Team Sop’s continuing adventures with Innotek, security breaches and poor customer service

Last night I had a chance to compare notes with Mrs Sop on our continuing problems with the invisible fence company Innotek, and their poorly safeguarded computer system which was hacked resulting in their customer’s personal information being stolen. Two days ago the Missus spoke with Innotek’s legal services manager Anita White where she expressed our displeasure with their response including the 3 week delay in notifying their customers. After that first conversation we had more questions and the Missus again called Innotek to speak with Ms White this time leaving a message as Ms White was not available to take the call. That was two days ago and Innotek has evidently now gone dark.

Folks, companies wanting to sell their products are a dime a dozen. Unfortunately those that value their customer’s satisfaction are just a tiny fraction of that number and we’re finding out the hard way Innotek is not a company that takes customer satisfaction very seriously.  Mrs Sop tells me Anita White tried to make her happy offering us free batteries for the dog’s collar. I don’t know what those batteries cost Innotek but I do know how much credit monitoring costs. I now wonder about Innotek’s solvency.

I’m not a lawyer but my advice to Innotek customers is to track all the time you have to spend fixing Innotek’s mess and save receipts for any out of pocket expenses you incur as a result of their poorly safeguarded computer system being hacked. And make no mistake, Innotek now views their customers as a potential litigants and I guarantee you their legal team is diligently at work behind the scenes against the interests of those whose personal information was compromised by their negligence.

Evidently we’re not the only people that have noticed Innotek’s piss poor response on this as reports:

If this site had a “Vaguest Breach Report of the Month Award,” I think Innotek would have won it for January.

For an example of a breach report that pretty much says absolutely nothing useful other than the number of New Hampshire residents to be notified, see Innotek’s notification to the New Hampshire Attorney General’s Office. Apparently they neither knew the nature of the breach nor the extent of the breach at the time of their notification. Hopefully, letters they send to those affected contain more detail.

As my previous post indicated the letter we received was basically the same one that was sent the New Hampshire AG. I think we’ll be contacting the consumer protection division of our Attorney General’s office to see if we have grounds to file a complaint against Innotek.

We’ll be in the market soon for another system when we move back to the coast in a few month.  Since Pets Mart only stocks Innotek we’ll be shopping somewhere else for our next purchase.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *