View Poll Results: Do you support usurping individual rights to join class action lawsuits?

Voters
7. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    1 14.29%
  • No

    5 71.43%
  • I have no opinion

    1 14.29%
Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 57
Thanks Tree19Thanks

Thread: Regarding arbitration clauses in financial contracts

  1. #21
    Veteran Member Southern Dad's Avatar
    Joined
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    32,108
    Thanks
    6735

    From
    A Month Away
    Quote Originally Posted by Ian Jeffrey View Post
    There is a problem with this regarding contracts of adhesion - i.e., "take it or leave it" contracts. If it is just you and me negotiating the sale of, say, some building materials, and we have authority to negotiate (including being self-employed), then we could indeed negotiate away an arbitration clause, or fashion an alternative, or whatever. Or, we can agree to a binding arbitration clause, and that is that. Or one of us could go elsewhere. Note that there is somewhere else to go.

    Not so when it comes to bank accounts. Negotiation is not possible, and in today's society it is nearly impossible to participate in society without a bank account. You need the bank, but the bank does not need you (unless you possess many billions of dollars or something, in which case they may want you badly enough to waive the clause - less than 1% of the population would have access to this, of course). In essence, the banks (or likely any other major industry as well) form a cartel for the purpose of certain contractual terms (or minor variations thereupon) they will all use, such that one does not truly have a choice, and it is this kind of binding arbitration clause that can be struck down by the courts.
    No, there is negotiation. If you do not like the contracts don't sign them. If enough people refuse to sign them, they will change them. Other banks will opt to not put that in their contracts. ATM fees are the rage now, right? Not at my bank. They used that as a draw to get people to come there. They not only charge no ATM fees but reimburse up to a certain amount of those charged by other banks each month. Why do they do this? It's simple they want customers.

    The truth is lawsuits take forever. They cost companies a fortune in legal fees. Arbitration is much faster. I know there are some that will arbitration is rigged in favor of the big businesses. Arbitration works. Like I said, if you don't like the contract you have another choice. Don't use them. They have something that you want.

  2. #22
    Conservatively Liberal NiteGuy's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    17,043
    Thanks
    12442

    From
    Teardrop City
    Quote Originally Posted by NightSwimmer View Post
    You could say the exact same thing were they allowed to demand my first born child. Have you no sense of morality?
    No, he doesn't @NightSwimmer.
    Thanks from NightSwimmer

  3. #23
    Thought Provocateur NightSwimmer's Avatar
    Joined
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    32,780
    Thanks
    30331

    From
    United States
    Quote Originally Posted by Neomalthusian View Post
    Why is this question limited to financial institutions?
    Feel free to expand the scope of the discussion. My first encounter with one of these contract clauses occurred while I was purchasing a new car.

  4. #24
    Anarquistador StanStill's Avatar
    Joined
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    9,207
    Thanks
    9112

    From
    Home
    Quote Originally Posted by Southern Dad View Post
    The party that has what you want, has the upper hand in the negotiations but it is still a negotiation. You can refuse. If everyone refused, they'd change the contract.
    Or if enough people petitioned the government to make it illegal for that to be a term of the contract, they'd change the contract—the subject of this thread.

  5. #25
    Veteran Member Southern Dad's Avatar
    Joined
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    32,108
    Thanks
    6735

    From
    A Month Away
    Quote Originally Posted by StanStill View Post
    Or if enough people petitioned the government to make it illegal for that to be a term of the contract, they'd change the contract—the subject of this thread.
    I see, you don't like the idea of market pressure changing something and just want a law passed to make it happen. What if some people would rather go to arbitration? Fuck them? You know better?

  6. #26
    Anarquistador StanStill's Avatar
    Joined
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    9,207
    Thanks
    9112

    From
    Home
    Quote Originally Posted by Southern Dad View Post
    I see, you don't like the idea of market pressure changing something and just want a law passed to make it happen. What if some people would rather go to arbitration? Fuck them? You know better?
    This is how laws get made! People lobby the government to protect them. So you are completely subservient to the law when it exists, but in the absence of law you defer to the more powerful side as necessarily right. Got it.

    I look forward to the day that the law is made and you turn on a dime and say "that's the law and theres nothing we can say against the law, because the law is the final word on everything"

  7. #27
    Veteran Member Southern Dad's Avatar
    Joined
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    32,108
    Thanks
    6735

    From
    A Month Away
    Quote Originally Posted by StanStill View Post
    This is how laws get made! People lobby the government to protect them. So you are completely subservient to the law when it exists, but in the absence of law you defer to the more powerful side as necessarily right. Got it.

    I look forward to the day that the law is made and you turn on a dime and say "that's the law and theres nothing we can say against the law, because the law is the final word on everything"
    They have something that you want. You can either sign the contract or not. If they have to spend a lot more money on litigation, they are going to have less to lend. That means more people getting told no when they apply. There's a consequence to every decision.

  8. #28
    Veteran Member
    Joined
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    14,195
    Thanks
    3813

    From
    AK
    Quote Originally Posted by NightSwimmer View Post
    Feel free to expand the scope of the discussion. My first encounter with one of these contract clauses occurred while I was purchasing a new car.
    Alaska Statutes 23.40.200. Classes of Public Employees; Arbitration

    (b) The class in (a)(1) of this section is composed of police and fire protection employees, jail, prison, and other correctional institution employees, and hospital employees. Employees in this class may not engage in strikes. Upon a showing by a public employer or the labor relations agency that employees in this class are engaging or about to engage in a strike, an injunction, restraining order, or other order that may be appropriate shall be granted by the superior court in the judicial district in which the strike is occurring or is about to occur. If an impasse or deadlock is reached in collective bargaining between the public employer and employees in this class, and mediation has been utilized without resolving the deadlock, the parties shall submit to arbitration to be carried out under AS 09.43.030 or 09.43.480 to the extent permitted by AS 09.43.010 and 09.43.300.

    (c) The class in (a)(2) of this section is composed of public utility, snow removal, sanitation, and educational institution employees other than employees of a school district, a regional educational attendance area, or a state boarding school. Employees in this class may engage in a strike after mediation, subject to the voting requirement of (d) of this section, for a limited time. The limit is determined by the interests of the health, safety, or welfare of the public. The public employer or the labor relations agency may apply to the superior court in the judicial district in which the strike is occurring for an order enjoining the strike. A strike may not be enjoined unless it can be shown that it has begun to threaten the health, safety, or welfare of the public. A court, in deciding whether or not to enjoin the strike, shall consider the total equities in the particular class. "Total equities" includes not only the effect of a strike on the public but also the extent to which employee organizations and public employers have met their statutory obligations. If an impasse or deadlock still exists after the issuance of an injunction, the parties shall submit to arbitration to be carried out under AS 09.43.030 or 09.43.480 to the extent permitted by AS 09.43.010 and 09.43.300.

    Why the yearning for arbitration all the time? Why arbitration? Oh. I know.

    IBEW Constitution, Objects:

    "The Objects of the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers are:

    ...To settle all disputes between employers and employees by arbitration (if possible)"

  9. #29
    Spock of Vulcan Ian Jeffrey's Avatar
    Joined
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    50,257
    Thanks
    23758

    From
    Vulcan
    Quote Originally Posted by Southern Dad View Post
    No, there is negotiation.
    There is no negotiation where one party has no bargaining power.

    Quote Originally Posted by Southern Dad View Post
    If you do not like the contracts don't sign them.
    See my post for why this is not always practical.

    Quote Originally Posted by Southern Dad View Post
    If enough people refuse to sign them, they will change them.
    And in the meantime, there is nowhere else to go for the service, because the entire industry is doing the same thing.

    Quote Originally Posted by Southern Dad View Post
    Other banks will opt to not put that in their contracts. ATM fees are the rage now, right?
    Nobody is taking out arbitration clauses as a draw. Most people do not know what they are, or even understand them.

    Quote Originally Posted by Southern Dad View Post
    The truth is lawsuits take forever. They cost companies a fortune in legal fees. Arbitration is much faster. I know there are some that will arbitration is rigged in favor of the big businesses. Arbitration works.
    Sometimes it works. But it is rigged in favor of big business, which is the real reason why they want to use it. The arbitrator is expensive (whereas the judge is a public servant), and most individuals do not have that kind of money. In fact, the inability of people to file class-action suits impedes the market force you claim generally works.

    Quote Originally Posted by Southern Dad View Post
    Like I said, if you don't like the contract you have another choice.
    Not if everyone offering the same product or service has the same contract or objectionable provision.

    Quote Originally Posted by Southern Dad View Post
    They have something that you want.
    And individuals mostly have nothing they want - meaning they have no bargaining power.

    Your position sounds like it makes sense upon first glance, and there are situations in which it works that way. This not one of them, because your position here does not hold up upon closer inspection.

  10. #30
    Veteran Member Southern Dad's Avatar
    Joined
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    32,108
    Thanks
    6735

    From
    A Month Away
    I know it breaks the liberals heart but if they have something you want either agree to the terms or do without. The fact remains if the company has to deal with lots of litigation they have less to lend. More people being told no.

Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Arbitration Court Nixes BP's Russia Tie-Up......
    By Midwest Media Critic in forum Economics
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 25th March 2011, 11:23 AM
  2. let's try again - IMPLIED CONTRACTS
    By nonsqtr in forum Political Discussion
    Replies: 81
    Last Post: 2nd November 2009, 01:48 AM
  3. more on implied contracts
    By nonsqtr in forum Political Discussion
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 19th September 2009, 08:20 PM
  4. implied contracts
    By nonsqtr in forum Political Discussion
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 16th September 2009, 07:19 PM
  5. Should this affect the Halliburton contracts?
    By johnlocke in forum Political Discussion
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 13th March 2007, 08:31 AM

Tags for this Thread


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed