Home Depot Deal May Set Standard For Cyber Breach Settlements
By: Judy Greenwald (Business Insurance) March 2016
The $19.5 million settlement Home Depot Inc. was able to reach in connection with its massive 2014 data breach was relatively low, which can be attributed to the difficulty plaintiffs in many related cases have had in successfully claiming damages, say experts.
Atlanta-based Home Depot announced last week that it will set up a $13 million fund to reimburse shoppers for out-of-pocket losses and spend at least $6.5 million to fund one-and-a-half years of cardholder identity protection services, according to court papers filed March 7 with the U.S. District Court in Atlanta.
Under terms of the settlement, if the number of settlement class members who enroll in monitoring service is more than 40 million persons, the cost of these services will increase at a rate of $16,250 for every 100,000 eligible settlement class members over that total, according to the settlement terms.
Class members who submit a valid claim form and “reasonable” documentation of substantiated losses are eligible for reimbursement of up to a maximum of $10,000. Class members have until July 18, 2016 to opt out of the settlement. A final hearing on the settlement is scheduled for Aug. 12.
The settlement covers about 40 million people who had payment card data stolen and 52 million to 53 million who had email addresses stolen, with some overlap between the two groups.
Experts say the settlement was not larger because in many comparable cases, defenders have successfully sought dismissal on the basis that plaintiffs did not have standing to sue because they had not yet suffered injury.
One exception to this was the July 2015 ruling by the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Chicago, which held that plaintiffs in a Neiman Marcus breach case met the standard set in the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2013 ruling in Clapper v. Amnesty International USA in showing a “substantial risk of harm” from the 2013 data breach. That case is now proceeding in U.S. District Court in Chicago, with a status hearing set for May 12.
Roberta Anderson, a partner with K&L Gates L.L.P. in Pittsburgh, who is not involved in the case, referred to the 2015 $10 million settlement by Minneapolis-based Target Corp. over its 2013 data breach, which compromised at least 40 million cards.
Ms. Anderson said she could not comment on the specifics of the Home Depot settlement. But “the relatively low settlement amount that we see in Target and Home Depot is reflective of the fact that the plaintiffs in these cases face very significant uphill challenges in getting their claims to advance through the judicial system because the vast majority of those plaintiffs lack actual compensatory injuries,” so their claims “are subject to significant challenges, including on standing grounds.”
Ms. Anderson said had the two cases not been settled there was a good chance they would have been dismissed at the pleading stage, although it would have been expensive for the companies to proceed with the litigation.
Linn Foster Freedman, a partner with Robinson & Cole L.L.P. in Providence, Rhode Island, said, “Home Depot has alleged all along that none of these customers were harmed by the intrusion,” but the company has “been sued in multiple class actions that have been consolidated, and (Home Depot is) settling it because it’s extremely expensive to litigate class action lawsuits.”
Ms. Freedman said, “What is the most interesting thing about this settlement to me is that (it) includes a recovery of up to $10,000 per customer, which includes up to five hours of documented time that consumers have to deal with issues around identity theft, making sure that they’re protecting themselves, and to my knowledge that’s the first time we’ve seen that.”
“This case has been a model, really, from day one,” said Ms. Freedman, who is not involved in the case. Home Depot “did a great job with crisis management following the data breach, and I do believe every settlement we see” in the future will flow from this one.
Categories
- Benefits Resources
- Bonding
- BOP
- Business Insurance
- Commercial Auto
- Commercial Property
- Company News
- Construction
- Crime Insurance
- Cyber Insurance
- Directors & Officers
- Employee Benefits
- Employment Practice Liability Insurance
- Entertainment
- General Liability
- Health Insurance
- Healthcare
- Healthcare Reform
- Homeowners Insurance
- Hospitality
- Manufacturing
- Medical Malpractice
- Mining & Energy
- Nightclubs
- Personal Auto
- Personal Insurance
- Professional
- Restaurants
- Retail & Wholesale
- Risk Management Resources
- Safety Topics
- SBA Bonds
- Security
- Seminars
- Technology
- Tourism
- Transportation
- Uncategorized
- Workers Compensation
Archives
- May 2021
- November 2020
- October 2020
- September 2020
- August 2020
- July 2020
- June 2020
- May 2020
- November 2018
- September 2018
- August 2018
- May 2018
- April 2018
- March 2018
- February 2018
- January 2018
- December 2017
- November 2017
- October 2017
- September 2017
- August 2017
- July 2017
- June 2017
- May 2017
- April 2017
- March 2017
- February 2017
- January 2017
- October 2016
- September 2016
- August 2016
- July 2016
- June 2016
- May 2016
- April 2016
- March 2016
- February 2016
- January 2016
- December 2015
- November 2015
- October 2015
- September 2015
- August 2015
- July 2015
- June 2015
- May 2015
- April 2015
- March 2015
- February 2015
- January 2015
- December 2014
- November 2014
- October 2014
- September 2014
- August 2014
- July 2014
- June 2014
- May 2014
- April 2014
- March 2014
- February 2014
- January 2014
- December 2013
- November 2013
- October 2013
- September 2013
- August 2013
- July 2013
- June 2013
- February 2013
- November 2011
- October 2011
- September 2011
- July 2011
- June 2011
- March 2011
- November 2010
- October 2010
- September 2010
- April 2010
- February 2010
- November 2009
- October 2009
- November 2008
- August 2008