Peoples Trust Privacy Breach Class Action | Peoples Trust | Discussion forum

I believe the poster should disclose whether he/she is a member of one of the law firms named in the post. This same/similar post has been posted on FinancialWebringForum (FWF) and RedFlagDeals (RFD) with challenges for disclosure made by forum members.

I believe someone, a plaintiff, would have to ask one of the firms to pursue action, at which point the law firms could apply to the courts for class action status, particularly if they already have a list of affected others who are interested in pursuing. There clearly is no money in pursuing an action on the behalf of one client, so the more the merrier, and the more likely the law firms would undertake this on a speculative basis (no cost to clients).

If you look at the website, you will see an extensive list of class action suits they already have active files on. This is clearly a big part of their business. So I think this is a legit action on their part, with no other ulterior motives. But everyone will have to do their own due diligence. Whether anyone who has received a letter from PT should show some interest in contacting these firms is an individual decision.

Even if the litigation is successful, the law firms will likely get most of the loot, covering their costs plus a very hefty percentage of the remainder. I have been a party to a few of these in the USA where affected parties got very little out of such class actions.

Added Thursday: I think those who might consider joining this class action need to think about whether this is worth the small monetary amounts that might come the depositor's way. If successful, this will affect PT's bottom line, potentially resulting in lower deposit rates for all of us. Most of the money will likely go to the legal firms. Do we want to enrich them? I suspect PT has suffered reputational damage to some extent already and have already learned a lesson. But as I mentioned above, each individual needs to make their own decision.

No disagreement from me on that, but PT should have had that 'application' database encrypted at a minimum, and there was no need to retain all that 'application data' in an fairly open portal anyway (open to new online application entries). Once an application is approved, all that information should have been secured away in a separate archive for various CRA and regulatory purposes, and then only that information required to support the 'accounts' database kept live in that 'accounts' database. I beleive it was primarily convenience and/or lack of rigor for that 'application' database to be in the state it was. I suspect that has now changed significantly.

Class action lawsuits always astound me. It seems the bulk of the settlement ends up as lawyers fees and the relative pittance left is split between lots and lots of plaintiffs.

As frequent readers know I am currently based in the US and the bulk of the commercials on TV here are for medications or medical procedures to change something about you, likely something that isn't bothering you and that you didn't know could be a problem, (complete with the requisite disclaimers about possible side effects up to and including death), ways to get the IRS to reduce your outstanding tax liability (providing it is greater than $10,000, and with the disclaimer that you should not expect the results they are using for illustration), and finally for some form of class action lawsuit for some assumed infraction of the law.

I will be pleased when I return to Canada, despite the 24 inches of snow I can see in my driveway from my newest toy, an IP accessible and addressable webcam mounted over the garage door.

GS