advertisement
advertisement

This is page 2 of:

Macy’s Ignores Govt. Subpoena For CRM Records In Lead-Tainted Necklace Criminal Case

April 1st, 2009

Wright said his office wants the names of those who bought the products mainly so that they can be warned. He noted that Pecoware, the Chino-based company that imported the jewelry from China, has been much more cooperative than has Macy’s even though it, too, faces fines if convicted. A voluntary recall of the necklaces, in which buyers were urged to contact Pecoware for a refund, was issued in February by the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission.

Officials said that, between January 2006 and November 2007, about 2,900 of the necklaces were sold and they contend Macy’s sold more than any other retailer.

Wright said Macy’s has offered no explanation to him for its refusal to cooperate. However, he said he doesn’t think the company is keeping quiet due to fear of violating the privacy rights of its customers. “I don’t think it has anything to do with that,” said the prosecutor. “I just think they don’t want to give out the information because they are afraid they are going to be sued by the people who bought the products. They never explained it. I’ve been asking for it for so long. I know they must know something like names, addresses and phone numbers.”

Wright said he asked Macy’s to notify the customers first, before providing the information to his office. “I know every product has a SKU code and people have to be billed if they buy it with credit card although the cash sales are impossible to track. I also know that a large number were purchased with Macy’s cards and they would be extremely easy to track.”

Wright said litigants in civil cases often have the right to refuse revealing customer information. However, that shield does not apply in California to criminal matters. He noted Macy’s, as of Tuesday, April 1, hadn’t even filed a motion to quash the subpoena and he’s hoping the company will bring the information to the April 7 hearing.


advertisement

One Comment | Read Macy’s Ignores Govt. Subpoena For CRM Records In Lead-Tainted Necklace Criminal Case

  1. cestmoi Says:

    Given that all companies, esp ones of the stature of Macey’s, are required to be PCI compliant, I would put forth another reason that they may not be able to produce the info that the Attorney general wanted: masked CC# or that they do not even have any of the CC# stored at all.

    Another more sinister reason may be that they are still not PCI compliant and are storing all CC# in plain text? This would be a good reason to NOT hand over their CRM (strictly coming from a PCI perspective).

Newsletters

StorefrontBacktalk delivers the latest retail technology news & analysis. Join more than 60,000 retail IT leaders who subscribe to our free weekly email. Sign up today!
advertisement

Most Recent Comments

Why Did Gonzales Hackers Like European Cards So Much Better?

I am still unclear about the core point here-- why higher value of European cards. Supply and demand, yes, makes sense. But the fact that the cards were chip and pin (EMV) should make them less valuable because that demonstrably reduces the ability to use them fraudulently. Did the author mean that the chip and pin cards could be used in a country where EMV is not implemented--the US--and this mis-match make it easier to us them since the issuing banks may not have as robust anti-fraud controls as non-EMV banks because they assumed EMV would do the fraud prevention for them Read more...
Two possible reasons that I can think of and have seen in the past - 1) Cards issued by European banks when used online cross border don't usually support AVS checks. So, when a European card is used with a billing address that's in the US, an ecom merchant wouldn't necessarily know that the shipping zip code doesn't match the billing code. 2) Also, in offline chip countries the card determines whether or not a transaction is approved, not the issuer. In my experience, European issuers haven't developed the same checks on authorization requests as US issuers. So, these cards might be more valuable because they are more likely to get approved. Read more...
A smart card slot in terminals doesn't mean there is a reader or that the reader is activated. Then, activated reader or not, the U.S. processors don't have apps certified or ready to load into those terminals to accept and process smart card transactions just yet. Don't get your card(t) before the terminal (horse). Read more...
The marketplace does speak. More fraud capacity translates to higher value for the stolen data. Because nearly 100% of all US transactions are authorized online in real time, we have less fraud regardless of whether the card is Magstripe only or chip and PIn. Hence, $10 prices for US cards vs $25 for the European counterparts. Read more...
@David True. The European cards have both an EMV chip AND a mag stripe. Europeans may generally use the chip for their transactions, but the insecure stripe remains vulnerable to skimming, whether it be from a false front on an ATM or a dishonest waiter with a handheld skimmer. If their stripe is skimmed, the track data can still be cloned and used fraudulently in the United States. If European banks only detect fraud from 9-5 GMT, that might explain why American criminals prefer them over American bank issued cards, who have fraud detection in place 24x7. Read more...

StorefrontBacktalk
Our apologies. Due to legal and security copyright issues, we can't facilitate the printing of Premium Content. If you absolutely need a hard copy, please contact customer service.