Discouragement washes over several Desjardins members who have fallen victim to identity theft following the data leak that rocked the cooperative in 2019. Some are resigned to throwing in the towel at the weight of the documentary evidence to be provided, hoping for compensation for fraud committed without their knowledge.
An agreement reached as part of a class action lawsuit on behalf of the 9.7 million Desjardins members affected by the data breach seeks $1,000 in compensation for those who suffered identity theft after January 1, 2017, inclusive.
To receive compensation, applicants must provide “documentary evidence” showing that they committed fraud on their behalf. The process sometimes resembles Asterix’s “madhouse”, according to several testimonies collected by Le Devoir.
Documents not obtained, police reports denied, delay too short to correct a disputed claim: Faced with obstacles, many one day forego receiving compensation.
Four tries, four failures
Jean-François Rochette thought he had everything he could to obtain compensation. At the height of the pandemic, a stranger applied for the Canadian Emergency Response Benefit (CERB) on his behalf. After countless hours on the phone waiting to speak to someone, the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) finally acknowledged the scam and deleted his file.
However, the airline pilot had no written evidence of his mishap and outcome. His online file showed a refund for the $3,000 he had taken without his knowledge, along with an acknowledgment of error by the CRA. The screenshots showing one and the other, Mr. Rochette thought, would be enough to get him compensation.
To substantiate his claim, he added the documents prepared by his accountant that a scam had changed his taxes.
His application was initially denied because the documentary evidence was insufficient in the eyes of RicePoint, the administrator appointed by Desjardins to administer the compensation program. Jean-François Rochette then had 45 days to correct his claim. During that time, he knocked on the doors of four government agencies hoping to obtain a document proving the fraud he had suffered. Each time he received another rejection.
“I called Canada’s Internal Revenue Service first because I thought I would get evidence,” says Mr. Rochette, but she told me she had no papers showing fraud. »
The CRA instead referred him to Service Canada, which referred him to Revenu Québec, which then referred him to the Canadian Anti-Fraud Centre. No one could help him: after waiting several hours on the phone each time to explain his situation, the pilot saw resignation overcome him.
“I gave up,” he explains. I had until December 19th and didn’t know where to go to get my hands on a document. It’s wasted money and time… I’m certainly not the only one: I don’t know anyone for whom it was easy. »
“A document that does not exist”
Sarah Power went through the same journey. She, too, a victim of PCU fraud in the summer of 2020, had to fight for two years to settle her case. “It was wonderful,” she says wryly. Each time it was necessary to speak to someone who didn’t know my file and approach people who didn’t really know what to do. »
The CRA eventually admitted to the fraud, but only over the phone. “I have never received any papers showing that I was a victim of a crime,” says Ms. Power. She filed a $1,000 compensation claim from Desjardins — unsuccessfully.
“I shipped two T4s, the first showing the $6,000 PCU fraudulently collected and another canceling it. I also sent screenshots of my testimony to the Anti-Fraud Center. As a precaution, I also sent a copy of the emails exchanged with my accountant, in addition to a letter I had written to the CRA explaining that I had been the victim of fraud. »
Reply RicePoint: Information is missing. Sarah Power contacted the administrator who was unable to explain to her what specific documents he wanted. One person told him that a letter from the CRA might be able to decode his file, the document that Jean-François Rochette was trying to get, but was unsuccessful.
“I really don’t want to do business with the agency: I had to call them every month for two years to sort out the identity theft,” says Sarah Power.
New mom, out of defiance and lack of time, she decided to throw in the towel. “I don’t need the $1,000: I’m a doctor,” explains Sarah Power. For me it is not a question of money. It’s all about the principle. »
Le Devoir collected three more testimonies regarding the difficulties faced by the plaintiffs in obtaining compensation. An accountant, also a victim of a scam at the PCU, Gabriel Laurin, sent a detailed log of the events. Le Devoir was able to see the five pages of documents that were sent to RicePoint. This includes, in particular, screenshots of his CRA file, a detailed description of what happened and the actions taken, and a report from the Service de Police de la Ville de Montréal.
His claim is also disputed. “I’ve been working full-time during the pandemic, there’s no way I touched the PCU,” he argues. What the admin is asking me to do is complete the investigation. It’s like being asked for something that doesn’t exist! »
“Ease the Complaint”
In approving the agreement last summer, the Quebec Supreme Court ruled that members who have been victims of identity theft can submit “a variety of documents,” including screenshots, to receive their compensation. “All this, added Magistrate Claude Bouchard, to facilitate it [l]a complaint. »
Desjardins told Le Devoir that it had received calls from members asking for documents to support their claims at RicePoint. The cooperative emphasizes that in this case it is neither a judge nor a party: it is the administrator who sets the eligibility requirements and decides on the validity of the claims.
RicePoint did not respond to Le Devoir’s questions or interview requests. According to the legal agreement, the administrator is obliged to submit a report within the first 120 days of the year, including in particular the number of applications received and rejected.
Le Devoir contacted two attorneys leading the class action lawsuit against Desjardins. My Karim Diallo and Jérémie Longpré of the law firms Siskinds Desmeules and Kugler Kandestin said they had never heard of the obstacles the plaintiffs encountered.
However, Me Diallo clarifies that the court can formulate new guidelines if unforeseen difficulties arise in the litigation process. The Administrator or Applicants may make the request if they deem it necessary.
For her part, Sarah Power is considering leaving Desjardins to take justice into her own hands. “It has been my fund since I was in elementary school, but for the last two years in particular it has been the source of a lot of frustration and I am considering changing institutions. »