4 ms·

I'd say this is non-enforceable. They're trying to make it impossible to sue them, including withholding the information that would show proof of our standing t

I'd say this is non-enforceable. They're trying to make it impossible to sue them, including withholding the information that would show proof of our standing to sue them in the first place.

maxerickson 9y ago
New York State Attorney General agrees with you: https://twitter.com/AGSchneiderman/status/906195350532304896 https://twitter.com/AGSchneiderman/status/906195350532304896
- dccoolgai 9y ago
  The Supreme Court disagrees with the NY AG. Who do you think wins? http://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/333417-supreme-court-sides-with-nursing-home-in-arbitration-case http://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/333417-supreme-c...
  - maxerickson 9y ago
    Is it your opinion as the Supreme Court that the facts are the same and thus the Equifax case can't be heard?
    - dccoolgai 9y ago
      My opinion is that forced arbitration sucks and the FAA should be restored to it's original intention: A tool for large corporations on equal footing to do business with each other: not a tool to be used against individual consumers to provide impunity for damages inflicted on customers. What the Supreme Court, unfortunately, has decided the "fact" is that you are correct - If you were covered in the forced arbitration clause, you would forfeit your right to civil action against Equifax in exhange for having your case heard by an "Arbitrator" that Equifax chooses. Have fun with that.
itsxamot 9y ago
Right. It doesn't make any sense. Can they really prove it was you or that it wasn't you that did the search or lookup?
- bb88 9y ago
  You had to enter your lastname and last 6 digits of your SSN. So there's a high likelyhood that it would be you. On the other hand, you might be able to make a case that since they leaked your information, they couldn't prove it was you anyway.
  - yebyen 9y ago
    I wouldn't say "might be able to make a case." I think you've just made the case right there. The company has proven their inability to determine whether or not you are who you say you are, by their own admission that your personal information was lifted from their servers. I don't know who's signing up for these "free" identity protection services anyway. This company has failed to protect the personal information of roughly half the population of the entirety of US. (I understand they are not limited to US, but those are the numbers.) They do not need to be "protecting" anybody after that. They should be tarred and feathered for putting up these websites after what they've done, and whatever lawyer advised them to sneak in a provision against class action lawsuit should be immediately disbarred, in my not so humble opinion. How many digits of my SSN do I need to enter into this five-day-old website that provides me with no clue what they're going to do next, in order to see if I need any further "protection" from this group with which I have no direct relationship, and whom I've never done business with, but that has diligently kept records on me for my entire adult life?
  - Alex3917 9y ago
    > You had to enter your lastname and last 6 digits of your SSN. So there's a high likelyhood that it would be you. Except for that Equifax has all that data. So what's to stop them from just using their own data to prevent anyone else from suing them? (Or to prevent the people who stole the data from doing this for whatever reason.)
  - didibus 9y ago
dccoolgai 9y ago
Nope. Check the Supreme Court. Forced Arbitration is the law of the land, like it or not. Here's some help: http://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/333417-supreme-court-sides-with-nursing-home-in-arbitration-case http://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/333417-supreme-c...
- yebyen 9y ago
  I have absolutely no idea what I just read. Can you dumb it down for me please? Why would this ruling have any bearing on what we're talking about. Nobody is signing anything on your behalf with power-of-attorney. Does this ruling say that I or my agent can relinquish my rights in a contract, that does not actually come out and say that I am relinquishing my rights? I'm sure that's not what it says, but that's approximately what I'm able to tease out of the words in that link you posted. That sounds like absolute nonsense, so please explain precisely what this is supposed to mean if you will be so kind.
  - dccoolgai 9y ago
    In 1925 the Federal Arbitration Act was passed. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Arbitration_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Arbitration_Act The intention of the FAA was to provide a way to streamline legal/business relationships between two corporations and it was largely used that way until... The Supreme Court said "Other laws don't matter - if there is an arbitration clause you have to go through that: No Court For You regardless of how you were injured." ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southland_Corp._v._Keating https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southland_Corp._v._Keating ) And then they were all like "Even if the law explicitly says you can take the party that harmed you to court, you can't": ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Preston_v._Ferrer https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Preston_v._Ferrer ) And then in 2011 they went absolutely bonkers and were like "OK, listen guys. Before this was just between businesses... but now a business can use it against people." ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AT%26T_Mobility_LLC_v._Concepcion https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AT%26T_Mobility_LLC_v._Concepc... ) and then all hell broke loose and now every company tries to use them for everything. The link provided was just the most recent example of the SC expanding the power of the FAA.

I'd say this is non-enforceable. They're trying to make it impossible to sue them, including withholding the information that would show proof of our standing to sue them in the first place.

maxerickson 9y ago

New York State Attorney General agrees with you: https://twitter.com/AGSchneiderman/status/906195350532304896 https://twitter.com/AGSchneiderman/status/906195350532304896

dccoolgai 9y ago
The Supreme Court disagrees with the NY AG. Who do you think wins? http://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/333417-supreme-court-sides-with-nursing-home-in-arbitration-case http://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/333417-supreme-c...
- maxerickson 9y ago
  Is it your opinion as the Supreme Court that the facts are the same and thus the Equifax case can't be heard?
  - dccoolgai 9y ago
    My opinion is that forced arbitration sucks and the FAA should be restored to it's original intention: A tool for large corporations on equal footing to do business with each other: not a tool to be used against individual consumers to provide impunity for damages inflicted on customers. What the Supreme Court, unfortunately, has decided the "fact" is that you are correct - If you were covered in the forced arbitration clause, you would forfeit your right to civil action against Equifax in exhange for having your case heard by an "Arbitrator" that Equifax chooses. Have fun with that.

itsxamot 9y ago

Right. It doesn't make any sense. Can they really prove it was you or that it wasn't you that did the search or lookup?

bb88 9y ago
You had to enter your lastname and last 6 digits of your SSN. So there's a high likelyhood that it would be you. On the other hand, you might be able to make a case that since they leaked your information, they couldn't prove it was you anyway.
- yebyen 9y ago
  I wouldn't say "might be able to make a case." I think you've just made the case right there. The company has proven their inability to determine whether or not you are who you say you are, by their own admission that your personal information was lifted from their servers. I don't know who's signing up for these "free" identity protection services anyway. This company has failed to protect the personal information of roughly half the population of the entirety of US. (I understand they are not limited to US, but those are the numbers.) They do not need to be "protecting" anybody after that. They should be tarred and feathered for putting up these websites after what they've done, and whatever lawyer advised them to sneak in a provision against class action lawsuit should be immediately disbarred, in my not so humble opinion. How many digits of my SSN do I need to enter into this five-day-old website that provides me with no clue what they're going to do next, in order to see if I need any further "protection" from this group with which I have no direct relationship, and whom I've never done business with, but that has diligently kept records on me for my entire adult life?
- Alex3917 9y ago
  > You had to enter your lastname and last 6 digits of your SSN. So there's a high likelyhood that it would be you. Except for that Equifax has all that data. So what's to stop them from just using their own data to prevent anyone else from suing them? (Or to prevent the people who stole the data from doing this for whatever reason.)
- didibus 9y ago

dccoolgai 9y ago

Nope. Check the Supreme Court. Forced Arbitration is the law of the land, like it or not. Here's some help: http://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/333417-supreme-court-sides-with-nursing-home-in-arbitration-case http://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/333417-supreme-c...

yebyen 9y ago
I have absolutely no idea what I just read. Can you dumb it down for me please? Why would this ruling have any bearing on what we're talking about. Nobody is signing anything on your behalf with power-of-attorney. Does this ruling say that I or my agent can relinquish my rights in a contract, that does not actually come out and say that I am relinquishing my rights? I'm sure that's not what it says, but that's approximately what I'm able to tease out of the words in that link you posted. That sounds like absolute nonsense, so please explain precisely what this is supposed to mean if you will be so kind.
- dccoolgai 9y ago
  In 1925 the Federal Arbitration Act was passed. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Arbitration_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Arbitration_Act The intention of the FAA was to provide a way to streamline legal/business relationships between two corporations and it was largely used that way until... The Supreme Court said "Other laws don't matter - if there is an arbitration clause you have to go through that: No Court For You regardless of how you were injured." ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southland_Corp._v._Keating https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southland_Corp._v._Keating ) And then they were all like "Even if the law explicitly says you can take the party that harmed you to court, you can't": ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Preston_v._Ferrer https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Preston_v._Ferrer ) And then in 2011 they went absolutely bonkers and were like "OK, listen guys. Before this was just between businesses... but now a business can use it against people." ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AT%26T_Mobility_LLC_v._Concepcion https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AT%26T_Mobility_LLC_v._Concepc... ) and then all hell broke loose and now every company tries to use them for everything. The link provided was just the most recent example of the SC expanding the power of the FAA.