[Bacardi4206]

Lemmy Lemmy:

Bacardi4206 Bacardi4206:

If she wasn't a cheating whore in the first place, none of this would have even happened.

"This"? What "this" is is Rogers giving out personal information. The belief that she's a "whore" (which she isn't) has nothing to do with it. So when you say "none of this would have even happened" you're wrong. Do you think that this woman is the only person whose information has been carelessly mishandled by Rogers? It would have happened and certainly did to more customers than her. Are you a Rogers' customer? If so, you're likely a victim too.

The circumstances by which Rogers' lack of privacy with customer information was discovered don't matter. If it hadn't been her, it might have been you.

Now, do I think she should get $600,000? No. But I think Rogers should have to pay SOMEONE (gov't?) $600,000. Punitive damages. Teach them a lesson that encourages them to be more careful with customer privacy.

Giving out personal information to her husband? Oh my, maybe that's a little bit of a deal however it's not like they gave it out to complete strangers. That would be a big deal. As well, how are you saying shes not a whore? I guess it's perfectly normaly and un-slutty that a woman who decided to marry somebody decided to spread her legs for more than just her husband. Yeah, that completely doesn't make her a whore at all.

Also, if rogers carelessly mishandled information before. Why is this article the first I am hearing about it, where are the other families and customers crying about how rogers ruined there life or gave out information? I haven't seen any but I guess it exists because you say so? As well I am a rogers customer, I hate there service and there ways of trying to make money off of you. However they haven't once mishandeled my information. My privacy is infact intact.

This woman, this cheating "non-whore" would not be sueing rogers or complaining about privacy problems if infact she remained faithful, diddn't sleep with other men behind her husbands back or have anything to hide in which would effect her marriage. Shes looking for a escape goat, somebody to point fingers at and sympathy. Not to mention perhaps to make a few easy bucks as well but yeah, why give her some of the blame when we can all just blame rogers. Rogers forcefuly got her to screw other guys and made her a complete moron. It's also rogers fault that her husband isn't a idiot and knew something was up and decided to check facts with the number.

[Lemmy]

Bacardi4206 Bacardi4206:

Also, if rogers carelessly mishandled information before. Why is this article the first I am hearing about it, where are the other families and customers crying about how rogers ruined there life or gave out information? I haven't seen any but I guess it exists because you say so? As well I am a rogers customer, I hate there service and there ways of trying to make money off of you. However they haven't once mishandeled my information. My privacy is infact intact.

How do you know that you're privacy is intact? How do you know that I don't have your information? How do you know that some marketing firm doesn't have your information? There are likely MANY victims that don't know they're victims. You're angry with the wrong party in this story.

[Bacardi4206]

Lemmy Lemmy:

Bacardi4206 Bacardi4206:

Also, if rogers carelessly mishandled information before. Why is this article the first I am hearing about it, where are the other families and customers crying about how rogers ruined there life or gave out information? I haven't seen any but I guess it exists because you say so? As well I am a rogers customer, I hate there service and there ways of trying to make money off of you. However they haven't once mishandeled my information. My privacy is infact intact.

How do you know that you're privacy is intact? How do you know that I don't have your information? How do you know that some marketing firm doesn't have your information? There are likely MANY victims that don't know they're victims. You're angry with the wrong party in this story.

Alright, than you tell me my information. Being you are accusing rogers of giving away peoples information. How about you go find that out. You can get more information from peoples facebook pages than you could from rogers. Further more, rogers is a company. A company that deals with cable, internet and phone services. They sell people these products and are infact rich off of them as one of Canada's leading provider of them.

They don't aquire sensative information on there costumers, it's customers that give sensative information to there phone provider which in this case was rogers. In this case, she made those calls and rogers billed her for it. They found that her husband was using rogers products as well and instead of sending 2 seperate invoices, they thought it would be more efficient to just send the household one. Not to mention, according to them it saved them money by doing so.

Is it rogers fault that the information in the invoice showed her calls to her secret lover and her husband was smart enough to know something was up and snoop around? No, the fact is. Rogers assumed there marriage wasn't based on cheating and lies and tried to make there service more efficient for them. They combined invoices because the two are married. Unless you are married to every marketing firm. I don't believe you have to worry about anything. Further more, why would rogers ruin there buisness and risk losing all there customers over selling off customer information to marketing firms for lously money compared to what they make. You're unfact based conspiracy theories are serverely flawed as is your bias of the article.

This women, if she had not cheated on her husband. There would not have been suspicious phone calls on her invoice which was merged with her husbands. He wouldn't have checked them as there wouldn't be anything to check. Her marriage would have still been intact and she would not have cared if rogers merged her invoice with her husbands. The fact is, it is more efficient assuming you are not her and don't have any dark secrets on your phone records you don't want your husband or wife to know about. This whole thing is bullshit for the fact shes not trying to take responsability for her own actions and blaming rogers because they were the reason her husband found out. Further more, neither should she be gaining any money because of it because rogers did nothing wrong. Neither does she deserve it. Rogers doesn't do the same thing for as mentioned in another post, your roommate getting you to pay all the bills. There is no way that could happen. They did it because these two individuals were married, they combine incomes regardless so why not share bills?

[Brenda]

$1:

They found that her husband was using rogers products as well and instead of sending 2 seperate invoices, they thought it would be more efficient to just send the household one. Not to mention, according to them it saved them money by doing so.

And that is NOT their choice to make.

$1:

They combined invoices because the two are married.

They didnt know that, and is non of their business. The invoice was in her maiden name, which is not the same as her married name.

Just because 2 people reside at the same address, doesnt mean they share bankaccounts too, or a bed, or whatever. Even if they do, it is not the business of the one that is billing.

$1:

she would not have cared if rogers merged her invoice with her husbands.

How do you know?

[Lemmy]

I understand your point, Bacardi. Sure, she (and her husband) are responsible for the break-up. I already said I don't think she should get any money out of this. I'm not arguing with you on that. I frankly don't care about her or her marriage. I do care about corporations that are loose in the security and confidentiality of their customers' information. And you're ABSOLUTELY wrong if you believe Rogers did nothing wrong.

[Benn]

To say sorry for improper billing Rogers should send her one pre-paid untraceable disposable cellphone for her future endeavors, like she should of had for her past ones, and send her on her way.