Tag Archives: Forced Arbitration
Forced Arbitration: A Clause for Concern
By Scott Medintz, Consumer Reports Jan. 30, 2020 – Mandatory arbitration deprives consumers of important options if a product is faulty or harmful. https://www.consumerreports.org/mandatory-binding-arbitration/forced-arbitration-clause-for-concern/
Forced Arbitration: A Sneaky Rip-Off
Update: The CFC submitted a letter in strong support of the proposed rule to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau on August 22. View it here (pdf). When a bank or other financial institution engages in unfair, deceptive or downright abusive rip-offs, consumers should get their day in … Read More ›
9-In-10 Big Banks Strip Customers Of Their Right To Jury Trial
by Chris Morran, Consumerist
Researchers at the Pew Charitable Trusts … looked at the customer contracts for checking accounts at 44 of the nation’s largest banks and found that 91% of them include jury trial waivers. Read More ›
Judge Shreds Uber; Says Company Can’t Prove Riders Are Giving Up Right To Sue
by Chris Morran, Consumerist
With regard to the Uber app, [U.S. District Court Judge Ned] Rakoff notes that there is no requirement for the new user to even check off a box that they read the terms of service; one could easily finalize their registration without reading, or even knowing about, these terms — let alone the restrictive arbitration clause. Read More ›
Bill Aims To Restore Consumers’ Legal Rights Stripped Away By Supreme Court Rulings
by Chris Morran, Consumerist
Sen. Patrick Leahy from Vermont and Sen. Al Franken from Minnesota announced the Restoring Statutory Rights Act. … It would create an exception in the Arbitration Act for disputes involving individuals and small businesses. The only way individuals would enter into arbitration is if they agreed to do so after the dispute has been filed. That’s very different from the current process, which automatically shunts all customer disputes into binding arbitration. Read More ›
Supreme Court Rejects Class-Action Suit Against DirecTV
by Robert Barnes, Washington Post
“These decisions have predictably resulted in the deprivation of consumers’ rights to seek redress for losses, and turning the coin, they have insulated powerful economic interests from liability for violations of consumer protection laws,” wrote [dissenting Justice Ruth Bader] Ginsburg. … “It has become routine, in a large part due to this court’s decisions, for powerful economic enterprises to write into their form contracts with consumers and employees no class-action arbitration clauses … further degrading the rights of consumers and further insulating already powerful economic entities.” Read More ›
Uber Seeks To Head Off Lawsuits With New Binding Driver Agreement
by Carolyn Said, San Francisco Chronicle
One East Bay driver, who asked not to be identified because he fears retaliation from Uber, said he had not immediately understood that he could opt out of the [binding arbitration] provision. “That wasn’t obvious to me,” said that driver, who graduated from UC Berkeley and worked in a professional job for many years. … Retaliation by Uber against drivers for opting out of the arbitration clause or for pursuing First Amendment rights to criticize the company would be illegal, but numerous drivers commenting on social media seemed unaware of this. Read More ›
A Fiat Chrysler Discount Will Cost You Your Right To Sue
by David Lazarus, Los Angeles Times
Until now, experts say, no major car manufacturer has sought to encourage customers to forgo their right to sue. … Many large businesses prefer arbitration because settlements are limited and because professional arbitrators often favor the corporate side. Arbitrators’ fees are typically paid by the company in a dispute. A 2007 report by Public Citizen found that over a four-year period, arbitrators ruled in favor of banks and credit card companies 94 percent of the time in disputes with California consumers. Read More ›
Binding Arbitration Rules Get Consumer Protection Bureau Scrutiny
by Ann Carrns, New York Times
Customers who have disputes with banks or credit card companies often can be forced to go to arbitration before a private lawyer to try to resolve the problem, rather than before a judge in court. That’s because many financial accounts come with built-in contracts containing “pre-dispute” arbitration clauses — so-called because consumers agree to them when they sign up for the account, before they actually have a disagreement. Read More ›
Carrier IQ Loses Bid To Send Privacy Case To Arbitration
by Wendy Davis, MediaPost News
In a blow to software developer Carrier IQ, a federal judge has rejected the company’s bid to send a class-action privacy lawsuit to arbitration. The decision, issued late last week, means that consumers who are suing the company for allegedly violating privacy laws will be able to proceed with their claims in federal court. Read More ›
Why You Should Opt Out Of Forced Arbitration, In 3 Sentences
by Chris Morran, Consumerist
While more and more companies are adding “forced arbitration” clauses to their terms of service, only a handful of these businesses are offering customers the choice to opt out of this part of the contract. Here are the reasons why you should take advantage of that option … Read More ›
Proposed Federal Laws & Regulation That Could Help Consumers In 2014
by Kate Cox, Consumerist
Here are four key areas — mostly proposed laws and one policy — to keep an eye on throughout the new year. If you want to see any of these federal bills become law, make sure you let your representatives and senators know. Read More ›