START A PETITION 27,000,000 members: the world's largest community for good
START A PETITION
x
1,284,837 people care about Politics

CFPB To Investigate Mandatory Arbirtation Clauses

CFPB To Investigate Mandatory Arbirtation Clauses

On Tuesday the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau announced a “public inquiry” into how the financial services industry uses mandatory arbitration clauses as shields from consumer lawsuits. This is an important first step in protecting consumers and returning access to the court system for those harmed by corporate interests.

The main purpose of mandatory arbitration is to prevent the creation of a class of plaintiffs by forcing individual consumers to pursue claims on their own, even if the underlying and offensive corporate behavior is common among an entire group of individuals. Think of it as a de-facto ban on the class action lawsuit and one that has been very successful. Without the threat of damages from a class-action recover corporations are free to defraud customers with little incentive to change.

“Arbitration clauses are found in many contracts for consumer financial products,” said CFPB Director Richard Cordray. “We want to learn how arbitration clauses affect consumers, and how effective arbitration is in resolving consumers’ issues. This inquiry will help the Bureau assess whether rules are needed to protect consumers.”

For purposes of conducting the study, the Bureau is asking the public about the following areas of concern:
•    The prevalence of arbitration clauses in consumer financial products and services;
•    What claims consumers bring in arbitration against financial services companies;
•    If claims are brought by financial services companies against consumers in arbitration;
•    How consumers and companies are affected by actual arbitrations; and
•    How consumers and companies are affected by arbitration clauses outside of actual arbitrations.

Companies that use pre-dispute arbitration clauses claim that arbitration is faster and cheaper than litigation, and at least as fair. Others disagree, noting that consumers may not realize that they have waived their right to a trial because of an arbitration clause. And even if consumers understand arbitration clauses, these clauses may still have significant impacts that warrant study by the CFPB.

Comments on the Request for Information must be submitted by June 23, 2012. After the Bureau completes its study, it will assess whether imposing conditions or prohibitions on arbitration clauses would better protect consumers and serve the public interest.

Christine Hines, Consumer and Civil Justice Counsel for Public Citizen was pleased with the news. “We expect that any fair examination of forced arbitration will conclude that the practice is devastatingly harmful to consumers. The most critical step, then, will be for the CFPB to ban forced arbitration, ensuring that arbitration is always voluntary for consumers – not a kangaroo court or a tool for law-breaking corporations to insulate themselves from accountability.”

With the one year anniversary of the devastating AT&T v. Concepcions decision and corporations continuing to fleece customers with next to no consequence.

Related Stories:

SCOTUS Deals Consumers Another Blow

Read more: , , ,

Photo from Casey Serin via flickr.

have you shared this story yet?

some of the best people we know are doing it

5 comments

+ add your own
3:16PM PDT on Sep 30, 2012

noted

7:31AM PDT on Apr 26, 2012

It's about time!! Mandatory arbitration strips citizens of their RIGHT to the U.S. legal system, and forces them into a corporate-biased kangaroo court.

Corporations pay the arbitration companies, which are strongly influenced to decide in the corporations' favor, or else the corporation will choose ANOTHER arbitration company in future cases.

This corporate parallel legal system is a sham and a fraud, and citizens are forced into it by the "binding arbitration" agreements they're often required to sign to get services.

Kudos to the Obama Administration for finally standing up to this corporate usurpation of citizens' rights!

7:15AM PDT on Apr 26, 2012

Cool that is awesome!

4:36AM PDT on Apr 26, 2012

OK Jeff,you made your troll money today!
Now crawl back under your rock!

11:30AM PDT on Apr 25, 2012

"CFPB To Investigate Mandatory Arbirtation Clauses"

What is arbirtation? Anything to do with Obama eating his dog?

add your comment



Disclaimer: The views expressed above are solely those of the author and may not reflect those of
Care2, Inc., its employees or advertisers.

Care2 - Be Extraordinary - Start a Care2 Petition
ads keep care2 free
CONTACT THE EDITORS

Recent Comments from Causes

My job used to be 8 hour shifts and changed to 12 hours. Most of the employees love 12 hour shifts, less…

if it were two labrador retrievers I believe this story would had had a different ending. very sad. Ive…

ads keep care2 free



Select names from your address book   |   Help
   

We hate spam. We do not sell or share the email addresses you provide.