OT: You're Not Getting That $125 from Equifax After All (WSJ Link Inside)
Not sure if it's behind a paywall, but I'll just throw this out there to let you understand the level of incompetence being exhibited here:
Last week, the FTC announced a settlement agreement of up to $700 million with Equifax over its 2017 data breach that compromised the personal information of 147 million Americans. The settlement includes at least $300 million, with potentially up to $425 million, available for consumers affected by the breach. This money is intended to provide consumers with free credit monitoring or, if they already have credit monitoring in place, $125 cash as compensation for their time and money lost during the hack.
Since only $31 million was allocated for these cash payments, spreading the amount among a large number of consumers would lower the amount of money those people who file claims could potentially receive.
Apparently they didn't factor in the possibility that a non-inconsequential amount of free money available to most consumers with minimal effort required would go viral on the internet.
Website says 4M people already signed up. They allotted $31M. That's <$8pp.
Well, to be totally accurate, they say that "4.5 million" people visited the claims site. But not how many actually filed claims, and not how many of those chose the cash option.
That's true. I, for one, didn't qualify. In any case, with an initial $31 million allocated to cash payments, they've basically assumed that about 248,000 people would opt for the cash payments. Out of an estimate that up to 148 million people were affected.
Enjoy your check for $0.75.
FTC saying the credit monitoring will be worth a lot more:
So, if you haven’t submitted your claim yet, think about opting for the free credit monitoring instead. Frankly, the free credit monitoring is worth a lot more – the market value would be hundreds of dollars a year. And this monitoring service is probably stronger and more helpful than any you may have already, because it monitors your credit report at all three nationwide credit reporting agencies, and it comes with up to $1 million in identity theft insurance and individualized identity restoration services.
For those who have already submitted claims for this cash payment, look for an email from the settlement administrator. They’ll be asking you for the name of the credit monitoring service you already have. Or, if you want to change your mind, you’ll have a chance to switch to the free credit monitoring. You can also email the settlement administrator, JND, at info@EquifaxBreachSettlement.
https://www.consumer.ftc.gov/blog/2019/07/equifax-data-breach-pick-free-credit-monitoring
I already get this through my credit card.
I'd be surprised if your credit card offered the million dollars of insurance and monitored all three bureaus. (Or did I misread who you were responding to here? You were responding to the credit karma comment, so ignore).
LOL at the FTC trying to push people to accept the credit monitoring instead of cash to try to keep them from looking like idiots when the cash payments come out to $1 per person. FTC totally screwed up the settlement by limiting the cash payout. They got to flash a bunch of gaudy numbers that make it look like they are punishing Equifax, but in reality, it will end up being a light slap on the wrist.
I am not sure what is worse: either Equifax paid the FTC off to make this go away or the FTC is incompetent. Going to stay away from politics, but anyone who read Michael Lewis' book "The Fifth Risk," this is what happens when you neglect and fail to staff government agencies with competent individuals.
You're assuming it didn't go as intended, at least as far as the allocations are concerned.
The lawyers came out quite well, probably well into 9 figures. And the government got a nice cut,too.
$31m for the victims amounts to an afterthought, not even 10%, sounds about right.
The lawyers are smart, they made out very well, they very competently helped themselves to what they intended. Most random bureaucrats just want to keep riding the gravy train, their objectives do not align with that of the general citizenry.
The fact that the FTC is already putting up posts pushing people not to make a claim for the cash alternative less than a week after the settlement went public makes me believe that it is not going as expected for them or they were/are not prepared for the PR backlash.
The lawyers were always going to make out well and get their cut. But it was up the FTC to determine the cost to Equifax, and they didn't go far enough. I disagree with your take on bureaucrats though; it depends which ones you are talking about and who you put in there. Many people in the civil service can and will work hard for the general citizenry. But if you appoint or hire incompetent or corrupt individuals for these positions, this is the result you get. When politicians and corporations that pay them dismantle or neuter organizations that are meant to protect the citizenry like the CFPB, FCC, or EPA; you get results like this. It shouldn't be this way, and I am trying real hard to stay out of politics here because neither political party is clean in this area.
FTC is generally very conservative in their decisions to go after companies as well as in the magnitude of the penalties they pursue. It's pretty pathetic, given it is one of the most important regulatory agencies.
Nothing says "we're sorry for our negligence and care about your security" like giving everyone $2.83. Anyone in charge at Equifax should be in jail.
roflmao... kick more, cry more
Username checks out
It’s insane Equifax gets to still be a company.
Because of a security breach?
In the long list of scandal and outright cluster f*cks in corporate America this is peanuts.
Well that's kinda their job, sooooo...
This is my take as well. Equifax's business is the storage, distribution, and protection of personal financial data. Their top priority should be security and accuracy of that data. They have no other reason to exist besides that.
And when part of their business is selling people credit monitoring and fraud prevention services, it is kind of problematic to also be reason the people need the services now.
Well consider this: how much do you think a company like Google or Facebook know about your personal business, financial or otherwise? They have made it their business to know about as much about each of us as they can, and that is considerable.
Google flat-out says in the EULA that if you use their gmail service that they scan each and every email. How many companies do you know use different Google services? There are public institutions and hospitals that do. They know all kinds of things about you they probably shouldn't because it violates some laws, but nobody pays much attention. If you have Windows 10 it's sending a ton of information about what you're doing with it to Microsoft constantly.
Last year my wife and I were looking for personal/family budget software, it was hard finding one that didn't want out bank account information to manage our transactions. At any given moment developers of such software would know exactly how much we have and how we're spending it. Every app that's cloud-based has the ability to gather whatever information you provide to the service, and probably is. Data mining is huge right now, and we're giving them lots to look at.
People hand over lots of personal data every day without a moment's thought. Maybe that's why the lawyers allocated such a small fraction of the settlement for us, they figured we were too dumb to appreciate it and would just give it away.
Can't tell if you're agreeing or disagreeing with the comment you're replying to.
The point as I understood it is that as a custodian of trusted financial information that Equifax should be out of business for the breach.
My point is that many companies have become custodians of our personal data, many of which weren't founded with a notion of being trustees of important personal data. They self-appointed themselves, and the idea that a company should be forced to shutdown because of a data breach is quaint at best, hypocritical at worst. We have given up lots of personal data to any company that asks for it (and sometimes doesn't).
If we don't treat our personal data with much regard, why should we expect corporations to do the same?
"...why should we expect corporations to do the same?"
Because its in their business plan to take care of it.
They are one of only a couple companies that have access to all our credit data and we have no choice in who to trust our data with. If they can't protect this data then they should not be allowed to be in this business.
Let me guess... you work for Equifax.
Less regulation of big corporations amirite!?
Yes, always. The Fair Credit Reporting Act and other rent-seeking regulations shield Equifax, enable sweetheart deals like this one, stifle competition, and limit market consequences that would otherwise send Equifax straight to bankruptcy. In other words, regulation, along with incompetence, got us into this mess.
People think that regulations help the consumer or the masses, but regulations almost always benefit a special interest group far more. See the Special Interest Effect of Public Choice Theory.
August 1st, 2019 at 10:00 AM ^
The market would not send them into bankruptcy, consumers have zero option with regard to Equifax and their corporate customers couldn't possibly care less about the breach, though they might use it as leverage to negotiate lower pricing.
What market consequences are you referring to? Specifically ones that the current (weak) regulations actually prevent from occurring.......
If regulations don't end up serving consumers, it is typically because they get watered down by lobbyists in the process of becoming regulations and only pass because of a compromise with a special interest.
Relaxing regulations on banking/Wall Street ends up in a shot show of economic collapse every time and there are zero consequences. By all means, let's do that again!
I'm going to imagine a guy like Navin R Johnson signing checks for $1.09 and hope like hell that it's the person responsible for this BS in the 1st place.
Thanks for the laugh!
Math is hard.
I hope there was some money left for the lawyers. Won’t someone please think of the lawyers?!?!?
This should be illegal. How is it legal for a company, who already lost 150 millions peoples personal info, to then lie/mislead about a settlement?
There's 320 million Americans. 150 million had their info hacked. This means about half of the people who try to apply for the settlement wont be eligible which means Equifax basically conned millions more into handing over their personal information with this bogus settlement
So now an incompetent company who already lost peoples information has now tricked more people into giving them information
My initial excitement for the easy $125
Me today upon hearing this news.
So everyone who publicized the settlement here and elsewhere is responsible for me not getting the full $125? Thanks!
I don't think that really mattered. 145 million people were affected by this breach, one of the largest in history. That is half of the USA population. They only budgeted $31 million toward the cash option. Assuming everyone receives the full $125, they budgeted for less than 250,000 people to take the cash option--about the size of the metro Ann Arbor area.
Of course people are going to want the money! Why would people opt for free credit monitoring from the clowns that jeopardized their credit in the first place?
This article is a touch more reassuring: https://slate.com/technology/2019/07/ftc-equifax-125-payment-credit-monitoring.html. Basically, if the other "buckets" of money aren't depleted for other purposes, they will get repurposed towards getting the cash payments back towards $125. But we'll see what ends up happening.
I probably posted this same thing 2-3x in that other thread, at the time. Hopefully people were able to think for a second.
I'll add however, that if you opt in to this settlement, no matter how small the amount you end up getting, you are waiving your right to sue if your information gets used at a later date (because of this past exposure).
Also it requires you to send in a written request to opt out, which is um, probably not going to hold up in court, but then it seems like we are dealing with whatever's past incompetence on the FTC's part, probably something more on the corrupt spectrum.
One other thing to note is that if there is any money leftover in the $380 million consumer fund set aside for reimbursing consumers for losses, paying for credit monitoring, and paying the lawyers--that money will be used toward the cash compensation option. I doubt there will be anything left in the fund at the end, but the more people who sign up for credit monitoring also uses potential funds that could be used toward the cash option too.
still money yo
Sounds like a job for my good friend Mitch!
Ha, I applied for way more than $125, by outlining the hours I may or may not have spent dealing with the data breach.
Could have guessed it was too good to be true, even though I think these companies should have to pay more meaningful penalties for this crap.
So there's $700M in a settlement (a fraction of Equifax's profit), and only $31M is set aside for the cash payout to 145 million victims. The lawyers and CEOs sure did their jobs... They did it every bit as good as Paulson and his Wall St friends did it back in 2008.
Equifax should have been fined enough to be put out of business. The entire business model is based on data protection and privacy. Fuck the CEO. Fuck the CIO. Fuck all the lawyers involved. Fuck the FTC fat cats that signed off on this bullshit instead of, you know, protecting citizens.
Unfortunately, the only people that really get fucked in this deal are the victims - the people that have zero choice in whatever Equifax feels like doing. Good job, financial system and its government overlords!
FTC's blog post is a transparent admission that they fucked this up, badly. The size of the settlement is completely inadequate.
What is the rationale for reaching a settlement that, even assuming something like half of the effected file claims, results in claimants getting almost nothing? Was FTC designing this with the expectation that only a small fraction of the effected--probably those more in the loop on thist stuff and less in need of the money--would file and get all the cash? Because that sucks. Equifax's valuation is billions of dollars. This settlement was the cost of doing business, not a real deterrent for them.
I already checked on the verification website and I was not eligible. I guess if I was and I found out my 175.00 is now 4.25, I would be feeling bpone!
Typical bullshit. They get sued and have to pay hundreds of millions of dollars . Then the lawyers get most of those fees and the common man who was effected , gets table scraps !
Not surprising in actuality. 150 million Americans had their data breached, and Equifax said they’d allegedly set enough aside to pay everyone affected $125 each. You really think they were able to allocate nearly $19 billion for this? How many companies just have that kind of cash lying around?
Doesn't make them any less of slime balls. They spectacularly failed at the one thing they exist for (protecting your data), and then they lied again about their ability to make things right. And I made the mistake of believing them.
How they continue to survive as a company is beyond me, but in this day and age, when does anyone ever actually get what they deserve? Oh well. At least the service I’ve paid for is Experian.
They don’t have close to that. Last balance sheet indicated $223 million in cash and around $900 million in current assets. Long term assets are mainly goodwill and intangible. They also are carrying 500 million in AP and 2.3 billon in long term debt.
Last year they had revenue of $3.4 billion, a gross of 1.9 billion, operating income of $448 million and net of $298 million. This all equals not having close to enough money to pay 100 million people $125