Personal Finance

Equifax Hacked Jul 29- 143M Americans, Unknown # of Canadians

  • Last Updated:
  • Nov 14th, 2017 8:39 am
Deal Fanatic
User avatar
Mar 9, 2007
7965 posts
2808 upvotes
Toronto
Class action lawsuit breakdown of payment.

Lawyers gets $100 million
Individuals affected gets $20 each

WOULD SOMEBODY THINK OF THE CHILDREN!!!
Deal Guru
User avatar
Dec 7, 2009
13392 posts
1223 upvotes
hagbard wrote:
Sep 9th, 2017 11:49 am
The banks and other financial institutions are also to blame and should also be part of the suit.
I am actively trying to get 'unbanked' through crypto. It is taking some time, but I figure in 10 years I will have no use for a bank or a credit reporting agency.
In a perfect system, corporations would fear the government and the government would fear the people. - David Wong

Check out caRpetbomBer's picks in this thread.
Deal Addict
Feb 29, 2012
2662 posts
1390 upvotes
Richmond
Syne wrote:
Sep 9th, 2017 11:44 am
Exactly my thoughts. I never once asked to be monitored or profiled.
So here's a legal question: let's say you get a credit card from BigBadBank, and one of the terms in their 30-page agreement is that you agree to allow the bank to provide your personal information to third parties in order to verify your credit worthiness or to offer other services to you (i.e., cross-marketing). You are of course deemed to have agreed to those terms by using the credit card. I'll bet that there are no terms in that agreement restricting what private personal information the bank can provide, who they can provide it to, or requiring them to use any measures to protect your personal data. If they have a duty of care, it is imposed by other laws, not by their own agreement.

Now if one of those 3rd parties like Equifax carelessly leaks that personal information, who do you sue? Most obviously Equifax, but most people probably have no direct connection with Equifax at all. There is no contract between you. Equifax obtained information about you from their own sources. Do they have any duty of care to you not to expose it on the internet?

So maybe you sue BigBadBank, since there is a contract between you and they have a duty of care with respect to your private information, whether they leak it or give it to a third party who leaks it. But BigBadBank will may say that lots of sources gave information to Equifax. How are you going to prove that it's their fault?
Deal Guru
User avatar
Dec 7, 2009
13392 posts
1223 upvotes
Faith24 wrote:
Sep 9th, 2017 12:00 pm
So here's a legal question: let's say you get a credit card from BigBadBank, and one of the terms in their 30-page agreement is that you agree to allow the bank to provide your personal information to third parties in order to verify your credit worthiness or to offer other services to you (i.e., cross-marketing). You are of course deemed to have agreed to those terms by using the credit card. I'll bet that there are no terms in that agreement restricting what private personal information the bank can provide, who they can provide it to, or requiring them to use any measures to protect your personal data. If they have a duty of care, it is imposed by other laws, not by their own agreement.

Now if one of those 3rd parties like Equifax carelessly leaks that personal information, who do you sue? Most obviously Equifax, but most people probably have no direct connection with Equifax at all. There is no contract between you. Equifax obtained information about you from their own sources. Do they have any duty of care to you not to expose it on the internet?

So maybe you sue BigBadBank, since there is a contract between you and they have a duty of care with respect to your private information, whether they leak it or give it to a third party who leaks it. But BigBadBank will may say that lots of sources gave information to Equifax. How are you going to prove that it's their fault?
The problem is KYC legislation most likely mandates that they collect all of this data and pass it around so they can sniff you out. In a decentralized financial system, the customer will have absolute control over their information and deal with transactions on a much more level playing field. Contracts won't be shrouded in mystery.
In a perfect system, corporations would fear the government and the government would fear the people. - David Wong

Check out caRpetbomBer's picks in this thread.
Deal Fanatic
Aug 29, 2006
6747 posts
970 upvotes
That was in 2015, however and the free reports should have expired for most unless they extended the reporting.

Have to wonder if the Equifax breach now affect their current and active members or how far does it go back ?
t3359 wrote:
Sep 8th, 2017 10:14 pm
https://krebsonsecurity.com/2017/09/equ ... ster-fire/
...
Might affect those who signed up after the Home Depot breach.

bjl
The Devil made me buy it - RFD. :twisted:
Deal Fanatic
User avatar
Jul 17, 2008
7492 posts
1277 upvotes
Can't wait to get my 10$ from the class action suit!

I wonder if I could sue it personally, I'd probably get off a lot better after I invest some money into a good lawyer.
Deal Expert
User avatar
Dec 19, 2001
29061 posts
993 upvotes
Fernando Po
Syne wrote:
Sep 9th, 2017 11:52 am
I am actively trying to get 'unbanked' through crypto. It is taking some time, but I figure in 10 years I will have no use for a bank or a credit reporting agency.
There are problems with crypto too. Its way too complicated to catch on in its current form, and I suspect it too will be hacked at some point, it's not a stable medium of exchange (but a good speculative investment), its also fiat, I'm sure I can come up with more but that will do. I'd like to stick with cash or precious metals once I deal with my housing issue, and just buy stuff. This Equifax thing is particularly grading as I don't ever borrow money (except CC) yet they still end up with my information. Hell, even the banks will do a credit check even if all I'm doing is making a deposit or setting up an account. I still have a credit card but plan to get rid of that at some point as well.
"On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their heart's desire at last and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron.” -HL Mencken
Deal Addict
Feb 4, 2015
2573 posts
457 upvotes
Canada, Eh!!
Could not find anything similar for Equifax unless I searched wrong?

On the Transunion form on second page it says Police Report but no mention if required or optional, i.e. set up fraud alert without police report possible as preventive measure?

Also, would suggest to get SIN fraud alert? Guess they have our SIN # but would rather not give if just the regular fraud alert works fine.
Deal Addict
Aug 24, 2016
2174 posts
1094 upvotes
UrbanPoet wrote:
Sep 9th, 2017 4:25 pm
When i did lending at the bank... the reports show court ordered judgements too.
They still do.
I had no idea they show support payments, but I suppose it makes sense since it's court ordered.
Deal Addict
Dec 12, 2009
2292 posts
703 upvotes
Toronto
Faith24 wrote:
Sep 9th, 2017 12:00 pm
I'll bet that there are no terms in that agreement restricting what private personal information the bank can provide, who they can provide it to, or requiring them to use any measures to protect your personal data. If they have a duty of care, it is imposed by other laws, not by their own agreement.
I think we will learn about a lot of things once this goes through the privacy commissioner.
Anybody remember the hoopla about police departments uploading presumed information onto CPIC that was then passed onto homeland security?
Deal Fanatic
Mar 15, 2005
5108 posts
662 upvotes
New news regarding the trading of Equifax stock.

We already know that three senior execs were likely insider trading when they sold nearly $2M of stock in a non-scheduled sale prior to the new being public.

New suspicious activity around put trades prior to the information going public. Someone purchased about $150K in put options on the stock a week before the announcements, which after the stock dropped was a profit of about $4M for them

https://www.cnbc.com/2017/09/08/suspect ... rofit.html
Jon Najarian, a trader and CNBC contributor, said Equifax options trade infrequently. As an example, in the entire month of July, Equifax put options traded just under 260 contracts, or about 13 contracts a day.

But Aug. 21 was different. Najarian pointed to activity in Equifax puts that day, when 10 times as many were bought than in the entire preceding month.

Specifically, Najarian said, 2,600 contracts, giving the owner the right to sell 260,000 shares of Equifax at $135 in September, were purchased for 60 to 70 cents each.
Newbie
Sep 9, 2017
9 posts
2 upvotes
Syne wrote:
Sep 9th, 2017 11:44 am
Exactly my thoughts. I never once asked to be monitored or profiled.
You authorized the banks to report your personal info and account status (payment, balance, etc.) to the credit bureaus (compiling a credit history) when you opened a bank/credit card account with them.
Deal Addict
Sep 23, 2009
3897 posts
1102 upvotes
Ziggy007 wrote:
Sep 10th, 2017 11:02 am
New news regarding the trading of Equifax stock.

We already know that three senior execs were likely insider trading when they sold nearly $2M of stock in a non-scheduled sale prior to the new being public.

New suspicious activity around put trades prior to the information going public. Someone purchased about $150K in put options on the stock a week before the announcements, which after the stock dropped was a profit of about $4M for them

https://www.cnbc.com/2017/09/08/suspect ... rofit.html
The CEO owned 285,126 shares as per the DEF-14A filed in March:

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data ... m#lefxa021

Whoops.

I highly doubt that someone naked bought $150K of puts with the intention to sell them for a profit .... there isn't much of a market for them.

But, someone may have bought it as a form of insurance.

Given that the CEO made close to $15 Million in 2015, $150K of puts is less than 1% of a year's compensation.

No other executive owns close to 260,000 shares.

Of course, it could be an outsider ... but probably not.
Deal Addict
User avatar
Mar 31, 2017
1450 posts
432 upvotes
renoldman wrote:
Sep 10th, 2017 5:38 pm
The CEO owned 285,126 shares as per the DEF-14A filed in March:

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data ... m#lefxa021

Whoops.

I highly doubt that someone naked bought $150K of puts with the intention to sell them for a profit .... there isn't much of a market for them.

But, someone may have bought it as a form of insurance.

Given that the CEO made close to $15 Million in 2015, $150K of puts is less than 1% of a year's compensation.

No other executive owns close to 260,000 shares.

Of course, it could be an outsider ... but probably not.
Each put is 100 shares dude. Each put was bought at around 70 cents. This is in the millions of dollars in profits.

Top