While Equifax Victims Sue, Congress Limits Financial Class Actions (marketwatch.com)

An anonymous reader quotes a local NBC news report: Stories are starting to pour in about those impacted by last month's massive Equifax data breach, which compromised the private information of more than 140 million people. Katie Van Fleet of Seattle says she's spent months trying to regain her stolen identity, and says it has been stolen more than a dozen times. "I kept receiving letters from Kohl's, from Macy's, from Home Depot, from Old Navy saying 'thank you for your application,'" she said to CNN affiliate KCPQ. But she says she's never applied for credit from any of those places. Instead, Van Fleet and her attorney Catherine Fleming say they believe her personal data was stolen during the massive Equifax security breach... Fleming has filed a class-action lawsuit against Equifax, saying they were negligent in losing private information on more than 140 million Americans... "Countless people, I mean, I've really, truly lost count, and the stories that like Katie's, the stories I hear are heart-wrenching," Fleming said.
But are things about to get worse? Marketwatch reports: It will become harder for consumers to sue their banks or companies like Equifax... The Senate voted Tuesday night to overturn a rule the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau worked on for more than five years. The final version of the rule banned companies from putting "mandatory arbitration clauses" in their contracts, language that prohibits consumers from bringing class-action lawsuits against them. It applies to institutions that sell financial products, including bank accounts and credit cards. Consumer advocates say it's good news for companies like Wells Fargo or Equifax, which have both had class-action lawsuits filed against them, and bad news for their customers... Lisa Gilbert, the vice president of legislative affairs at Public Citizen, a nonprofit based in Washington, D.C., said the Senate vote shouldn't impact cases that are already ongoing. However, there will "certainly" be more forced arbitration clauses in contracts in the future, and fewer cases brought against companies, she said.

Comments

Re:Because fuck you, that's why.

[Powercntrl]

As a 1%er who doesn't need more tax cuts, I can't help but to shake my head at all of the dumb people who vote to make their lives worse.

A common reason many Americans vote Republican is that they simply believe the burden of socialist programs will fall hardest upon them. I.e., the poor will be exempt due to low income, and the rich will exploit tax loopholes to avoid paying their fair share, so who does that leave holding the proverbial bag? Sadly, this isn't too far from the truth.

There's also a prevailing attitude in this country that you shouldn't be punished for being successful. The meme of hard work equals success is instilled since a young age, and it easily leads to the logically fallacious belief that someone who is successful must have worked hard to achieve it. Why would you want to punish those who have worked the hardest, with higher taxes? Ironically, many 1%ers do understand that social programs are investments back in to society, rather than a punishment. Hence why the most productive cities generally lean Democrat.