A LOST LAPTOP = A $54 MILLION LAWSUIT
-
I don't. I hope the court drops the amount to something reasonable, something around $3-4000 plus lawyers fees. But I do hope they punish Best Buy for acting like such complete and utter idiots.
¡El diablo está en mis pantalones! ¡Mire, mire! Real Mentats use only 100% pure, unfooled around with Sapho Juice(tm)! SELECT * FROM User WHERE Clue > 0 0 rows returned Save an Orange - Use the VCF! VCF Blog
You're forgetting the possibility that her entire life could be stolen from her if someone decides the identity info is usable. It takes years and lots of money to clean up a mess like that. I think 54 million is a good starting point.
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
-----
"...the staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - Jason Jystad, 10/26/2001 -
http://redtape.msnbc.com/2008/02/a-lost-laptop-a.html#posts If her suit is successful, I wonder what it will do to the savings Best Buy thinks it realizes from outsourcing its help desk.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface
I try to avoid Best Buy as much as possible. They are a bunch of arrogant guys who always try push their extended warranty along with any of the purchases...The regional stores in our area (NJ/NY) offer much better service (in terms of price and customer service) and I always prefer them..
-
I try to avoid Best Buy as much as possible. They are a bunch of arrogant guys who always try push their extended warranty along with any of the purchases...The regional stores in our area (NJ/NY) offer much better service (in terms of price and customer service) and I always prefer them..
Madhu Cheriyedath wrote:
They are a bunch of arrogant guys who always try push their extended warranty along with any of the purchases...
I don't know about "arrogant" but my closest BestBuy always (every single time I've bought anything there) try to push the extended warranty on me. I react so indifferently to it than they never push too hard - but it's still annoying. It's like Macy's or Target always asking you if you want their credit card.
Regards, Nish
Nish’s thoughts on MFC, C++/CLI and .NET (my blog)
My latest book : C++/CLI in Action / Amazon.com link -
I can understand the consumer's frustration... but I hope the court throws out her claim as frivolous and fines her for wasting everyone's valuable time.
Do you know the meaning of frivolous? Her case is most definitely NOT frivolous. The amount may be excessive, and the court (or more likely, the jury) can issue award her a significantly smaller amount. If BB is smart, they will offer her a reasonable 6 figure sum, which her attorney will encourage her to take.
-
http://redtape.msnbc.com/2008/02/a-lost-laptop-a.html#posts If her suit is successful, I wonder what it will do to the savings Best Buy thinks it realizes from outsourcing its help desk.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface
If only more would come to the same conclusion I did years ago. When a company's corporate office states, "We don't need your business that bad", I justifiably believe they don't need anyones and encourage everyone to not shop there.
Need a C# Consultant? I'm available.
Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know. -- Ernest Hemingway -
Do you know the meaning of frivolous? Her case is most definitely NOT frivolous. The amount may be excessive, and the court (or more likely, the jury) can issue award her a significantly smaller amount. If BB is smart, they will offer her a reasonable 6 figure sum, which her attorney will encourage her to take.
As stated in the article, its not the money that matters but rather the attention given to this matter. $54 mil is just to get attention. NO jury in its right mind would give the 54 mil. She may be lucky to get the cost of the laptop back. All repairs are done with an assumtion that you have a backup. :-D
-
Do you know the meaning of frivolous? Her case is most definitely NOT frivolous. The amount may be excessive, and the court (or more likely, the jury) can issue award her a significantly smaller amount. If BB is smart, they will offer her a reasonable 6 figure sum, which her attorney will encourage her to take.
Draugnar wrote:
Do you know the meaning of frivolous?
Yes I do - and remember this: while court time is wasted debating the plausibility of handing out $54m, other more serious cases are going unheard.
-
You're forgetting the possibility that her entire life could be stolen from her if someone decides the identity info is usable. It takes years and lots of money to clean up a mess like that. I think 54 million is a good starting point.
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
-----
"...the staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - Jason Jystad, 10/26/2001While Best Buy may have lost the laptop (and behaved badly in not refunding her properly, etc.), leaving sensitive information on a laptop leaving her possession is negligence on *her* part, so she is very unlikely to get any damages for that. I had to have my laptop repaired last year, I can assure you every single byte of personal and company data was removed before it left my house.
'Howard
-
While Best Buy may have lost the laptop (and behaved badly in not refunding her properly, etc.), leaving sensitive information on a laptop leaving her possession is negligence on *her* part, so she is very unlikely to get any damages for that. I had to have my laptop repaired last year, I can assure you every single byte of personal and company data was removed before it left my house.
'Howard
Howard Richards wrote:
leaving sensitive information on a laptop leaving her possession is negligence on *her* part
Perhaps, but bear in mind that the power switch on the computer was broken so she couldn't access the data on the computer. Not everyone is able to take apart their computer, she might not have had another machine in which she could put the drive and it could've invalidated the extended warranty she bought. I think the negligence lies entirely with Best Buy and not the customer - they were in possession of her equipment and therefore it's their responsibility to ensure its security. I hope she wins the case and gets awarded a reasonable amount of cash (not $54M obviously!).
It definitely isn't definatley
-
As stated in the article, its not the money that matters but rather the attention given to this matter. $54 mil is just to get attention. NO jury in its right mind would give the 54 mil. She may be lucky to get the cost of the laptop back. All repairs are done with an assumtion that you have a backup. :-D
It's not about having or not having a backup, it's about personal data that was lost by Best Buy that could be used for identity theft. Granted, she could have asked them to take out the hard drive and give it to her since the problem had nothing to do with it.
-
If only more would come to the same conclusion I did years ago. When a company's corporate office states, "We don't need your business that bad", I justifiably believe they don't need anyones and encourage everyone to not shop there.
Need a C# Consultant? I'm available.
Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know. -- Ernest Hemingway -
Draugnar wrote:
Do you know the meaning of frivolous?
Yes I do - and remember this: while court time is wasted debating the plausibility of handing out $54m, other more serious cases are going unheard.
But the courts aren't concerned with and don't debate the amount at this stage. Their consideration is whether or not the case has merit at all. The only times amount comes in to play is during the findings if the judge feels that the "winnable" amount is small enough for small claims court (not likely considering how she was treated and their stall tactics) and by the jury if they find the defendants were negligent and liable.
-
There are plenty of companies not like that. But most of them are smaller and believe in customer service. I'm the head of IT (head of 2 people, WOOHOO!) and I spend at least 4 hours a week doing customer service handling questions that are beyond our CSRs' ability to answer. A couple of weeks ago, I walked a customer through our registration process and helped him build his emergency profile (for more info, look up Road ID online, don't want to advertise here). It took me a good half an hour and yet we only charge $20 for the ID, so we lost money on that one. But, this person knows many other people who could use our product. So it resulted in good will and a glowing review for our helpfulness. I buy all my groceries from a smaller chain. They have a great pharmacy and I've gotten to know the people. I may pay 10-15% more, but the personalized service and the attention to detail (the baggers know how finicky we are about cleaning suplies and food NOT being in the same bag, for instance). Anytime I can, I deal with small businesses as they understand customer service is the life blood of their business. When you are small and live by word of mouth referrals and return customers, customer service beyond the sale has meaning to you. So, next time you go to buy anything which may need follow-up service think about who will provide the best service after the sale. The little guy will. He knows your business is important and will do what it takes to get you to come back to him again and again.
-
http://redtape.msnbc.com/2008/02/a-lost-laptop-a.html#posts If her suit is successful, I wonder what it will do to the savings Best Buy thinks it realizes from outsourcing its help desk.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface
It looks like BB is losing millions a day in lost sales, because of this case. They will probably lose well over 54mil before it's over.. Just look at how many comments are left on the original document link.. amazing They should be offering her several thousand dollars to resolve this immediately.. Just more corp bullsh*t, they can't do anything timely, everthing has to stamped and checked by the entire line of suits. I have always disliked extented service plans, and never purchase them. It's like paying more for a product that already has warranty, some people are just paranoid and gullable.
-
Howard Richards wrote:
leaving sensitive information on a laptop leaving her possession is negligence on *her* part
Perhaps, but bear in mind that the power switch on the computer was broken so she couldn't access the data on the computer. Not everyone is able to take apart their computer, she might not have had another machine in which she could put the drive and it could've invalidated the extended warranty she bought. I think the negligence lies entirely with Best Buy and not the customer - they were in possession of her equipment and therefore it's their responsibility to ensure its security. I hope she wins the case and gets awarded a reasonable amount of cash (not $54M obviously!).
It definitely isn't definatley
Removal of sensitive data is unnecessary. Encryption - at all times - is mandatory. Whenever I type anything more sensitive than my name and Windows logon password into my computer, I encrypt it using a program I wrote called AESPad (think WordPad meets Crypto++). It encrypts the data using 256-bit AES (in CBC mode) - combining a password with a key stored on a hardware token to enforce full two-factor authentication. Every time you hit the save button, data is encrypted - cleartext is never placed on the hard drive. (Needless to say, I have two copies of the key device to protect against coffee spills. They are never within five feet of each other.) Regarding backups, I back up all of my data onto an external HDD every week (sometimes more often if I do something really important). Every few months, everything truly critical gets burned to DVD and mailed to out-of-state relatives for secure offsite storage. Her only expenses should be replacement of the hardware (Best Buy already offered this) and the cost of recreating a few DAYS (not years) of data. When she dropped off the computer for servicing, she probably signed a contract stating that Best Buy would NOT be liable for lost data, only for damaged or stolen equipment. Settle for $3000 or $4000 and call it quits before the judge throws your case out.
-
As stated in the article, its not the money that matters but rather the attention given to this matter. $54 mil is just to get attention. NO jury in its right mind would give the 54 mil. She may be lucky to get the cost of the laptop back. All repairs are done with an assumtion that you have a backup. :-D
raphael_kc wrote:
NO jury in its right mind would give the 54 mil.
Two words for you "spilt coffee"
-
Removal of sensitive data is unnecessary. Encryption - at all times - is mandatory. Whenever I type anything more sensitive than my name and Windows logon password into my computer, I encrypt it using a program I wrote called AESPad (think WordPad meets Crypto++). It encrypts the data using 256-bit AES (in CBC mode) - combining a password with a key stored on a hardware token to enforce full two-factor authentication. Every time you hit the save button, data is encrypted - cleartext is never placed on the hard drive. (Needless to say, I have two copies of the key device to protect against coffee spills. They are never within five feet of each other.) Regarding backups, I back up all of my data onto an external HDD every week (sometimes more often if I do something really important). Every few months, everything truly critical gets burned to DVD and mailed to out-of-state relatives for secure offsite storage. Her only expenses should be replacement of the hardware (Best Buy already offered this) and the cost of recreating a few DAYS (not years) of data. When she dropped off the computer for servicing, she probably signed a contract stating that Best Buy would NOT be liable for lost data, only for damaged or stolen equipment. Settle for $3000 or $4000 and call it quits before the judge throws your case out.
azonenberg wrote:
Removal of sensitive data is unnecessary. Encryption - at all times - is mandatory.
That's an easy philosophy to preach (and FWIW, something I agree with) but realisically, how many IT professionals do you know that encrypt all their data? Hell, how many do you know that do regular backups?! You've had to write your own implementation - how is your typical user supposed to do that? Data security gets loads of press (especially over here in the UK at the moment) but there aren't any real solutions available to the general public.
It definitely isn't definatley
-
http://redtape.msnbc.com/2008/02/a-lost-laptop-a.html#posts If her suit is successful, I wonder what it will do to the savings Best Buy thinks it realizes from outsourcing its help desk.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface
This is nothing but another frivolous lawsuit. She should have read her contract before signing it. Systems can get lost or damaged in shipping, I have never hard of any repair shop guaranty no lost data. Your data is only worth to you what you are willing to pay to back it up. Its her own fault, she could have easily asked to have the hard drive removed or a data backup performed for her. If she was just being cheap and did not want to pay for the backup, she could have purchased a USB adapter for the harddrive from BB, Wal-Mart or any other retailer. Then if she treated them the way she wanted to be treated, they would offer to show her how to do it herself for free. Best Buy should only have to cover the cost of replacing the laptop with a comparable model. If its older then 6 months, guess what it is now not worth what you paid for it, same as a car. Shopping at small or big retailers, you always treat the people you deal with respect. When I worked retail, any customer who thought giving me a hard time was going to get their way was always wrong. They received the minimum effort it took, if I would deal with them without passing them off to a manager. The ones who treated me nice, and understood problems can happen, I would bend over backwards to make sure they where treated the same way. Yes, I worked for the Geek Squad at Best Buy (and other big and small retailers) and have seen all types of customers. I've seen a couple of lost computers, it does take time to track down where it might have gotten lost at. The customers who treated the manager and staff with respect and where patient where given brand new computers, always better then the one they sent in with free service and a gift card. Those that cussed or treated the employees as scum, did not get the new laptop.
-
Removal of sensitive data is unnecessary. Encryption - at all times - is mandatory. Whenever I type anything more sensitive than my name and Windows logon password into my computer, I encrypt it using a program I wrote called AESPad (think WordPad meets Crypto++). It encrypts the data using 256-bit AES (in CBC mode) - combining a password with a key stored on a hardware token to enforce full two-factor authentication. Every time you hit the save button, data is encrypted - cleartext is never placed on the hard drive. (Needless to say, I have two copies of the key device to protect against coffee spills. They are never within five feet of each other.) Regarding backups, I back up all of my data onto an external HDD every week (sometimes more often if I do something really important). Every few months, everything truly critical gets burned to DVD and mailed to out-of-state relatives for secure offsite storage. Her only expenses should be replacement of the hardware (Best Buy already offered this) and the cost of recreating a few DAYS (not years) of data. When she dropped off the computer for servicing, she probably signed a contract stating that Best Buy would NOT be liable for lost data, only for damaged or stolen equipment. Settle for $3000 or $4000 and call it quits before the judge throws your case out.
azonenberg wrote:
Whenever I type anything more sensitive than my name and Windows logon password into my computer, I encrypt it using a program I wrote called AESPad (think WordPad meets Crypto++). It encrypts the data using 256-bit AES (in CBC mode) - combining a password with a key stored on a hardware token to enforce full two-factor authentication. Every time you hit the save button, data is encrypted - cleartext is never placed on the hard drive. (Needless to say, I have two copies of the key device to protect against coffee spills. They are never within five feet of each other.)
Which is irrelevant. There is nothing in the article that suggests that the customer is even aware that such utilities exist much less being capable of writing them herself.
-
While Best Buy may have lost the laptop (and behaved badly in not refunding her properly, etc.), leaving sensitive information on a laptop leaving her possession is negligence on *her* part, so she is very unlikely to get any damages for that. I had to have my laptop repaired last year, I can assure you every single byte of personal and company data was removed before it left my house.
'Howard
Howard Richards wrote:
While Best Buy may have lost the laptop (and behaved badly in not refunding her properly, etc.), leaving sensitive information on a laptop leaving her possession is negligence on *her* part, so she is very unlikely to get any damages for that.
If I take my car in to have the oil changed does that mean I am responsible for cleaning absolutely everything out of it that isn't nailed down (glove compartement, spare tire, etc) because the garage is not responsible for any thefts of any sort? If I have plumber in to fix my sink and they steal my TV is that also negligence on my part? Best Buy has a business unit, can businesses also expect that when they contract for an on-site repair call that the customer company, and not Best Buy, is responsible for insuring that the repair technician does not have access to any business information of any sort? And Best Buy need not do anything at all in regard to preventing that including minimal background checks? After all if Best Buy has absolutely no liability in that regard then why should they? If that is the case then what is the point of even having a on-site service contract? What about when son-in-law agrees to fix a parent's computer and steals their credit card numbers? Does that mean that the parent's are responsible for any actual merchant losses rather than the son?