• Home
  • RSS Feeds
  • Blog Archives
Subscribe to Disputing
Book an ADR Service
Call Karl Bayer
Karl Bayer's Disputing Blog - Mediator, Arbitrator, Court Master & Technical Advisor
About Karl  |  Book an ADR Service  |  Contact Karl   (214) 891-4505

Menu 
  • home
  • Mediation
  • Arbitration
  • Court Neutrals
  • Online Dispute Resolution
  • Technology
    • Intellectual Property
    • Privacy and Cybersecurity
    • E-discovery
  • Court Decisions
    • Texas Supreme Court
    • Fifth Circuit
    • Third Court of Appeals
    • U.S. Supreme Court
  • More
    • Legislation
      • Texas
      • United States
    • Healthcare
    • Guest Posts
      • John DeGroote
      • John C. Fleming
      • Rick Freeman
      • Professor Peter Friedman
      • Honorable W. Royal Furgeson, Jr.
      • James M. Gaitis
      • Laura A. Kaster
      • Professor John Lande
      • Philip J. Loree, Jr.
      • Michael McIlwrath
      • F. Peter Phillips
      • Professor Alan Scott Rau
      • Professor Thomas J. Stipanowich
      • Professor S.I. Strong
      • Richard Webb
      • Glen M. Wilkerson
    • International arbitration
    • Regulation
    • Sports and Entertainment


Marriott Won’t Require Data Breach Victims to Individually Arbitrate Claims

0
by Beth Graham

Thursday, Jan 24, 2019


Tweet

Late last year, hotel giant Marriott International disclosed a data breach that began in 2014 and affected approximately 500 million Marriott and Starwood Preferred guest accounts.  A variety of hotel guest information including names, birth dates, passport numbers, encrypted credit card information, and other sensitive data was reportedly obtained by hackers.  In response, Marriott has offered those guests affected by the data breach a free one-year subscription to fraud monitoring service Kroll WebWatcher.  The terms and conditions of the WebWatcher service contain a mandatory arbitration clause that also includes a collective action waiver.

A Federal Trade Commission webpage describing the Marriott data breach states:

The company set up an informational website, https://answers.kroll.com, and a call center, 877-273-9481, to answer questions. It says affected customers also can sign up for a year of free services that will monitor websites that criminals use to share people’s personal information. Marriott says the service will alert customers if their information shows up on the websites, and will also include fraud loss reimbursement and other services.

In December, a proposed class action lawsuit including plaintiffs from each of the 50 states was filed against Marriott in the United States District Court for the District of Maryland.  In their complaint, attorneys for the putative class claim WebWatcher’s arbitration provision creates uncertainty amongst data breach victims regarding whether using the complimentary fraud monitoring service would waive their right to “pursue legal claims in court through a class action vehicle.”  Since Hiteshew v. Marriott was filed, however, Marriott International has apparently agreed not “to enforce the WebWatcher arbitration and class action waiver” against putative class members.

In 2017, a similar situation occurred in response to a data breach at consumer credit reporting agency Equifax. Although the company offered nearly 143 million affected consumers a free one-year subscription to fraud monitoring service TrustedID, a public backlash followed because the terms and conditions of the monitoring service included an arbitration clause and class action waiver.  Equifax later amended the TrustedID terms to state:

NO WAIVER OF RIGHTS FOR THIS CYBER SECURITY INCIDENT

In response to consumer inquiries, we have made it clear that the arbitration clause and class action waiver included in the Equifax and TrustedID Premier terms of use does not apply to this cybersecurity incident.

Unfortunately, large data breaches like those at Marriott and Equifax are becoming all too common.  It will be interesting to see how companies choose to incorporate arbitration provisions into their future breach policies as well as how consumers and the courts react.

Photo by: Michal Mrozek on Unsplash

 

Related Posts

  • Massachusetts Law Bars Mandatory Arbitration as a Condition of Receiving Free Credit Monitoring Following a Data BreachMassachusetts Law Bars Mandatory Arbitration as a Condition of Receiving Free Credit Monitoring Following a Data Breach
  • Illinois Appellate Court Holds BIPA Privacy Claims Are Not Arbitrable Under Terms of Parties’ Employment ContractIllinois Appellate Court Holds BIPA Privacy Claims Are Not Arbitrable Under Terms of Parties’ Employment Contract
  • Another Proposed Class Action Data Breach Lawsuit Ordered to Individual ArbitrationAnother Proposed Class Action Data Breach Lawsuit Ordered to Individual Arbitration
  • Corpus Christi COA Holds Arbitrator Must Decide Whether Arbitral Clause Was IllusoryCorpus Christi COA Holds Arbitrator Must Decide Whether Arbitral Clause Was Illusory
  • Dallas COA Orders Arbitration Based on Electronic Signature and Click Through User AgreementDallas COA Orders Arbitration Based on Electronic Signature and Click Through User Agreement
  • San Antonio COA Holds Payday Lender Did Not Waive Right to Arbitrate When it Filed Criminal Charges Against CustomersSan Antonio COA Holds Payday Lender Did Not Waive Right to Arbitrate When it Filed Criminal Charges Against Customers

Like this article? Share it!


  • Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)
    LinkedIn

  • Click to share on X (Opens in new window)
    X

  • Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
    Facebook

  • Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window)
    Pinterest

  • Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window)
    Email
About Beth Graham

Beth Graham earned a Master of Arts in Information Science and Learning Technologies from the University of Missouri-Columbia, and a Juris Doctor from the University of Nebraska College of Law, where she was an Eastman Memorial Law Scholar. Beth is licensed to practice law in Texas and the District of Columbia. She is also a member of the Texas Bar College and holds CIPP/US, CIPP/E, and CIPM certifications from the International Association of Privacy Professionals.

Legal Research

Legal Research

Connect with Disputing

Visit Us On LinkedinCheck Our Feed

About Disputing

Disputing is published by Karl Bayer, a dispute resolution expert based in Austin, Texas. Articles published on Disputing aim to provide original insight and commentary around issues related to arbitration, mediation and the alternative dispute resolution industry.

To learn more about Karl and his team, or to schedule a mediation or arbitration with Karl’s live scheduling calendar, visit www.karlbayer.com.

About Disputing

Disputing is published by Karl Bayer, a dispute resolution expert based in Austin, Texas. Articles published on Disputing aim to provide original insight and commentary around issues related to arbitration, mediation and the alternative dispute resolution industry.

To learn more about Karl and his team, or to schedule a mediation or arbitration with Karl’s live scheduling calendar, visit www.karlbayer.com.

Recent Posts

We're Back!!!!
Feb 24, 2025
JAMS Welcomes Karl Bayer to its Panel of Neutrals
JAMS Welcomes Karl Bayer to its Panel of Neutrals
May 28, 2024
Class Action Waivers in Arbitration Agreements: The Twenty-First Century Arbitration Battleground and Implications for the EU Countries
Nov 27, 2023

Featured Posts

Tips on Taking Good Remote Depositions From a Veteran Court Reporter

Online Mediation May Allow Restorative Justice to Continue During COVID-19

Remote Arbitration Best Practices: Witness Examination

Search

Legal Research

Legal Research


© 2025, Karl Bayer. All rights reserved. Privacy Policy