Jodokast96
R.I.P Bassman442
Premium
join:2005-11-23
Erial, NJ | What did you expect?
Is anyone really surprised? They find in favor of the company that's paying them. Who would have thought? |
|
N3OGH
Bear patrol must be working like a charm
Premium
join:2003-11-11
Philly burbs
 ·Verizon FIOS
 ·Verizon Online DSL
| No surprise here....
"A new report by Public Citizen found that one arbitration company frequently used by credit card companies ruled in favor of its corporate clients 95% of the time or more"
No surprise here. The companies are paying for the arbitration. They know who butters their bread, so to speak.
Kudos to Public Citizen for putting it out in the open, and good news story.
Someone needs to put these so called arbiters into the public eye, and kill their credibility....
--
Petty people are disproportionably corrupted by petty power… |
|
moonpuppy
join:2000-08-21
Glen Burnie, MD
·Verizon Online DSL
| Wait for it......
Soon the pro-business fanboys (Comcast and ATT) will be here claiming this keeps costs down and if you don't like it, go use someone else.
I can tell you arbitration means NOTHING. My parents tried to go to arbitration with some guy over the sale of their house. Guy put down $3000 deposit and has still not bought the house. He was in default of the contract and we requested the deposit as stipulated in the contract. He signed for the certified letter telling him about the arbitration but simply ignored it. Now we have to get a lawyer and sue him the old fashion way.  |
|
TKJunkMail
Enjoy the sun
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Avalon, NJ
 ·Sprint Mobile Broa..
 ·Comcast
1 edit | said by moonpuppy  :I can tell you arbitration means NOTHING. He signed for the certified letter telling him about the arbitration but simply ignored it. Now we have to get a lawyer and sue him the old fashion way. So, why the big problem with arbitration. Don't like it, then sue anyway. Of course your chances in court are even less than in arbitration.
»www.adrforum.com/rcontrol/docume···oung.pdf
--
--
Internet News
My BLOG
My Web Page |
|
swhx7
Premium
join:2006-07-23
Elbonia
·RoadRunner Cable
| reply to moonpuppy
That's different because you still have access to the courts. What the big businesses put in their consumer contracts is a provision for binding arbitration with no other option. Any access to the regular judicial system is explicitly removed, even to dispute the arbitration clause itself.
First it was credit card companies, now cable and telephone companies, tomorrow all kinds of businesses. The contracts are non-negotiable. So anyone who's not rich enough to have alternatives is subject to whatever terms they want to impose. |
|
Cabal
Premium
join:2007-01-21
Boston, MA
| There's a reason it takes 7 minutes or less
Most of these cases (and I've looked over quite a few in my years) are people who won't pay their bill or back fees owed and figure they can get some money knocked off it in arbitration. They don't.
--
Interested in open source engine management for your Subaru? |
|
johnnyv
@covad.net
| Comcast/AT&T
One of the absolute biggest scams is how the telcos and cable companies have a stranglehold on Internet access.
They charge whatever they want. $46 a month including modem rental? No problem. It costs them a buck to deliver the service and $15 to buy the cable modem.
They make whatever rules they want up about limits on downloads.
Next, they will try to control access to websites based on payments from those websites.
The Internet is a necessity for work and for school. It's very hard to even access some government services without it. But, because of a historical phone monopolies and cable TV monopolies, congress has lined their pockets with donations and allowed this Internet duopoly that is absolutely horrible for consumers. |
|
moonpuppy
join:2000-08-21
Glen Burnie, MD | reply to Cabal
Re: There's a reason it takes 7 minutes or less
How many of them actually show up? I wonder how many of these cases did the people actually bother and show up? |
|
moonpuppy
join:2000-08-21
Glen Burnie, MD
·Verizon Online DSL
1 edit | reply to TKJunkMail
Re: Wait for it......
said by TKJunkMail :So, why the big problem with arbitration. Don't like it, then sue anyway. Of course your chances in court are even less than in arbitration. So now you are a lawyer?
Explain your position?
Now that you edited your post, care to explain the differences in a 2004 study you posted and the 2007 study posted in this news item. |
|
jc1350
join:2004-09-23
| Verizon Wireless doing the same thing
I got an updated "ToS/contract" the other day that had the same "arbitration only" garbage. They gave me until the end of the current billing cycle to cancel my accounts with no penalty if I don't agree.
I'm half tempted to do it just out of spite. |
|
jc100
join:2002-04-10
2 edits | reply to moonpuppy
Re: There's a reason it takes 7 minutes or less
None moon. 100 percent of people want to lose their case. Hence, it's safe to assume no people showed up in order to allow the companies to prevail every time.
As for arbitration, these companies have to give you the ability to opt out I imagine. It's called reading the contract. Therefore, if you sign up for one of these, be sure to make it known in writing you do not wish to be obligated to use arbitration. You'll know the result, before it happens, obviously. |
|
Camelot One
Premium,MVM
join:2001-11-21
Sarasota, FL
clubs:
| reply to Cabal
I was thinking something like that. You'd expect to see a very high company win rate, if for no other reason than they have proceedures in place to make sure they are following rules and agreements to the letter. The consumer/customer on the other hand doesn't, and MOST of the time is filing the dispute based on a lack of understanding of the agreement. (ie, they shouldn't have to pay charge x because it's not valid, even though it was clearly laid out in the fine print) And that's before you take into account those who just don't want to pay their bills.
There are some nasty credit card terms out there. And I'm sure these people see claims based on the same charges over and over again with them. So if they already know that the clause was followed, and that the charge is valid, I could see it only taking 7 minutes to look it over and make a ruling.
--
Intel Quad Core QX6700 @3500Mhz/Asus P5N32-E SLI/4x 1024Mb Corsair/WD 74Gb Raptor/PNY 7800GTs SLI/Antec 550 True Control/Custom water cooler |
|
jc100
join:2002-04-10
| Camelot,
While that might be true fifty percent of the time, I highly doubt EVERY PERSON in EVERY CASE is ill prepared. We all know how it works. ATT and Verizon want arbitration with a company they cherry picked to mostly rule in their favor. Seriously, give me a break. I don't k now any company that's 100 percent right and any person that's always 100 percent wrong. I could understand if it was skewed towards the company, but not this bad. |
|
moonpuppy
join:2000-08-21
Glen Burnie, MD
·Verizon Online DSL
| reply to jc100
said by jc100 :None moon. 100 percent of people want to lose their case. Therefore, we all know your logic and inability to reason. Hence, it's safe to assume no people showed up in order to allow the companies to prevail every time. Give me a break. No one can ever take moon seriously. His comments are beyond the realm of reality. Your cluelessness never ends.
What I proposed was a valid question. Many people don't show up for court when they have a traffic ticket. They don't think that a bench warrant will be issued but it does happen. Judge went through cases like that many times and it would be the same sentence; "Defendant is FTA, bench warrant issued. NEXT" Happens in civil cases too.
said by jc100 :As for arbitration, these companies have to give you the ability to opt out I imagine. It's called reading the contract. Therefore, if you sign up for one of these, be sure to make it known in writing you do not wish to be obligated to use arbitration. You'll know the result, before it happens, obviously. Try again. Comcast only allowed you to opt-out IF you were already a customer and you only had one month to do it. New customers are opted-in automatically. Don't like it? Don't sign up for Comcast.
Take a peak at your next new car contract. They won't let you sue them either. »www.remarsuttonassociates.com/el···tion.htm
Maybe you should read what I say instead of making your baseless assumptions as you usually do. Nice to know I live rent free in that empty skull of yours. |
|
moonpuppy
join:2000-08-21
Glen Burnie, MD
·Verizon Online DSL
| reply to swhx7
Re: Wait for it......
said by swhx7 :First it was credit card companies, now cable and telephone companies, tomorrow all kinds of businesses. The contracts are non-negotiable. So anyone who's not rich enough to have alternatives is subject to whatever terms they want to impose. Soon, it will be every company will demand mandatory arbitration. There will be no alternatives and this will set a dangerous precedent.
My guess is most people don't realize that ALL the court TV shows (People's Court for one) are NOT courts but binding arbitration. There is no appeal. There is no recourse. You lose, that's it. |
|
Camelot One
Premium,MVM
join:2001-11-21
Sarasota, FL
clubs:
| reply to jc100
Re: There's a reason it takes 7 minutes or less
said by jc100 :Camelot, While that might be true fifty percent of the time, I highly doubt EVERY PERSON in EVERY CASE is ill prepared. We all know how it works. ATT and Verizon want arbitration with a company they cherry picked to mostly rule in their favor. Seriously, give me a break. I don't k now any company that's 100 percent right and any person that's always 100 percent wrong. I could understand if it was skewed towards the company, but not this bad. But it's not 100%, it's 95%. That would mean that 5% of the people actually won. My guess is this particular arbitrator spent the entire day looking at cases against one particular credit card company, with all of the complaints claiming the same thing. Have you seen some of the crap credit card companies put in their fine print? Just how many people do you think get screwed by the "make 1 payment 1 day late and your interest rate goes from 8% to 29%" clause? How many of them do you think file for arbitration, and how many of those claims get denied? Well, 95% of them.
All I'm saying is that credit card companies have legal departments that go over what they can and cannot do, and unless you find yourself in the odd situation where they haven't followed their own fine print, however ridiculous the fine print terms may be, you are going to lose in arbitration. (and in court, unless you can show the clause violates the law) So with that in mind, 95% sounds about right.
--
Intel Quad Core QX6700 @3500Mhz/Asus P5N32-E SLI/4x 1024Mb Corsair/WD 74Gb Raptor/PNY 7800GTs SLI/Antec 550 True Control/Custom water cooler |
|
sporkme
drop the crantini and move it, sister
Premium,MVM
join:2000-07-01
Morristown, NJ | This is legal why?
When you have little choice in the services you buy and they all contractually require arbitration, and the deck is stacked against you, how is this even legal?
--
Dogma is the problem. |
|
Richard B
Fur It Up
join:2007-06-22
Portland, OR | I can see the need for Arbitration
The problem I see is legal cost and the need to weed out frivolous lawsuits. Unless Comcast Blew up ones house why one need to go to court. The contract is plain as day If one does not like it do not subscribe |
|
mglunt
join:2001-09-10
Fredericksburg, VA
·Verizon FIOS
1 edit | I can see both sides
I can see both sides... However, I bet if you had a truly independant 3rd party to do the arbitration (someone that knew all the rules, fine print of what you agreed to, etc), I bet it would still be pretty damn close to 95%. Just because the vast majority of claims would be from people not paying bills, not knowing the terms of the agreement, etc.
I've been in the shoes of the couple days late and see the interest go from 8 to 30%. This is why I tend to stay with the same company. I've had the same CC company for about 8 yrs. When this happened, I called, explained why the date was missed, talked about how long I have been with them, and it was changed back with all extra interest refunded. |
|
swhx7
Premium
join:2006-07-23
Elbonia
·RoadRunner Cable
| reply to sporkme
Re: This is legal why?
A very good question. The law ought to impose some limits on what businesses can require in exchange for products or services. Money is OK, but they should not be allowed to require people giving up basic constitutional rights.
If no limits are imposed by law, and the trend continues, it will eventually amount to a virtual repeal of the 13th amendment. |
|
