best buy getting sued for 54 M

[Blank]

I love this comment... actually its not us. Its the Law makers that allow for grossly oversized recoveries based on tort (civil wrong) negligence.

 

The ability to exercise action, should not be confused with whether or not the action is conscienable. We used to call this "common sence."

 

Your comments concerning my case were lucid and well thought out. I appreciate your interpretation. I could address each one, but I think we would digress from the intent of this thread. I'll sum up. We were found at fault for most of the reasons you listed. The store was in Florida. Ice happens about 3 times a year. Most people are not at all prepared for this occasonial occurance. But because someone had an accident, I was sued. But once again, I was breaking no laws. Yet I am still out thousands of dollars.

 

I agree that Best Buy is in the wrong. That is why i beleve that $4,100 is a resonable compensation for her lost computer and her time and aggravation. Like it or not, shit happens. We are all bound to be screwed at some point. How we respond is what seperates us as individuals.

[LegalSmash]

The ability to exercise action, should not be confused with whether or not the action is conscienable. We used to call this "common sence."

 

Your comments concerning my case were lucid and well thought out. I appreciate your interpretation. I could address each one, but I think we would digress from the intent of this thread. I'll sum up. We were found at fault for most of the reasons you listed. The store was in Florida. Ice happens about 3 times a year. Most people are not at all prepared for this occasonial

occurance. But because someone had an accident, I was sued. But once again, I was breaking no laws. Yet I am still out thousands of dollars.

 

I agree that Best Buy is in the wrong. That is why i beleve that $4,100 is a resonable compensation for her lost computer and her time and aggravation. Like it or not, shit happens. We are all bound to be screwed at some point. How we respond is what seperates us as individuals.

Today 08:12 AM

 

Im from florida originally, south florida... and I grew up without ice... that being said, i can totally understand how the case ended up going the way it did now.

 

Without detrimenting or insulting you in any way, the fact that ice appeared rendered a situation that in a state like Florida, where there is no ice 99% of the year, would lead a reasonable person to believe that the ice needed to be disposed of, dealt with, etc. prior to the store opening

 

The fact that "most people" were not prepared for the accident unfortunately does not aid you as a shopkeeper/businessman who is held to a higher standard of care than the average citizen in your capacity. Your property, the area around your property, the road adjacent to the property are all frequently traversed areas that must be kept to a certain standard of safety.

 

I know that sounds lame, sucks, etc. but its the law, to prevent people from leaving areas in gross disrepair.

 

As for the best buy settlement offer: I will agree and dissent in part from your opinion.

 

Considering she had a laptop more than a year old, I would say that 4,100 would be a princely sum as to the replacement of the property itself. I would even say that a really nice, top of the line laptop for nongaming use could fall under a number near the one they offered, say 5K.... however:

 

I dont believe that the amount she was offered was worth the breach of warranty and the treatment she received from a company that openly offers itself to be highly consumer friendly. The company entered into a contract with her for parts, service, repair, replacement, etc of the warrantied computer. By failing to provide these services, they left themselves open to suit. Again, I have no pity for them here, as they had the opportunity to define the scope of their services. As the old adage goes: you made your grave, now lay in it.

 

When BB accepted her computer, they entered into a bailment contract with her... she entrusted her property to this company for safekeeping and repair.

They breached THAT duty as well.

 

To make this worse still is the fact that they were unresponsive, rude, and uncooperative with the woman. Any other company, LLP, professional that does this would not only lose a customer, but goodwill, as in this case.

 

In a world where there are a million box retailers, electronic peddlers, etc. a company must be wary of its actions. This case allows a citizen to do just that.

 

Once again, saying "shit happens" is easy to do, but here is the problem... the company is being paid specifically through the purchase of the warranty IN CASE shit happens.

 

They failed at the very reason they were being paid for which we referred to above.

 

Lastly, the fact that the action is exercisable, and that the wrong was committed, especially in Bestbuy's scenario makes the action more than conscionable. Companies make a lot of money and are depended on, they are responsible for the actions of their workers... perhaps they should hire quality workers and stop featherbedding.

 

Common sense is seeking renumeration for your losses when you are wronged, we cannot condone negligence in our society, especially in business... that is how enrons happen.

[Blank]

Legalsmash, you have many valid points. I always enjoy reading your posts. Yours are some oh the most informative on the forum. I agree with what you have to say in your last post. I too, am alarmed by the unresponsivenss of BB. It is sad that the situation had to escalate to the level of legal involvment for any action to occur on their part. I have been to BB. Not many employees there over the age of 25. In business we have a saying, "The person you pay the least, will often, cost you the most." Accidents happen, but I would bet that her lost computer was a result of negligence.

 

I would like for more people to post in this thread and give their opinion of this situation as well. We have a responisibility to ourselves, and to our fellow man to be compassionate and to take action against all those who would cause us harm.

[Jager]

the part that legal is not mentioning is that this lawsuit is also forcing bestbuy to deal with the geek squad issues they have been denying for a long time. Geek squad members are known and have been caught stealing customer information off the computers brought in, even taking personal photos, music and banking information. Bestbuy has two options to do now, 1 they find her data and her laptop, they give her a new pc and they sign her up and pay for a lifetime of credit id theft protection insurance. That is the minimum I would expect to recieve when my data goes missing. If the component companies and NDA info stored on my pc were to be leaked to whomever was on the geek squad and published id be in serious trouble, and possibly ruined. 54 million "seems" expensive sure, and I agree its a tad bit much, but if bestbuy was only charged say 10 thousand dollars, a sum they make in a bad day from 1 store. there is no real punishment. having a 54million dollar lawsuit is the smack in the face that Bestbuy and the other computer service companies (circuit cities firedog etc) to pay real close attention to exactly how liable they are with warrenties and data protection.

 

 

legal can correct me if my information is outdated, but in any case of hacking or data theft the owner of the data generally sets the price or "worth" of said data. it may be 5 bucks but if the company/person claims it was worth as little as a few hundred thousand then suddenly its an FBI matter and federal laws have been broken. That lady has bestbuy by the balls basically, and unless she has an idiot for an attorney she will likely win her case. Watch bestbuy scramble and probably force changes as to how their repair service works as well and her laptop may "appear".

 

 

bestbuy is very lucky she did not have an ibm laptop with the internet traceback feature built in, that as soon as she reports it missing it will broadcast a signal on any wireless signal available. if it can be proven that the computer crossed state lines without her consent or spelled out on the forms bestbuy or the affiliate doing the work could face criminal charges for theft of data and services which is something that the feds love to try in court, judges give out stiff sentences for that as well, 5-10 years is the norm or more depending on the "value" the victim says the data is worth.

[LegalSmash]

I have been to BB. Not many employees there over the age of 25. In business we have a saying, "The person you pay the least, will often, cost you the most." Accidents happen, but I would bet that her lost computer was a result of negligence.

 

 

Blank, thank you for your kind words, they are much appreciated. I am glad to have a forum where the populace doesnt consist of imbeciles that cant make a point. Zombie Murder makes this good for me.

 

 

I agree in that the workers are young, but this is the geek squad their "elite" people regardless of their age... they need to screen better, or add a clause requiring employees to set a bond for working there in case of damage or loss that can be led back to them..

 

Ok, as to Jager, Let me do this:

 

Im going to give a complete response here, it may be long, but I want my brain to be warm to do actual work, and doing this is both enjoyable and warms the brain for me, so here I go.

 

the part that legal is not mentioning is that this lawsuit is also forcing bestbuy to deal with the geek squad issues they have been denying for a long time.

 

True, Jager, this case has a rather specific aim I think. Its not just a recovery from the company for the comp, this is a consumer/merchant issue that must be addressed. Best Buy hires persons for Geek squad for the purpose of providing an alternative to the individuals going to office/max/depot as a secondary repair service to the computer manufacturers' own warranty services. These people are advertised as computer experts. This is no one elses idea but best buy's. This means that the courts will hold these "experts" to the standard of an expert in that field that they are to be experts in.

 

Additionally as the employees of best buy, the parent company is liable for the actions of its employees through the doctrine of "respondiat superior" basically, that the employer is liable for the actions of his employee in the scope of their work.

 

Here, the company, regardless of the skill, quality, etc. of the employee is liable for the employee, or employees loss of the computer.

 

 

legal can correct me if my information is outdated, but in any case of hacking or data theft the owner of the data generally sets the price or "worth" of said data.

 

No, you are right to a degree. The owner of the info can generally name their price on this... a jury will decide what to do however. What is not mentioned however, is the chance of punitive damages. These damages are awarded for the flagrance of the act, to punish the defendant for their actions.

 

In an action where the company's employees are not careful with sensitive materials AND the company just ignores the pleas of the aggrieved consumer, these damages are not out of the realm of possibility.

 

Jager is right in essence, this plaintiff does have BB by their short and curlies, its up to her and her counsel to determine the way this story end. It wont be the 54 M that will satisfy the situation though, it is the act of forcing BB to SPEND 54 M to fix their problems, and the woman be justly compensated for her loss, inconvenience, and future problems that may arise due to BB's carelessness in keeping her computer, and within it, information, safe.

[Captain Colon]

she might be able to win if its in the USA

 

some women sued MCdonalds $10 million because she burnt herself with the takeaway hot chocolate because it never had "This May Contain Hot Substance" encrypted on the lid or w.e.

Actually she won because it was found that mickey d's served their coffee much much hotter than everyone else did, hot enough to cause third-degree burns before the person even had time to change position to get coffee-soaked clothes off their skin, and that the company received complaints about their practices multiple times a year and thus had no excuse for not fixing an obvious hazard to customers, but deemed the number of incidents "acceptable." It was their callous attitude towards their customers that lost the case for them and it looks like Best Buy didn't pay very good attention to that case (like most people) because their lowball settlement offers are sending the same message here.

 

However, unless she gets a real lawyer, whether or not she wins is anyone's guess imo...anyone know if she wised up yet?