I refuse to believe it can't be built to be more secure than "oops 100% of our data were stolen lulz"

 

That's not what happened here. Stupidity, carelessness, and failure to update their system happened. You can't leave your front door unlocked because "someone will always find a backdoor".



As usual in court, they will determine whether Equifax took reasonable actions based on their standard of care. In this case, being a security type company holding people's most valuable information, that standard of care will be very high and they will be found negligent in their duty to protect the information.

 

And so it begins... GOP wants to repeal the CFPB rule banning arbitration clauses that prevent class actions. They're trying to get a vote on it in the Senate this week. They already got it passed the House.



https://www.forbes.com/sites/dianahe.../#694ba3e540b9



https://theintercept.com/2017/09/25/...jor-cfpb-rule/



Article from Fox, lest I be accused of only posting "liberal media":



http://www.foxbusiness.com/features/...defectors.html

 

If you read the article, it says that pretty much every Republican they've interviewed so far has reservations about it and plans to vote against it. And in the Senate, it only takes 2 or 3 Reps as we've found with the healthcare bills.



I see BOTH sides of this issue. If you think arbitration doesn't help both parties, then go ahead and join your class-action lawsuits and let me know how rich the lawyer made you.

 

I did read the articles. That's why I posted them. There's hope for it being killed in the Senate, but it did already pass the House. Yes, lawyers make a ton off class actions, and maybe that's something that should be addressed. Not being allowed to bring a class action benefits nobody but the defendant. If I get $5 from a class action, that's still more than $0. Nobody is going to arbitration over a $10 overcharge on an account. That's why class actions are needed.

 

Why no one? Whether they cost me $30 because of a fee, or $1000 due to them voilating the FCRA, I would not hessitate to take them to MY small claims court where they are NOT allowed a lawyer, and they MUST come to MY county court.



This is where I see the bank's side of the case. People are lazy f*cktards and don't want to do their due dilligence to protect their rights. They'd rather try and get a "free" pay day from a skanky lawyer.

Also, arbitration does NOT automatically mean bank wins. And it doesn't mean you have to have a lawyer with you. I don't think your articles know what arbitration means as they are portraying it as a costly ordeal.





I've personally threatened lawsuits to collection agencies and banks for misreporting and violating the FCRA. They all folded immediately, deleted themselves, and went away forever. All for 10 minutes of my time and a $5 stamp.

If they would have called my bluff, it would have immediately went to small claims for $1k with a trebling at the judges discretion.

 

Read your credit card contract. If yours is one of the many with an arbitration clause, you can't sue in small claims. You are required to go to binding arbitration with an arbiter of their choosing.

 

For the DEBT! Not for the fair and accurate reporting of information, or handling of said information, which is the topic of this conversation.

 

Also:



https://www.creditcards.com/credit-c...ation-1282.php



Don't enter into an arbitration agreement with the Devil, then cry about it because he doesn't play fair. As you can see above, most reputable banks are not requiring arbitration agreements. And when they do, they are up front about it. It just so happens that one of my CC's just switched banks and sent a package that included an arbitration opt-out form. Now, I can either sign the form and send it back, or be one of the lazy mindless consumers that doesn't, then b*tches and moans when they feel cheated later.



No one FORCES you into these agreements. No one forces you to do business with a company that wants arbitration. And no one forced you to sign over your rights with Equifax. If you did, then you didn't read the print because you were LAZY and too eager to get their free sh*t.



Obviously, you want a nanny-state to protect people who feel they're always being cheated, but are really just too lazy to understand the facts of what they got themselves into. Same for those who got into the balloon loans of 2008. They knew full well what they signed and did it anyways.

 

Actually, I was talking about THIS case. The law Sen Warren was working on is to allow class actions in this case and to prevent Equifax from requiring the arbitration clause to sign up for the free monitoring.