DataBreaches.Net

Menu
  • About
  • Breach Notification Laws
  • Privacy Policy
  • Transparency Report
Menu

California judge orders Walgreens to pay $16.57M to settle charges of improper disposal of environmental waste and records with consumers' confidential medical information

Posted on December 13, 2012 by Dissent

Wow. Linda Foley writes:

San Diego County District Attorney Bonnie Dumanis, together with 42 other California District Attorneys and two city attorneys, announced on Dec 13 that a judge in Alameda Superior Court has ordered the Illinois-based Walgreen Company to pay $16.57 million as part of a settlement of a civil environmental prosecution.

Walgreens was accused of illegally dumping hazardous waste and confidential customer medical information. The civil case was filed by the District Attorneys of Alameda, Riverside, San Joaquin, Solano, Monterey, Yolo and the City Attorney of Los Angeles. The lawsuit contended that more than 600 Walgreens stores throughout the state including 36 in San Diego unlawfully handled and disposed of hazardous waste for more than six years.

[…]

The settlement also resolves allegations that Walgreens unlawfully disposed of customer records containing confidential medical information without preserving confidentiality. All 36 Walgreens stores in San Diego County were involved in the violations.

Read more on Examiner.com.

The records disposal problems really came to the public’s and regulators’ attention in 2006 in a  series of articles by WTHR  in Indiana. Since then, Walgreens has  been investigated and/or charged by  state and federal agencies over improper disposal of customer medical/pharmacy records.  Indiana’s Attorney General started filing charges against Walgreens in 2007, and that case settled in 2009. Ironically, perhaps, Walgreens issued the following statement:

“We are glad to reach this agreement and believe we have always followed HIPAA standards. We have sound practices and policies that protect our patients’ information, and we will continue to adhere to them.”

Sound practices and policies? And they continued to adhere to the very practices and policies that didn’t work? No wonder problems still occurred too frequently in 2011.

Walgreens remains under investigation by HHS/OCR  and the FTC over improper disposal of records with confidential medical information.   In February 2009, CVS settled similar charges brought by the FTC for $2.25M.

For previous coverage of Walgreens and privacy concerns, search this site for Walgreens.

Frankly, given all the reports of improper disposal, and having already settled one case (Indiana) and while dealing with OCR and FTC  over improper disposal, I find it somewhat stunning that Walgreens has not really addressed the problem adequately.  The California case was based on inspections conducted during the summer and fall of 2011, and “34 of 37 Walgreens stores were in violation of state law, including three retailers investigated in San Diego County.”

Whatever Walgreens has been doing since 2006 to clean up its act, it appears to be woefully insufficient. Maybe getting socked with a big fine – even though I don’t know what portion of it was for the customer records issue – may get them to change what they’re doing and ensure that stores protect the privacy of consumers’ medical information. If not, they may find themselves perpetually or repeatedly under investigation or getting hit with fines.

 

Category: Health Data

Post navigation

← #OpIsrael Attack Timeline And Information
Personal information compromised in Winston-Salem →

Now more than ever

"Stand with Ukraine:" above raised hands. The illustration is in blue and yellow, the colors of Ukraine's flag.

Search

Browse by Categories

Recent Posts

  • Masimo Manufacturing Facilities Hit by Cyberattack
  • Education giant Pearson hit by cyberattack exposing customer data
  • Star Health hacker claims sending bullets, threats to top executives: Reports
  • Nova Scotia Power hit by cyberattack, critical infrastructure targeted, no outages reported
  • Georgia hospital defeats data-tracking lawsuit
  • 60K BTC Wallets Tied to LockBit Ransomware Gang Leaked
  • UK: Legal Aid Agency hit by cyber security incident
  • Public notice for individuals affected by an information security breach in the Social Services, Health Care and Rescue Services Division of Helsinki
  • PowerSchool paid a hacker’s extortion demand, but now school district clients are being extorted anyway (3)
  • Defending Against UNC3944: Cybercrime Hardening Guidance from the Frontlines

No, You Can’t Buy a Post or an Interview

This site does not accept sponsored posts or link-back arrangements. Inquiries about either are ignored.

And despite what some trolls may try to claim: DataBreaches has never accepted even one dime to interview or report on anyone. Nor will DataBreaches ever pay anyone for data or to interview them.

Want to Get Our RSS Feed?

Grab it here:

https://databreaches.net/feed/

RSS Recent Posts on PogoWasRight.org

  • US Customs and Border Protection Plans to Photograph Everyone Exiting the US by Car
  • Google agrees to pay Texas $1.4 billion data privacy settlement
  • The App Store Freedom Act Compromises User Privacy To Punish Big Tech
  • Florida bill requiring encryption backdoors for social media accounts has failed
  • Apple Siri Eavesdropping Payout Deadline Confirmed—How To Make A Claim
  • Privacy matters to Canadians – Privacy Commissioner of Canada marks Privacy Awareness Week with release of latest survey results
  • Missouri Clinic Must Give State AG Minor Trans Care Information

Have a News Tip?

Email: Tips[at]DataBreaches.net

Signal: +1 516-776-7756

Contact Me

Email: info[at]databreaches.net

Mastodon: Infosec.Exchange/@PogoWasRight

Signal: +1 516-776-7756

DMCA Concern: dmca[at]databreaches.net
© 2009 – 2025 DataBreaches.net and DataBreaches LLC. All rights reserved.