A better question might be:  Are there cases where people have suffered
these hazards that weren't related to said company doing something
illegal or getting caught with their hand in the proverbial cookie jar?
Every example I've ever heard of consisted of "Company does something
scummy, gets caught.  Discovery produces records proving the company did
said scummy deed.  Had company followed existing retention policy they
wouldn't have been caught because the records would have already been
purged."  So how many have avoided getting caught in illegal activities
because they *did* follow their retention policy?  Me, I find this
aspect of our profession a little disturbing.

David

-----Original Message-----
From: Records Management Program [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On
Behalf Of Larry Medina
Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2007 12:59 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [RM] records destruction

On 8/23/07, Roger Hamperian <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> Can anyone recommend some case studies that illustrate the hazards of 
> not destroying records that have met their required retention?



Two salient cases come to mind off the top:

RJ Reynolds, who was required to produce  documents regarding research
on the negative impacts of smoking that  could have, but were not,
destroyed in  the course of normal business after meeting their assigned
retention.

Arthur Andersen, who gave instructions for a mass disposal of records
that would have proven damaging to their client that should have been
disposed of
2-3 years earlier, but weren't.

Larry

List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance
To unsubscribe from this list, click the below link. If not already present, place UNSUBSCRIBE RECMGMT-L or UNSUB RECMGMT-L in the body of the message.
mailto:[log in to unmask]