COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES
|9 Months Ended|
Sep. 30, 2018
|Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]|
|COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES||
COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES
2017 Cybersecurity Incident
In fiscal 2017, we experienced a cybersecurity incident following a criminal attack on our systems that involved the theft of certain personally identifiable information of U.S., Canadian and U.K. consumers. Criminals exploited a software vulnerability in a U.S. website application to gain unauthorized access to our network. In March 2017, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security distributed a notice concerning the software vulnerability. We undertook efforts to identify and remediate vulnerable systems; however, the vulnerability in the website application that was exploited was not identified by our security processes. We discovered unusual network activity in late-July 2017 and upon discovery promptly investigated the activity. Once the activity was identified as potential unauthorized access, we acted to stop the intrusion and engaged a leading, independent cybersecurity firm to conduct a forensic investigation to determine the scope of the unauthorized access, including the specific information potentially impacted. Based on our forensic investigation, the unauthorized access occurred from mid-May through July 2017. The information accessed primarily includes names, Social Security numbers, birth dates, addresses and, in some instances, driver’s license numbers. In addition, payment card numbers for approximately 209,000 U.S. and Canadian consumers, and certain dispute documents with personal identifying information for approximately 182,000 U.S. consumers, were accessed. The investigation also determined that personal information of approximately 19,000 Canadian consumers was impacted and approximately 860,000 potentially affected U.K. consumers were contacted regarding access to personal information.
The Company acted promptly to notify the approximately 145.5 million U.S. consumers whose personally identifiable information the Company had identified in 2017 as potentially accessed. As a result of an ongoing analysis of data stolen in the 2017 cybersecurity incident, the Company announced in March 2018, that it had identified approximately 2.4 million U.S. consumers whose name and partial driver's license information were stolen, but who were not in the affected population of approximately 145.5 million consumers previously identified by the Company in 2017.
Below is a rollforward of accrued liabilities and insurance receivable associated with the 2017 cybersecurity incident, beginning with the event date:
Product Liability. As a result of the 2017 cybersecurity incident, we offered TrustedID® Premier, a credit file monitoring and identity theft protection product, for free to all U.S. consumers who signed up through January 31, 2018. We have recorded the expenses necessary to provide this service to those who signed up. Through December 31, 2017, we recorded $50.7 million of product costs in selling, general, and administrative expenses. We recorded $7.8 million and $11.9 million related to this service as well as the costs to extend credit monitoring coverage for eligible consumers in selling, general and administrative expenses in the accompanying Consolidated Statements of Income for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2018.
Expenses Incurred. Through December 31, 2017, the Company recorded $113.3 million of pretax expenses related to the 2017 cybersecurity incident. Expenses include costs to investigate and remediate the 2017 cybersecurity incident and legal and other professional services related thereto, all of which are expensed as incurred. We have included these costs in the above table through December 31, 2017. Beginning in 2018, expenses included in the above table include only costs incurred as part of the delivery of the free product.
Future Costs. We expect to incur significant professional services expenses associated with the 2017 cybersecurity incident in future periods. We will recognize these expenses as services are received. Costs related to the 2017 cybersecurity incident that will be incurred in future periods will also include increased expenses and capital investments for technology and security. We also expect to incur increased expenses for insurance, finance, compliance activities and to meet increased legal and regulatory requirements.
Insurance Coverage. We maintain $125.0 million of cybersecurity insurance coverage, above a $7.5 million deductible, to limit our exposure to losses such as those related to the 2017 cybersecurity incident. During the three months ended September 30, 2018, the Company has not recorded any insurance recoveries. During the nine months ended September 30, 2018, the Company has recorded insurance recoveries of $45.0 million. Since the announcement of the 2017 cybersecurity incident in September 2017, we have recorded and received insurance recoveries of $95.0 million for costs incurred through September 30, 2018.
Litigation, Claims and Government Investigations. As a result of the 2017 cybersecurity incident, we are subject to a significant number of proceedings and investigations. Since the 2017 cybersecurity incident, hundreds of class actions and other lawsuits have been filed against us typically alleging harm from the 2017 cybersecurity incident and seeking various remedies, including monetary and injunctive relief. We dispute the allegations in the complaints described below and intend to defend against such claims. In addition, numerous governmental agencies are investigating us in connection with the 2017 cybersecurity incident, which may result in fines, settlements or other relief. Set forth below are descriptions of the main categories of these lawsuits and investigations.
Other than as specifically stated below, while we believe it is reasonably possible that we will incur losses associated with the following proceedings and investigations, it is not possible at this time to estimate the amount of loss or range of possible loss that might result from adverse judgments, settlements, penalties or other resolution of the proceedings and investigations described below based on the various stages of these proceedings and investigations, that alleged damages have not been specified or are uncertain, the uncertainty as to the certification of a class or classes and the size of any certified class, as applicable, and the lack of resolution on significant factual and legal issues. The Company will continue to evaluate information as it becomes known and will record an estimate for losses at the time or times when it is both probable that a loss has been incurred and the amount of the loss is reasonably estimable. The Company believes that the ultimate amount paid on these actions, claims and investigations could be material to the Company’s consolidated financial condition, results of operations, or cash flows in future periods.
Multidistrict Litigation. Following the 2017 cybersecurity incident, hundreds of class actions were filed against us in federal and state courts relating to the 2017 cybersecurity incident. The plaintiffs in these cases, who purport to represent various classes of consumers and small businesses, generally claim to have been harmed by alleged actions and/or omissions by Equifax in connection with the 2017 cybersecurity incident and assert a variety of common law and statutory claims seeking monetary damages, injunctive relief and other related relief.
In addition, certain class actions have been filed by financial institutions that allege their businesses have been placed at risk due to the 2017 cybersecurity incident and generally assert various common law claims such as claims for negligence and breach of contract, as well as, in some cases, statutory claims. The financial institution class actions seek compensatory damages and other related relief.
Furthermore, a lawsuit has been filed against us by the City of Chicago with respect to the 2017 cybersecurity incident alleging violations of state laws and local ordinances governing protection of personal data, consumer fraud and breach notice requirements and business practices and seeking declaratory and injunctive relief and the imposition of fines the aggregate amount of which the complaint does not specifically quantify. Additionally, two Indian Tribes filed suits in federal court asserting putative class actions relating to the 2017 cybersecurity incident brought on behalf of themselves and other similarly situated federally recognized Indian Tribes and Nations.
Beginning on December 6, 2017 and pursuant to multiple subsequent orders, the U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation ordered the consolidation and transfer for pre-trial proceedings with respect to the U.S. cases pending in federal court discussed above, including the City of Chicago action and the Indian Tribal suits, to the Northern District of Georgia as the single U.S. District Court for centralized pre-trial proceedings. Based on this order, consolidated proceedings with respect to U.S. consumer and financial institution federal class actions related to the 2017 cybersecurity incident have been conducted in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia (“MDL Court”). The MDL Court has established separate tracks for the consumer and financial institution cases and appointed lead counsel on behalf of plaintiffs in both tracks.
The cases before the MDL Court are in preliminary stages. We have moved to dismiss the consolidated complaints filed by the U.S. consumer and financial institution plaintiffs.
Georgia State Court Consumer Class Actions. Four putative class actions arising from the 2017 cybersecurity incident were filed against us in Fulton County Superior Court and Fulton County State Court in Georgia based on similar allegations and theories as alleged in the U.S. consumer class actions pending in the MDL Court and seek monetary damages, injunctive relief and other related relief on behalf of Georgia citizens. These cases have been transferred to a single judge in the Fulton County Business Court and three of the cases were consolidated into a single action. On July 27, 2018, the Fulton County Business Court granted the Company’s motion to stay the remaining single case, and on August 17, 2018, the Fulton County Business Court granted the Company’s motion to stay the consolidated case.
Canadian Class Actions. Seven Canadian class actions, five of which are on behalf of a national class, have been filed against us in Ontario, Saskatchewan, Quebec and British Columbia. Each of the proposed Canadian class actions asserts a number of common law and statutory claims seeking monetary damages and other related relief in connection with the 2017 cybersecurity incident. All such actions are at the preliminary stages and one action has been stayed.
TransUnion Litigation. On November 27, 2017, Trans Union LLC and TransUnion Interactive, Inc. (collectively, “TransUnion”) filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois against Equifax Information Services LLC, Equifax Inc., and Equifax Consumer Services LLC f/k/a Equifax Consumer Services, Inc. In its lawsuit, TransUnion asserts claims for declaratory relief, breach of contract, and anticipatory repudiation of contract based on our Reciprocal Data Supply Agreement (the “Agreement”), which sets forth the pricing terms for credit monitoring supplied by the parties to each other. TransUnion seeks a declaration regarding its contractual rights under the Agreement and monetary damages. On January 26, 2018, we moved to dismiss TransUnion’s claims. On June 19, 2018, the court granted in part and denied in part our motion to dismiss, dismissing Equifax Inc. from the case. Discovery has now commenced and is scheduled to end in January 2019. We dispute the allegations by TransUnion and intend to defend against its claims.
Securities Class Action Litigation. A consolidated putative class action lawsuit alleging violations of various federal securities laws in connection with statements and alleged omissions regarding our cybersecurity systems and controls is pending against us and certain of our current and former executives, officers and directors in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia. The consolidated complaint seeks certification of a class of all persons who purchased or otherwise acquired Equifax securities from February 25, 2016 through September 15, 2017 and unspecified monetary damages, costs and attorneys’ fees. The defendants have moved to dismiss the complaint.
Shareholder Derivative Litigation. A consolidated putative shareholder derivative action naming certain of our current and former executives, officers, and directors as defendants and naming us as a nominal defendant is pending in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia. Among other things, the consolidated complaint alleges claims for breaches of fiduciary duties, unjust enrichment, corporate waste, and insider selling by certain defendants, as well as certain claims under the federal securities laws. The complaint seeks unspecified damages on behalf of the Company, plus certain equitable relief. We have appointed a committee of independent directors empowered to evaluate and respond in our best interests to the claims and related litigation demands.
Government Lawsuits. In addition to the City of Chicago’s lawsuit in the MDL Court, the City of San Francisco filed a lawsuit against us in Superior Court in the City of San Francisco on behalf of the People of the State of California alleging violations of California’s unfair competition law due to purported violations of statutory protections of personal data and statutory data breach requirements and seeking statutory penalties, injunctive relief, and restitution for California consumers, among other relief. The court has stayed the City of San Francisco action until March 29, 2019.
Civil enforcement actions have been filed against us by the Attorneys General of Massachusetts and West Virginia alleging violations of state/commonwealth consumer protection laws. The Massachusetts action is pending in Suffolk Superior Court and seeks permanent injunctive relief, civil penalties, restitution, disgorgement of profits, costs, and attorneys’ fees. The Suffolk Superior Court denied the Company’s motions to stay and dismiss the case, and the case is proceeding into discovery. The West Virginia action is pending in the Circuit Court of Boone County and seeks civil penalties and attorneys’ fees; Equifax’s motion to stay proceedings remains pending. The Attorney General of Puerto Rico filed an action against us in the United States District Court for the District of Puerto Rico alleging negligence and seeking monetary damages on behalf of aggrieved residents of Puerto Rico, disgorgement of profits, costs, and attorneys’ fees. The Puerto Rico case was tagged to the MDL, and Puerto Rico has opposed the transfer and that is pending. The Puerto Rico Department of Consumer Affairs recently issued Notices of Infraction that it plans on imposing administrative penalties related to the Company’s alleged failure to give timely notice of the data breach under Puerto Rico law to the Department and Puerto Rico consumers. The Company disputes that penalties are warranted.
Individual Consumer Litigation. Over 1,000 individual consumer actions, including multi-plaintiff actions, have been filed against us in state (general jurisdiction and small claims) and federal courts across the U.S. related to the 2017 cybersecurity incident. These claims include more than 2,500 individual plaintiffs. In addition, there are approximately 50 individual arbitration claims. The plaintiffs/claimants in these cases generally claim to have been harmed by alleged actions and/or omissions by Equifax in connection with the 2017 cybersecurity incident and assert a variety of common law and statutory claims seeking primarily monetary damages. Where possible, actions filed in federal court or removed to federal court have been noticed for transfer to the MDL Court. Some of these matters have been finally resolved, and others are in various stages of litigation.
Government Investigations. We continue to cooperate with federal, state, city and foreign governmental agencies and officials investigating or otherwise seeking information and/or documents, including through Civil Investigative Demands and subpoenas, regarding the 2017 cybersecurity incident and related matters, including 48 state Attorneys General offices, as well as the District of Columbia, the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”), the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (“CFPB”), the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”), the U.S. Department of Justice, the New York Department of State-Division of Consumer Protection, other U.S. state regulators, certain Congressional committees of both the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives, the Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada and the United Kingdom's Financial Conduct Authority ("FCA"). The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc. conducted an investigation that has now been concluded.
With respect to state Attorneys General investigations, the Company is cooperating with a consolidated multi-state investigation involving the Attorneys General of 46 states and the District of Columbia. As noted above, the Attorneys General of Massachusetts, West Virginia, and Puerto Rico are not participating in the multi-state process and have filed suit. The Attorneys General of Indiana and Texas are each conducting separate investigations.
On June 13, 2018, the CFPB and FTC provided us with notice that the staffs of the CFPB and FTC are considering recommending that their respective agencies take legal action against us, and that the agencies may seek injunctive relief against us, as well as damages and civil money penalties. We submitted written responses to the CFPB and FTC addressing their expected allegations and we continue to cooperate with the agencies in their investigations. On October 2, 2018, the Enforcement Staff of the New York Department of Financial Services (“DFS”) provided us with notice that it is considering recommending that the DFS take legal action against us, potentially seeking consumer relief and civil money penalties. We continue to cooperate with the DFS in its investigation.
The SEC issued a subpoena on May 14, 2018 regarding disclosure issues relating to the 2017 cybersecurity incident. We have produced documents in response to the subpoena and continue to cooperate with the SEC in its investigation. In addition, we continue to cooperate with the SEC and the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Northern District of Georgia regarding investigations into the trading activities by certain of our current and former employees in relation to the 2017 cybersecurity incident.
The New York State Attorney General Investor Protection Bureau (“IPB”) issued a subpoena on September 20, 2017 relating to an investigation of whether there has been a violation of the Martin Act. We have produced documents in response to the subpoena and continue to cooperate with the IPB in its investigation.
The FCA served an Enforcement Notice and Information Requests. We have provided responses to these requests and continue to cooperate with the FCA. In addition, on September 19, 2018, the Information Commissioner’s Office in the United Kingdom issued its final determination with respect to the 2017 cybersecurity incident and the Company paid a monetary penalty. The amount of the monetary penalty is not material to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
Although we are actively cooperating with the above investigations and inquiries, an adverse outcome to any such investigations and inquiries could subject us to fines or other obligations, which may have an adverse effect on how we operate our business or our results of operations.
Public Records Litigation
Equifax has been named as a defendant in 19 putative class action lawsuits pending in federal courts across the country relating to its reporting of civil judgments and tax liens on consumers’ credit files. In October 2018, Equifax and the plaintiffs’ attorneys who filed the lawsuits reached an agreement in principle to settle the public records-related claims at issue on behalf of a nationwide class of consumers and we accrued an estimate of our liability for these matters in the third quarter of 2018. The amount accrued represents our best estimate of the liability related to this matter and is not material to the Consolidated Financial Statements. The parties have filed notices of settlement in the pending lawsuits and have begun drafting a settlement agreement and preliminary approval papers to file with the requisite court. If the final terms of a settlement agreement cannot be agreed upon, or if the settlement is not ultimately approved by the court, Equifax believes it has valid defenses to each of these actions and will continue to defend against them.
Data Processing, Outsourcing Services and Other Agreements
We have separate agreements with IBM, Tata Consultancy Services and others to outsource portions of our computer data processing operations, applications development, business continuity and recovery services, help desk service and desktop support functions, operation of our voice and data networks, maintenance and related functions and to provide certain other administrative and operational services. Annual payment obligations in regard to these agreements vary due to factors such as the volume of data processed; changes in our servicing needs as a result of new product offerings, acquisitions or divestitures; the introduction of significant new technologies; foreign currency; or the general rate of inflation. In certain circumstances (e.g., a change in control or for our convenience), we may terminate these data processing and outsourcing agreements and, in doing so, certain of these agreements require us to pay significant termination fees.
Guarantees and General Indemnifications
We may issue standby letters of credit and performance and surety bonds in the normal course of business. The aggregate notional amounts of all performance and surety bonds and standby letters of credit was not material at September 30, 2018, and generally have a remaining maturity of one year or less. We may issue other guarantees in the ordinary course of business. The maximum potential future payments we could be required to make under the guarantees in the ordinary course of business is not material at September 30, 2018. We have agreed to guarantee the liabilities and performance obligations (some of which have limitations) of a certain debt collections and recovery management variable interest entity under its commercial agreements.
We have agreed to standard indemnification clauses in many of our lease agreements for office space, covering such things as tort, environmental and other liabilities that arise out of or relate to our use or occupancy of the leased premises. Certain of our credit agreements include provisions which require us to make payments to preserve an expected economic return to the lenders if that economic return is diminished due to certain changes in law or regulations. In conjunction with certain transactions, such as sales or purchases of operating assets or services in the ordinary course of business, or the disposition of certain assets or businesses, we sometimes provide routine indemnifications, the terms of which range in duration and sometimes are not limited. Additionally, the Company has entered into indemnification agreements with its directors and executive officers to indemnify such individuals to the fullest extent permitted by applicable law against liabilities that arise by reason of their status as directors or officers. The Company maintains directors and officers liability insurance coverage to reduce its exposure to such obligations.
We cannot reasonably estimate our potential future payments under the guarantees and indemnities and related provisions described above because we cannot predict when and under what circumstances these provisions may be triggered. We had no accruals related to guarantees and indemnities on our Consolidated Balance Sheets at September 30, 2018 or December 31, 2017.
In addition to those matters set forth above, we are involved in legal and regulatory matters, government investigations, claims and litigation arising in the ordinary course of business. We periodically assess our exposure related to these matters based on the information which is available. We have recorded accruals in our Consolidated Financial Statements for those matters in which it is probable that we have incurred a loss and the amount of the loss, or range of loss, can be reasonably estimated.
For additional information about these and other commitments and contingencies, see Note 6 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements in our 2017 Form 10-K.
The entire disclosure for commitments and contingencies.
Reference 1: http://fasb.org/us-gaap/role/ref/legacyRef