The Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco upheld a federal judge’s decision that the bank had misled customers about how the fees would be calculated. A lawyer for the plaintiffs has estimated that more than 1 million debit card customers, who incurred the fees between November 2004 and June 2008, would be eligible for the refunds. The case involved the bank’s former procedures for processing multiple transactions that, when combined, exceed a customer’s credit limit. In 2001, Wells Fargo started entering the largest transaction first, a change that multiplied overdraft fees of up to $35 each.
Security experts predict that the number of breaches, especially on a big scale, will keep growing. “The data breaches are going to continue and will probably get worse with the short term,” said Jim Penrose, former chief of the Operational Discovery Center at the National Security Agency. … Another vulnerable sector is the healthcare industry. Stealing medical records can be more “insidious” than stealing other data because they can be used for identity theft and fraud over a longer stretch of time.
The Yes on 45 campaign, led by the Santa Monica-based Consumer Watchdog group, hailed the poll results as a sign that voters are paying attention to the tens of millions of dollars being spent by health insurance companies to pay for anti-Proposition 45 television advertisement. “The more that health insurers spend against it, the more voters turn against it,” said Jamie Court, Consumer Watchdog’s president.
An online search into TerraCom resulted in a Lifeline application that had been filled out and was posted … Eventually, Wolf and his editors discovered more than 170,000 records that included Social Security numbers, home addresses and financial accounts. … Proponents of the Lifeline program say the federal subsidies are critical to ensuring that households that fall well-below the poverty line have access to at least one phone in case of emergency and to aid job prospects. The $10 million fine was the FCC’s first data security case and its largest privacy action.
The measure would increase California’s limit on “pain and suffering” awards in medical malpractice lawsuits. The cap was set in 1975 at $250,000. Prop. 46 would raise it to $1.1 million and adjust for inflation in the future. Lawyer after lawyer turned down Adam’s parents’ malpractice case because they are expensive and not worth it due to decades-old cap. California’s cap on non-economic damages is among the lowest in the country.