Office Depot Pays $25 Million To Settle Deceptive Tech Support Lawsuit

[NETWizz]

I disagree. These people bring their computers in to Office Depot because they have a problem of some kind. Indian Scammers actively push fake ads in your face telling you that you're infected and try to scare you into calling a 1-800 number so they can steal your money/identity.

Agreed

People come in with a problem, Office Depot says they can fix said problem, they fix said problem, get paid, and send the customer on their way. Does it really matter what the exact cause of the problem was? Whether it's viruses or just needs a tune-up, the issue the customer complains about gets resolved for the price agreed on. I don't see the crime here. Yeah, in an ideal world the technicians would sit down with the customer and explain everything in detail, but they don't have time for that. Sometimes it's easier to just say whatever it takes to get the customers computer so you can fix the damned problem. I'm not saying it's right. I'm just saying that's what happens when you have technicians making $12/hour, corporate with unrealistic expectations, and computer-illiterate dumba$$es bringing their computers in for a cheap fix.

Yes, it matters what the exact cause of the problem was at least once you make representations of that problem to the customer. The moment you say it is ABC and it isn't, and you take money to fix ABC, you have defrauded the customer (even if you do end up fixing their problem that is really XYZ). Technicians or Service Advisers DO need to sit down with customers and go over the work-order, get authorizations, get diagnostics approved etc. If you don't know the problem you tell the customer they need to pay $XX to diagnose which gets applied to fixing the problem. You can say that you suspect ABC problem, but that you have not made that as a firm diagnosis until you can actually look at it. You are better off NOT diagnosing the system and refunding and turning the customer away than making the wrong diagnosis or shooting the parts cannon at it - especially if you end up being wrong!

It is not unreasonable for customers to have the expectation their computers be reasonably fixed especially if that is the written promise to them being made in the work-order. Most reputable places even have a warranty on labor, so the worst thing you can do is send it back not fixed. At that point, not only do you still have to fix it, you likely owe refunds for work done on the wrong diagnosis!

 

[sapphirescales]

This is breach of contract. An exponent of unfettered free enterprise, such as yourself, should be utterly opposed to such practices, as they weaken trust in contractual arrangements, making enterprise more difficult, more costly and less trustworthy. It's almost as if your posts are not internally coherent across your post history.

I never said that it was right. I'm just explaining what happened. In the end, what happened here is the big guys (news stations, lawyers, etc.) saw an opportunity to steal money from another big guy (Office Depot) and they took advantage of it. The people that actually got their computers worked on might get a token $7.56 payout just so they can say that the "victims" were compensated while the lawyers and big wigs involved take everything else. There's a reason why class action lawsuits haven't caught on with the rest of the world. They really do nothing but enhance the wealth of the already wealthy while the people that SHOULD be compensated basically get nothing.

I personally love this behavior by the big guys. This is why people come to small repair shops like us. I would NEVER run my business this way, but having such incompetent and untrustworthy competition does wonders for us. They pay for all the marketing so people actually THINK about getting their computer fixed in the first place instead of just throwing it in the trash, and small shops benefit when they either personally get screwed over or a news story like this is released.

I'm not surprised. This is the guy who admitted on here that he buys laptops, tears them apart and returns them for his money back just so he can learn how to service them. The fact that said laptop is now ruined and can't be sold as new and the store takes a loss on his actions is irrelevant to him.

I've went over this before. You just refuse to accept reality. Just because you're too incompetent to take apart a laptop without ruining it doesn't mean that I am. And I don't do it all the time - only when I'm looking to buy another laptop for myself. There's nothing wrong with figuring out if it's repairable or not before I decide to keep it, especially nowadays where all you have to do is undo a couple of screws on the bottom and you can see all its guts right away. I have bought computers and stripped them down completely, but I don't return those. There's often no way to get them back together again 100% when you strip them down to the last screw. I keep those for myself. In fact, I'm still using a Dell that I bought brand new and stripped part down to the last screw back in 2008 or 2009. I never was able to get it back together again perfectly, but it's worked all this time (granted, it's had limited use the last 5 years or so, but it's still impressive). So you can take your assumptions and shove them where the sun don't shine.

 

[NETWizz]

This isn't about people reading or not reading fine print, it's more than that.

"KIRO 7's reporters took new computers to both Washington and Oregon Office Depot stores where four of the six laptops were found to be infected with malware and the employees offered to clean them for extra payment."

In my mind, jail time would not be inappropriate for those who condoned, encouraged or required this behavior as well as the employees who knowingly did this.

And fine print out no, deliberately deceptive and misleading practices should never be OK.

This one is kind of a wobbler for me. Let me explain. First you bring a brand-new computer in, and that makes no sense because any reasonable tech would assume something is wrong. That said, I would expect a reputable shop to direct them at the manufacturer's warranty and suggest they might get some free support from HP or Dell... that you might be able to do a few things above and beyond the manufacturer, but to then suggest things that are NOT warranty related. For example, "customer requests install MS Office Suite, upgrade RAM, and install printer driver."

I also understand that sometimes brand-new computers come pre-loaded with malware, spyware, or junk of some kind. It is generally not excessive to the point of being viruses, but usually a new computer cleanup is a good idea to get rid of most of the pre-installed stuff. Some folks even do a clean-install of Windows as the easiest way to get rid of 95% of the garbage the manufacturer installs.

All of this is true and a legitimate service as long as you do not misrepresent what you are providing. They may have actually been infested with malware depending upon the definition of Malware.

Jail-time is where this becomes a wobbler. I look at it as a civil matter. That said if it is intentional, and money is being passed around including the technicans who are in on it then maybe. If I were a judge, I would find it very hard to send a $12/hr employee to jail because he did what he was told by his bosses to keep his job. Ultimately, corporate policy is the bigger problem here.

 

[sapphirescales]

Yes, it matters what the exact cause of the problem was at least once you make representations of that problem to the customer. The moment you say it is ABC and it isn't, and you take money to fix ABC, you have defrauded the customer (even if you do end up fixing their problem that is really XYZ). Technicians or Service Advisers DO need to sit down with customers and go over the work-order, get authorizations, get diagnostics approved etc.

I agree on all points that this is what SHOULD happen in an ideal world. Unfortunately we don't live in an ideal world. The technician making $12/hour doesn't give a rats a$$. Have you seen the type of filth that walk into places like this? It's not worth it to deal with all this BS when you're making $12/hour. You go there, put your hours in, do the minimum that's required by your manager, and leave. When you're in a customer service position, you get accustomed to low IQ trash walking in, demanding this and demanding that. You learn that it's in YOUR best interest to just pacify them and get them out of your life ASAP. Eventually if what you're doing is routine (which would definitely describe doing software related repair at a big box store like Office Depot), you just go through the motions and do whatever it takes to get through it and move on.

I'm not saying it's right, but that's just the way it is. I guarantee you the reporters could do the same thing with Best Buy and Curry's PC World and they'd get more of the same. The business model works. It just sucks for everyone involved (employees and customers). The sledgehammer approach to pest control DOES work. It's not ideal, but it does work. The problem is, this time it was a fly and not a bee that was to be exterminated and the news outlets freak out and say that the exterminator was trying to scam people. WTF does it matter? The flying insect is bothering you, you called an exterminator, and the exterminator got rid of it.

 

[mraikes]

This one is kind of a wobbler for me. Let me explain. First you bring a brand-new computer in, and that makes no sense because any reasonable tech would assume something is wrong. That said, I would expect a reputable shop to direct them at the manufacturer's warranty and suggest they might get some free support from HP or Dell... that you might be able to do a few things above and beyond the manufacturer, but to then suggest things that are NOT warranty related. For example, "customer requests install MS Office Suite, upgrade RAM, and install printer driver."

I also understand that sometimes brand-new computers come pre-loaded with malware, spyware, or junk of some kind. It is generally not excessive to the point of being viruses, but usually a new computer cleanup is a good idea to get rid of most of the pre-installed stuff. Some folks even do a clean-install of Windows as the easiest way to get rid of 95% of the garbage the manufacturer installs.

All of this is true and a legitimate service as long as you do not misrepresent what you are providing. They may have actually been infested with malware depending upon the definition of Malware.

Jail-time is where this becomes a wobbler. I look at it as a civil matter. That said if it is intentional, and money is being passed around including the technicans who are in on it then maybe. If I were a judge, I would find it very hard to send a $12/hr employee to jail because he did what he was told by his bosses to keep his job. Ultimately, corporate policy is the bigger problem here.

For me, it stops being a "wobbler" when the computer is accepted for diagnostics, and then the customer is told that diagnostics has determined they have a virus (when it does not) and they should now pay $300.

And let's not forget, this isn't a potential problem - that was a practice for which the defendants accepted responsibility and agreed to pay $35,000,000. Thirty-five MILLION dollars. If Office Depot and their buddy couldn't figure out a defense to save themselves $35 million dollars, no one on Technibble will be able to defend it.

 

[NETWizz]

For me, it stops being a "wobbler" when the computer is accepted for diagnostics, and then the customer is told that diagnostics has determined they have a virus (when it does not) and they should now pay $300.

And let's not forget, this isn't a potential problem - that was a practice for which the defendants accepted responsibility and agreed to pay $35,000,000. Thirty-five MILLION dollars. If Office Depot and their buddy couldn't figure out a defense to save themselves $35 million dollars, no one on Technibble will be able to defend it.

I get what you are saying and completely agree. I use the legal term wobbler because I am differentiating civil vs criminal law. Here is my thinking... in a Civil lawsuit there is the concept of negligence. Specifically: Duty, Breach, Causation, Damage. That is that someone has a duty to do something or not to do something. Clearly in this case, there was a breach of that duty, and this was the causation of damages to the tune of $35 Million though admittedly this is the concept of different damage types from compensatory and restitution all the way down to punitive, which is where a court punishes someone making them pay more than the actual damages. Sometimes that amount is treble damages, which is another funny legal and accounting/bookkeeping word meaning triple.

I am not saying it is not fraud only that it would be incredibly hard to prosecute. It makes far more sense to do a class-action and actually force the business to change its practices by also adding robust injuctive relief enjoining them from doing the same deceptive business practices.

 

[ComputerRepairTech]

Just a reminder this is talking about stuff that goes as far back as 2012 and 2013 right? So you're talking about a time period when zero access was exploding all over the internet and new variations were being released constantly. I would have asked different questions but yeah depending on what they had said it definitely should be manually examined by a professional.

 

[NETWizz]

I agree on all points that this is what SHOULD happen in an ideal world. Unfortunately we don't live in an ideal world. The technician making $12/hour doesn't give a rats a$$. Have you seen the type of filth that walk into places like this? It's not worth it to deal with all this BS when you're making $12/hour. You go there, put your hours in, do the minimum that's required by your manager, and leave. When you're in a customer service position, you get accustomed to low IQ trash walking in, demanding this and demanding that. You learn that it's in YOUR best interest to just pacify them and get them out of your life ASAP. Eventually if what you're doing is routine (which would definitely describe doing software related repair at a big box store like Office Depot), you just go through the motions and do whatever it takes to get through it and move on.

Nobody claims to live in an ideal world, but YOU and all other technicians need to step-it-up because it is not okay that in your words, "the technician making $12/hour doesn't give a rats a$$." If that is the case, the technician should join a different line of work doing something he or she cares about. Not all of us subscribe to the attitude: "You go there, put your hours in, do the minimum that's required by your manager, and leave." With that kind of work ethic, of course, anyone would learn to hate their job, and they would wonder why management is always riding that person as you described in one of your a previous posts. You say, "when you're in a customer service position, you get accustomed to low IQ trash walking in, demanding this and demanding that." What is the problem when they are paying for the service? Why not give them what they demand? If they are "demanding this and demanding that" you can be "charging for this and charging for that." I you feel your best interest is to pacify customers and get them out of your life, you are in the wrong work environment that is not conducive of anyone doing their best work, and I am genuinely sorry for the workers and the customers.

I'm not saying it's right, but that's just the way it is. I guarantee you the reporters could do the same thing with Best Buy and Curry's PC World and they'd get more of the same. The business model works. It just sucks for everyone involved (employees and customers). The sledgehammer approach to pest control DOES work. It's not ideal, but it does work. The problem is, this time it was a fly and not a bee that was to be exterminated and the news outlets freak out and say that the exterminator was trying to scam people. WTF does it matter? The flying insect is bothering you, you called an exterminator, and the exterminator got rid of it.

Reporters absolutely do the same thing. They are not picking on one company specifically, but rather they are trying to make a good story. I have never heard of Curry's PC, but Best Buy has been news worthy before for certain things.

 

[sapphirescales]

Nobody claims to live in an ideal world, but YOU and all other technicians need to step-it-up because it is not okay that in your words, "the technician making $12/hour doesn't give a rats a$$." If that is the case, the technician should join a different line of work doing something he or she cares about. Not all of us subscribe to the attitude: "You go there, put your hours in, do the minimum that's required by your manager, and leave." With that kind of work ethic, of course, anyone would learn to hate their job, and they would wonder why management is always riding that person as you described in one of your a previous posts.

The problem doesn't lie with the employee, but with the employer that refuses to pay a fair wage. When you're abused by your employer, most people don't care anymore. That's why I pay my employees so well. I don't tolerate apathy in my workforce, but if you want to avoid apathy you have to treat your employees fairly. You can't have it both ways.

You say, "when you're in a customer service position, you get accustomed to low IQ trash walking in, demanding this and demanding that." What is the problem when they are paying for the service? Why not give them what they demand? If they are "demanding this and demanding that" you can be "charging for this and charging for that."

Most customers are fine. It's the 3% or so that are the real problem. I'm talking about the moron that demands to substitute a side of cole-slaw for more meat in the restaurant and refuses to pay any more. Then when they don't get their way they leave no tip or worse, cause a scene in the restaurant. It's fine dealing with this sort of crap if you're getting paid well, but if your employer is just squeezing you for every last dollar you stop caring and just do whatever it takes to get the job done.

 

[seashore]

I have never heard of Curry's PC, but Best Buy has been news worthy before for certain things.

Currys PC World is a UK company. Believe me, you ain't missing much.

 

[Sky-Knight]

Rule of business number 1, is obvious... take care of your customers and they will take care of you. Everyone gets this one. The second rule of business is, take care of your employees, and they will take care of you. Publicly traded corporations almost universally fail gloriously on step 2. Privately held firms can be better, can be a bit worse... depends on who owns it. The thing is where I am $12/hour is min wage. That means the people earning that money are useless, clueless, and generally terrible. They are the burger flippers of the world. And Sapphire is correct, they simply do not care. If they cared, they'd not be stuck working at $12 / hour. Employees that show that sort of attention and initiative tend to find themselves upwardly mobile VERY quickly. This is double true in an economy hallmarked by record low unemployment numbers.

And if you're an employer that abuses people, you're going to find the next 10 years or so REALLY HARD. People have options, work is everywhere. So even those idiots at the bottom need care, or they'll just walk and you'll quickly find yourself without any employees to do the work. And I see far too many organizations waking up too slow to this fact. They just stomp on people, and who's left is incompetent or overworked, either is a massive productivity sink.

 

[mikeroq]

Oh didn't even know that was a guy

You're right I don't think he is real either. I thought he was a unicorn.

 

[TechLady]

Nobody claims to live in an ideal world, but YOU and all other technicians need to step-it-up because it is not okay that in your words, "the technician making $12/hour doesn't give a rats a$$." If that is the case, the technician should join a different line of work doing something he or she cares about. Not all of us subscribe to the attitude: "You go there, put your hours in, do the minimum that's required by your manager, and leave." With that kind of work ethic, of course, anyone would learn to hate their job, and they would wonder why management is always riding that person as you described in one of your a previous posts. You say, "when you're in a customer service position, you get accustomed to low IQ trash walking in, demanding this and demanding that." What is the problem when they are paying for the service? Why not give them what they demand?

Lol, this sounds like it is coming from someone that really hasn't worked corporate retail much, if at all. I once read a blurb somewhere by a guy that said he did military service in some Middle East war zone and also worked Black Friday in the US...and he said he'd frankly choose the war zone any day. Corporate retail is literally the worst of humanity on every side, and unfortunately, the US has lots of spots where there are no other choices.

Publicly traded corporations almost universally fail gloriously on step 2.

One word: Costco. Publicly traded and generally treats employees fairly. It's possible.

And if you're an employer that abuses people, you're going to find the next 10 years or so REALLY HARD. People have options, work is everywhere.

Hate to get off topic, but no. As I mentioned above, there's lots of places where there really aren't many choices. The right-to-work states in the south are famous for this.

 

[sapphirescales]

Lol, this sounds like it is coming from someone that really hasn't worked corporate retail much, if at all. I once read a blurb somewhere by a guy that said he did military service in some Middle East war zone and also worked Black Friday in the US...and he said he'd frankly choose the war zone any day. Corporate retail is literally the worst of humanity on every side, and unfortunately, the US has lots of spots where there are no other choices.

This. I'm not for big government, but we need government intervention in business - NOW. If every product had a MAP (minimum advertised price), big companies like Amazon couldn't screw the little man. Everyone's prices would be the same, and everyone would be able to make a profit. How much a CEO makes should be no more than 100x what the company's lowest paid worker makes. And I'm not talking about the paltry "salary" CEO's take home. I'm including distributions, stock options, etc.

If these two laws were passed, our country would be so much better off it's unbelievable. If the CEO gets a 20% raise, everyone else should get a 20% raise too. Instead we have CEO's handing out 100% raises to themselves and giving NOTHING to their workers. It's not right. It's also not right that big companies like Walmart and Amazon can use their grossly overvalued stock prices to sell products at a loss in order to force their competition to go out of business so they can then jack the prices up again.

 

[Sky-Knight]

@TechLady Here's the thing... Costco is a freak of nature. A publicly traded corporation has one goal, make money. And if any leadership of that company makes a decision that leaves money on the table, they can be personally held liable for the losses. It takes a very special corporate construct to redefine this reality in such a way that allows for leadership to leave profit on the table, by passing it back to their people. Costco obviously can be used as a template for this, but as Sapphirescales hints... until this is required by law it's pointless.

Also I'm in AZ, we're one of those "Southern" Right to work states, what I said still applies. Organizations are running dry of people because they don't pay, and the trend is changing. The thing is, once the second baby boomers hit the work force starting in 2025, unemployment is going to swing the other way HARD and we're right back to where we are. But until 2025, nationwide, we're suffering a labor shortage and employers that treat people as disposable are going to have increasing difficulties operating.

 

[TechLady]

This. I'm not for big government, but we need government intervention in business - NOW. If the CEO gets a 20% raise, everyone else should get a 20% raise too. Instead we have CEO's handing out 100% raises to themselves and giving NOTHING to their workers. It's not right.

Holy crap. I think this marks the first time we've agreed on anything, ever. Madness.

@TechLady Costco obviously can be used as a template for this, but as Sapphirescales hints... until this is required by law it's pointless.

One thing everybody can do is make sure they vote, and make sure they vote for people that understand these problems concerning corporate greed and inept regulation. As we've seen over and over and over again, corporations will do anything they can get away with until the day someone says NO. For OfficeMax, apparently that takes a $25 million "NO."

 

[Sky-Knight]

@TechLady The nature of corporations is exactly as you describe, I just want to point out that there is no malice here. As I said before, leadership is held accountable for the losses if they leave money on the table. Which is to say, they will behave in this toxic way because they must. Only a specially configured corporate construct, specifically intended to avoid this nightmare will avoid this behavior at this time.

And honestly, I'm not sure how we'd create a system that changes that without causing even more harm. But that's a conversation we should be having as a people certainly. I just don't want this to turn into your typical bash fest on the rich, because that's not what's happening at all.

 

[sapphirescales]

Holy crap. I think this marks the first time we've agreed on anything, ever. Madness.

Capitalism is a great system, but it's not perfect. The problem with our current system is it's based on numbers rather than percentages. If it were based on percentages, the people at the top couldn't take advantage of everyone else by using their ignorance of math against them (seriously, the average person's math skill level is TERRIBLE!). I would love to abolish the current tax system and instead impose a consumption based tax system. If you want to tax the rich more, increase the tax on what they buy most (properties valued at more than $1,000,000, cars more expensive than $100,000, etc.). The reason why the tax code is so complex is so that politicians can use it in order to extort money from wealthy individuals and corporations (in reality, the politicians and the corporations are in bed together, but the details are too complex to get into here).

Want to tax the poor people less? Reduce or even eliminate the tax on things like food and other basic essentials. Nobody should have to file tax returns or deal with withholding and other BS. There's no need for it. A consumption based tax is all we need. It would save BILLIONS of dollars and make tax evasion almost impossible. It doesn't matter how much cash you've got stuffed under your mattress or how much you've got in your bank. When you go to spend it, the government takes a portion of it. Period. Think about it. How difficult is it to avoid paying sales tax? Pretty frickin' difficult. The only time you can avoid it is when a store has a "no sales tax" promotion - and they're still remitting the sales tax to the government. They just jack the prices up to cover it.

 

[Sky-Knight]

Consumption taxation doesn't solve the economic nightmare caused by wealth disparity. The issue isn't the taxation point, but the fact that there is stagnant income beyond the values of some nations, sitting in bank accounts somewhere. Graduated income taxation was created to mitigate this reality of capitalism, but it failed to adjust with the shifting nature of income. And now, only the middle class pays it, and they weren't meant to pay it AT ALL.

 

[TechLady]

@TechLady The nature of corporations is exactly as you describe, I just want to point out that there is no malice here.

No. Not effing people over isn't "leaving money on the table." I'm sure it may not seem like it in the boardroom, but tricking people into thinking they have malware when they don't...is malice. Full stop, no qualifiers. Remember the Wells Fargo account fraud scandal? It's the same kind of behavior that they justified the way you're trying to now. Even if you don't agree with what they did, this reaction ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ ...is why they keep doing it.