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

[Porthos]

https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/ne...ion-to-settle-deceptive-tech-support-lawsuit/

 

[sapphirescales]

Jesus. If people are so stupid that they can't read, that's their problem. The software asked a few questions and if the customer said yes to any of them, it told them that they MIGHT be infected with a virus and to call Office Depot. It's just a piece of marketing software - nothing more.

As for up-selling unneeded services, that's standard in ANY industry. Banks, car dealerships, auto repair, computer repair, etc. This is due to corporate setting UNREALISTIC goals for individual managers/branches/locations. Just one of the many reasons you're better off going to a small, local business rather than going with the big guys.

Sounds to me like somebody got a hard-on for Office Depot and went after them. Well if you're going to go after them then you're going to have to go after ALL big companies.

 

[Markverhyden]

As for up-selling unneeded services, that's standard in ANY industry.

There's a very old saying in sales. They can't say no if you don't ask. It's not the act of up-selling, it's how it's done. Fear mongering and the sky is falling tactics do work on the uninformed. So it's up the the seller to properly frame the question.

Having worked at CompUSA back in the day I do understand how these companies do this. A big part of the problem is compensation for the techs and store managers. Spiffs is a common way in retail to promote sales of certain things. Almost always paid by the vendor of the service or product. Hardware sales people could easily double their income by selling spiffed products and services. Including those that are questionable. Webroot was one. Another is extended warranties. We had people that sold extended warranties on software like Office, claiming that if they lost the discs or there was a new version the customer would get it for free. One manager in the store even sold them on ink cartridges and toner. Yes, it's all in the small print but no one reads the small print. Which is what they count on.

 

[mraikes]

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.

 

[TechLady]

I suspected they were doing something scummy like this all along. How exactly is this blown out of proportion? This isn't really "a big business" doing an "oopsie." This is a giant corporate chain engaging in greedy, massive deception and breach of trust. There's not much difference between what these guys were doing and the Indian scammers that call our customers up on the phone saying they have "malware."

Well if you're going to go after them then you're going to have to go after ALL big companies.

That sounds fantastic, actually.

 

[Sky-Knight]

I'm just going to point out that just because a machine is brand new, doens't mean it doesn't have malware. There have been many documented circumstances of tier 1 oem images being corrupted.

Which is why I generally do a clean install with my own media when a machine comes in. The bloat can and sometimes does contain malware.

 

[Porthos]

Which is why I generally do a clean install with my own media when a machine comes in. The bloat can and sometimes does contain malware.

I do it for my convenience (turnaround time) and reduction of future issues with the MFG bloatware. A clean install is a happy install.

 

[Sky-Knight]

@Porthos and all of it comes undone when the user clicks the wrong link...

Job security!

 

[Porthos]

@Porthos and all of it comes undone when the user clicks the wrong link...

Job security!

Yes, but at the same time I remind them that I offered to sell them a backup drive to store system images.

 

[sapphirescales]

There's not much difference between what these guys were doing and the Indian scammers that call our customers up on the phone saying they have "malware."

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.

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.

 

[TechLady]

Well I guess we agree to disagree then, because you are missing the main point of the litigation entirely. You either didn't read or don't understand basic business ethics. Or both.

 

[JoeTech]

I think the only difference between Office Depot and fake tech support in this situation is that Office Depot is unlikely to put syskey on your laptop if you make them mad or refuse to pay.

 

[mraikes]

Well I guess we agree to disagree then, because you are missing the main point of the litigation entirely. You either didn't read or don't understand basic business ethics. Or both.

He's being deliberately obtuse. We all know that the situation he's describing in defense of Office Depot isn't what actually occurred there.

 

[seedubya]

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.

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.

 

[ComputerRepairTech]

I'm going to take a guess how this went down. Im guessing support.com made the software and those checkboxes to report that there are malware symptoms...and technically thats kind of true. They probably suggested to office depot to recommend a virus removal service to do a full check on the system to be sure. Instead office depot understood that as, say its infected and they need to have the service done. The vast majority of the office depot employees probably don't know the difference so if 1-5 tech savy employees do and complain office depot isn't going to take those complaints seriously.

I haven't kept up with support.com but years ago I spoke to them about their online computer repair positions and they had a decent test before hiring people to work from home. I am guessing the techs just remoted in and performed the service and indicated no infection was found but the real question is...and maybe I missed it but what results were the customer given? I highly doubt random support.com work from home employees sat there and lied saying they cleaned something they didn't so I wonder what results the customer actually got.

 

[nlinecomputers]

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.

 

[ComputerRepairTech]

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.

Who? what guy?

 

[nlinecomputers]

The one guy defending Office Depot in this thread.

 

[ComputerRepairTech]

The one guy defending Office Depot in this thread.

Oh didn't even know that was a guy

 

[NETWizz]

I don't buy the hype. There are so many variables such as:

1. The technician always assumes there's something wrong with the computer - why else would they bring it in?

Agreed. Kind of a like a guy who brings a car into a mechanic and says, "just look at it," and doesn't want to pay the diagnostic fee says, "I didn't authorize a diagnosis" why is it there?

2. Incompetent technicians making $12/hour that have their managers railing them every second of the day to sell X number of virus removal services.

I started out making $13.50 in my first IT job and wasn't incompetent. I also didn't stay at the same rate or the same job. Yes, there can be management pressure.

3. Telling a client that the computer "has viruses" when it doesn't can be an acceptable white lie. These "techs" are making minimum wage and are just trying to get the customer to let them do their thing and bring it back to acceptable condition. I'm willing to bet that they're selling a "speed up your computer, virus removal, software repair, etc." package for $199 or something that covers all software related problems. They don't have time to explain the specifics to clueless, computer-illiterate customers. Saying "Yes, you have viruses" is synonymous with saying "yes, I need to take a look at it and run the $199 service if you want it to run faster."

Are you making baseless statements of assumption. While it is NOT illegal to sell a package, it IS illegal to misrepresent a non-existent problem to sell it. What I am saying is that it is NEVER acceptable to "Telling a client that the computer "has viruses" when it doesn't."

The #1 complaint with most clients is the speed. Most client's couldn't care less what's causing the slowness - from a failing hard drive to a virus to an anti-virus that's constantly writing log files and burning through the computer's hard drive I/O, they just want it fixed.

Okay. Tell them its slow and diagnose that before recommending a fix. Customers do care to the extent they have to pay for it, and they don't want the parts cannon shot at it. They also don't want data-loss.

When you do the same damned thing every day of your life, it becomes routine. The customer brings in a slow laptop, you tell them that it has viruses so they'll let you make it run fast again (whether you need to tune it up, remove viruses, or whatever it takes), you get your bonus points with management, and everyone walks away happy. 99.99% of the time it's fine. But then you've got news outlets looking to fabricate a story and blow it waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay out of proportion so they can make big $$$ when it blows up into a big story/scandal.

Just because things become routine and it seems every computer has viruses doesn't mean you get to represent that as the problem and take their money to fix "viruses" until the problem is diagnosed and confirmed. Now you can sell them a virus scan or some other diagnosis and get paid to figure it out, but jumping to the conclusion that it is viruses (spyware, malware, whatever) although it may work out 99.9% of the time it is not okay to misrepresent to the customer. It is not a fabricated story if it is true, and if they paid a settlement, then believe me after discovery: subpoenas, interrogatories, requests for admissions, and depositions, they were able to prove the case, and they ultimately had to prove class-certification in the United States District Court, too. Just saying it is not blown out of proportion when there is a $25,000,000 settlement. That is a LOT of customers.

It's not the way I do business, but it works well for the big guys. And most of the time it doesn't make one bit of difference for the customer.

Glad you do business on the up and up, but this doesn't work for the big guys when they don't get away with it. What makes you think it doesn't make a difference for the customers?

It all comes down to numbers. The big guys need to make X amount per head. Customer walks in with Expectation X, big business gives them Quote Y and so long as Expectation X and Quote Y are both met, they merge and become Result Z and everybody walks away happy. The little details don't really matter in the grand scheme of things. They can't when you run such a big business. I personally don't like doing business this way and I don't like it when businesses treat me this way. That's why I always try to do business with small businesses and I don't run my own business this way.

What may be what is rolled-up for the executives, but down where the rubber meets the road and the techs are doing the actual work the more granular details matter. The difference each tech is concerned about his or her individual customers, the managers are concerned about the process and performance, and the execs are concerned about the overall business.