and you agreed that the $125 check supposed to be the payment for your damages and the other party backed off and did not provide it that means the agreement shouldn't be valid.

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

#214

Post by PonderousBug »

fennecfoxen wrote: post #159
kls wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of note, you and I are not the customers of Equifax, we are the product they are selling.

Too rhetorical, and not informative. Forecasts of whether you'll make good on a promise to pay money are the product they're selling.

Seriously!

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

#215

Post by nkozyra »

the_watcher wrote: post #199
knicholes wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is it just me who thinks that $125 would hardly cover the cost of dealing with a stolen identity?

You could file for additional compensation based on documented damages (time, cost, etc). I'm not sure if that came from a separate settlement or not (doubtful) or if the documentation requirements are even more onerous (likely), but there was definitely an option to do this.

Depending on how much you asked I suspect the documentation required would scale but at a certain threshold they'd probably just pay an individual $300 with minimal documentation.

But who knows, they've been pretty craven and uncaring throughout. CRAs are not very good companies, honestly.

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

#216

Post by pimmen »

PretzelFisch wrote: post #160
cwkoss wrote: post #6

If anyone is getting a mortgage or refinancing soon, ask your lender to 'drop' equifax without running your score with them - just take the score from the other two. Equifax is an unnecessary security and privacy risk. They are a horrible company that needs to go out of business. Make their customers feel embarrassed to be doing business with them.

You assume they still don't get paid when a credit report is run without asking for that burro. I don't see any evidence that this is how the fee structure works.

If not a lot of people are run through Equifax, their customers are going to ask themselves why they’re paying them.

That could at the very least give the customers leverage to negotiate the rates down, which would also hurt Equifax’s revenue stream.

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

#217

Post by Gajurgensen »

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

I understand that the pervasive cynisicm can be exausting, but in the case of computer security, it really is warranted.

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

#219

Post by takeda »

ta20938 wrote: post #176
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 imagine arresting the Equifax Board of Directors, or similar, would have only have the effect of forcing security breaches back underground.

It should force better security practices, but I know, it is crazy talk.

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

#220

Post by cwkoss »

ceejayoz wrote: post #189
cwkoss wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think a CISO or CEO going to jail would send a strong message to the rest of the business community.

That message would be "silently cover up any data breaches and hope they don't get discovered", wouldn't it?

I think that sentiment is already prevalent.
Post reply on HN