Personal Info Published To Public Website
Ohio.
Not sure if this is the right forum, but I don't see one that is a better fit. If there is, please move, thanks.
My school (college) published a file containing personal information (name/address/ssn/dob/etc) to a web server. (Could have been downloaded by anyone with and internet connection) They sent a letter admitting the error and have purchased credit report checking for the next year for the people who had the info published.
I don't really have any factually damages at this point. But who's to say someone can't hold on to my information and damage me 4 years from now?
Also, being in IT myself, it seems like gross negligence to post this type of file to a web server. If it was on a network server and there system was hacked that would be one thing, but putting the file on a public web server is the same as handing out hard copies of the file on the street.
Anyway, I'm not looking for some type of quick pay day, but I would like to use their error as leverage in a separate matter. I would like to offer settlement on the other matter and say something to the effect, I am considering suit against you for posting that file.
Take the settlement in this case and I’ll forget about your gross negligence.
Would something like that carry any weight, since I don't have any real proof of damages at this time? Is there any type of damages they would be responsible for because there error was gross negligence? Punitive Damages maybe? Googling a bit I see in some states posting that type of information is violation of state law, but I can’t find anything relevant in Ohio?
Thanks.
James
Re: Personal Info Published To Public Website
Here's your problem. You don't get to sue for what hasn't happened yet. So your "leverage" is non-existant; you have no grounds to sue them since you have (and may never have) no damages. So a statement like that, besides sounding dangerously like extortion, would carry no weight whatsoever.
Re: Personal Info Published To Public Website
Quote:
Quoting
cbg
Here's your problem. You don't get to sue for what hasn't happened yet. So your "leverage" is non-existant; you have no grounds to sue them since you have (and may never have) no damages. So a statement like that, besides sounding dangerously like extortion, would carry no weight whatsoever.
Hummm…..extortion....really?
Maybe you are correct and I shouldn't try to use it as "leverage". However, I don't see how there isn't any "leverage" yet. Maybe it all depends on how it’s phrased and/or proposed. /shrug.
If I commit a negligent act, which hasn't resulted in any damages yet, but has the potential to do so. Then the potential person/s who could be damaged in the future came to me and said, give me $5 and if there are damages in the future (which is very possible) as a result of your negligence I’ll waive my rights to sue you at that later date for those damages.
I most certainly would take them up on the offer and I wouldn't consider it extortion.
Re: Personal Info Published To Public Website
You aren't getting it.
You have NO leverage. You have no damages and you may never have any damages. You have no grounds to sue now and you may never have any grounds to sue.
So why should they settle with you on the basis that IF you at some time in future have damages, you won't sue? Wouldn't it make more sense for them to gamble that you'll never have any damages and then never have any grounds to sue?
Re: Personal Info Published To Public Website
Quote:
Quoting
cbg
You aren't getting it.
No, I get what you are saying. I am just not getting your logic for why you are saying it. I understand with the amount of posts you have and from the threads I've read that you are probably frustrated thinking here is another person only looking for the answer they want to hear. However, I assure you that isn't the case and I am taking in your replies with an open mind.
Quote:
Quoting
cbg
You have NO leverage. You have no damages and you may never have any damages. You have no grounds to sue now and you may never have any grounds to sue.
So is leverage only defined by having all the elements of a lawsuit? I am legitimately asking. I would think having consent of negligence and the likelihood of future damages could be considered leverage? But hey, I could be wrong. It just seems (common sense wise) to me that an admittance of negligence with possible future damages would hold some weight in negotiations.
Quote:
Quoting
cbg
So why should they settle with you on the basis that IF you at some time in future have damages, you won't sue? Wouldn't it make more sense for them to gamble that you'll never have any damages and then never have any grounds to sue?
Well there are many reasons to settle and I suspect they will settle just because of the cost of trial alone. I mean, don't settlements happen everyday for that reason?
If they were suing me for say $100. (Assuming the average court case cost them $80) If I said, look the court case is going to cost you $80 and you may not win, how about I just give you $70 now and we'll settle?
Well, that wouldn't be extortion would it? I suspect that is negotiation of a settlement.
How about if I said, look the court case is going to cost you $80. ALSO, let's not forget, you just did something negligent that COULD be grounds for a lawsuit from me in the future. I'll waive my right to sue you later, should I suffer damages and give you $50 to settle the suit in which you’re suing me.
Is that extortion? Maybe in the legal definition it is, again I don't know. Are you really telling me it is? I am just really surprised to find out that your saying it is. I just assumed from my limited knowledge that deals like that are made all the time. I assumed it to be part of the negotiation process of a settlement.
Maybe it won't carry any weight with them, maybe they will say, we could care less about you waiving your rights to sue us later if you are ever damaged. Which I would be fine with, I am offering something, they have the right to reject it.
My stance is, I don't think it hurts to offer, if they reject it, fine. However, I certainly don't want to even make the offer if it's going to be considered EXTORTION by a judge or something.
So you saying it's dangerously close to EXTORTION is what scares me and why I am continuing the discussion.
I can understand your point that they may not give my offer any merit, but Extortion really? If you REALLY think that, could you elaborate for me? That's the only part I am not getting, how it's extortion?
Thanks,
James
Again, I am really not trying to be argumentative. I just want to understand why you say its extortion. My offer could have no merit, I get that, extortion, I don’t.
Re: Personal Info Published To Public Website
I thought I'd made it pretty clear. Maybe extortion is a bad word; maybe blackmail would be better.
You give me this, or I'll take this (negative) action against you.
Particularly since the action you're threatening to take is one that you have no legal grounds to take.
Sounds pretty cut and dried to me.
Re: Personal Info Published To Public Website
Law suits require "damages" (as cbg plainly put) where there are no damages there is no suit.
Re: Personal Info Published To Public Website
Quote:
Quoting
cbg
You give me this, or I'll take this (negative) action against you.
Ok, but this description fits alot of things that I know go on everyday. Are you saying they are all extortion?
Prosecutor: You plead guilty to manslaughter or I am going to charge you with murder and take you to trial.
Extortion?
Bill Collector: You owe us $500, give us $400 and we won't sue you for $500.
Extortion?
Employer: Resign and we will not fire you.
Extortion?
Re: Personal Info Published To Public Website
Quote:
Quoting
panther10758
Law suits require "damages" (as cbg plainly put) where there are no damages there is no suit.
Yeah, I got that part and acknowledged it. I am just confused (legitimately) how the examples I gave above wouldn't be extortion, but my offer to waive a potential suit would be consider so.
Re: Personal Info Published To Public Website
You still aren't getting it.
In your case, you have no basis for a lawsuit. You do not have any legal grounds to sue them, but you are using the threat of a lawsuit to force their hand.
In the examples you gave, the District Attorney, bill collector and employer all have the authority to settle a legitimate issue with a lessor charge/amount.