Jack

Administrator
Staff member
Verified
Panda Security must pay financial damages to a customer that suffered a malware infection which the company's antivirus failed to pick-up, despite running an up-to-date signature database.

The decision to award financial damages to the client came from the National Board for Consumer Disputes (ARN), a public authority that functions roughly like a court to resolve disputes between consumers and businesses operating in Sweden.

Old lady suffers malware infection despite running an antivirus
According to Swedish local news sources such as Västerbottens-Kuriren and PC för Alla, the incident came to light on December 19, when a woman of 60+ years tried to access two online TV channels but was told to install Flash Player.

After not being able to install Flash Player on her own, she contacted a PC repair company, who discovered malware on her computer, despite having an up-to-date Panda antivirus installed.

The woman was upset that she had to pay a PC repair company to fix her computer and remove the malware infection. She was also upset that in July 2015 she extended her Panda Antivirus Pro 2015 subscription for two more years, and had expected to be protected from such unfortunate events.

She first contacted Panda Security Sweden to file a complaint, but after she didn't receive the response she waited for, she filed another complaint with ARN and requested her money back, for both the subscription and the cost of the PC repairs.

ARN: Panda Security owes old lady $209
ARN awarded the woman 1,900 Swedish Krona ($209), according to Cyber War News. Of the sum, 1,440 Krona ($159) was for PC repair bills and 460 Krona ($50) for the antivirus subscription.

ARN didn't award the woman the full sum she requested, subtracting the months between July and December 2015, when she used the antivirus license (and was protected), and also reduced the PC repair bills after they discovered that the repair shop had performed and charged for extra operations that weren't required.

Read more: Antivirus Maker Forced to Pay Damages to Infected User
 

_CyberGhosT_

Level 53
Content Creator
Trusted
Verified
I was reading this earlier and I have mixed emotions on this.
I feel so sorry for this woman seeing Panda failed her, then she gets fleeced
by the repair shop.
This sets a precedent that opens a scary door for AV developers
and publishers too in Sweden.
Cool share Jack ;)
 

SHvFl

Level 35
Content Creator
Trusted
Verified
This doesn't really make sense. Did panda say they offer 100% protection. It's in their promotions or something because if not that makes 0 sense.
Sure to pay the refund i can accept but paying for the repair shop? Might move to Sweden if companies are liable for everything stupid i do.
 
Last edited:

_CyberGhosT_

Level 53
Content Creator
Trusted
Verified
This doesn't really make sense. Did panta said they offer 100% protection. It's in their promotions or something because if not that makes 0 sense.
Sure to pay the refund i can accept but paying for the repair shop? Might move to Sweden if companies are liable for everything stupid i do.
I see where your going with this, and I agree.
You can guarantee that there will be new disclaimers and policy clarification from many publishers now
due to this incident, for sure.
 

Azure

Level 23
Content Creator
Verified
I was reading this earlier and I have mixed emotions on this.
I feel so sorry for this woman seeing Panda failed her, then she gets fleeced
by the repair shop.
This sets a precedent that opens a scary door for AV developers
and publishers too in Sweden.
Cool share Jack ;)
Agreed. A storm might be coming.

I can already imagine a huge number of malware writers that will take advantage of this decision to swindle money out of AV companies. They simply install an AV, create a malware to infect their own computer, then complain that the antivirus did nothing to protect them. Easy money for them and it will ruin the AV companies. I really hope I'm wrong and this decision doesn't start a scary precedent like that.

Also, the lady should have gone to Malwaretips. The malware removal wouldn't have cost her so much.
 

SHvFl

Level 35
Content Creator
Trusted
Verified
I see where your going with this, and I agree.
You can guarantee that there will be new disclaimers and policy clarification from many publishers now
due to this incident, for sure.
I did some research and it seems it was like i guessed. The stupid marketing team of panda still have this in their main page. Eu doesn't do well with this small letter asterisks so it's probably why they had to pay.
Detects 100% * of all viruses
minimal impact on your PC
* According to tests conducted by AV-Comparatives in April and May 2015
Antivirusprogram för Windows, Mac och Android – Panda Security
 

_CyberGhosT_

Level 53
Content Creator
Trusted
Verified

JakeXPMan

Level 15
Verified
I doubt a storm is on the way... if a malware artist did the same act, they'd need proof the PC was repaired by a shop (likely)... and that shops charge quite a bit of money so they'd end up being refunded the same $$ as put in... it would be like trading a bike for a 10 speed.

The repairs recept from the shop I think is the deciding factor, or curtousy to an older lady from Panda.
 

spaceoctopus

Level 15
Content Creator
Verified
Hmmmm, Norton who had a lot of vulnerabilities, Eset who had a serious vulnerability some time ago and many other brands having these problems. Antivirus companies who had privacy issues...adding to that the missed detections that almost any antivirus or anti-malware has...you can make a lot of money this way :rolleyes:
 

Azure

Level 23
Content Creator
Verified
I did some research and it seems it was like i guessed. The stupid marketing team of panda still have this in their main page. Eu doesn't do well with this small letter asterisks so it's probably why they had to pay.

Antivirusprogram för Windows, Mac och Android – Panda Security
Well,it says viruses. Panda's legal team could have turned it around by arguing that she was infected by a type of malware that wasn't a virus.
Of course, it would be kinda an unethical thing to do. And I feel bad that she had to pay that much money for repairs.
 

SHvFl

Level 35
Content Creator
Trusted
Verified
Well,it says viruses. Panda's legal team could have turned it around by arguing that she was infected by a type of malware that wasn't a virus.
Of course, it would be kinda an unethical thing to do. And I feel bad that she had to pay that much money for repairs.
It wouldn't work like that in EU and even if they found a loophole it's not worth the bad publicity to save a few 100€.