1 edit |
uh ohye gods, this can't stand - it's a pro-consumer ruling.
quick, call Seymor Cash (R-BigBiz) and Ivanna Bribe (D-Demforsale)and tell them to got on some legislation to fix what these activist courts have done! |
|
FFH5 Premium Member join:2002-03-03 Tavistock NJ |
FFH5
Premium Member
2008-May-27 12:13 pm
Word of warning for those who want to start a class actionThe USSC made "no class action lawsuit" provisions in cell phone contracts non-enforceable ONLY in states that prohibit them. Not all states prohibit having a "no class action lawsuit" provision in a contract. So, if you are contemplating starting up one, the lawyer in YOUR state will need to investigate state law on the issue. |
|
|
mlundin
Member
2008-May-27 12:16 pm
Yay!Score one for the little guy! Not over though... still a long way to go. |
|
|
ctggzg Premium Member join:2005-02-11 USA |
ctggzg
Premium Member
2008-May-27 12:32 pm
No, score one for gold-diggers and frivolous lawsuits. |
|
|
Castro, was he right?For years I have been reading DSLr forums. It seems these corporations get worse every month in the things they do to squeeze every dollar from the people. I can definitely see why companies need to be nationalized if they get to big. A "no class action" clause should not be allowed EVER. Why do we need laws against exploitation by the companies? Also, the lawyers should not be allowed to profit so much for pushing class action lawsuits. Any money won should go back to customers and maybe the school systems. |
|
texans20 Premium Member join:2002-09-28 Texas! |
to ctggzg
Re: Yay!said by ctggzg:No, score one for gold-diggers and frivolous lawsuits. Exactly, most class action lawsuits do nothing but drive the prices we pay up. I get several notifications per year of me being involved somehow in some stupid class action suit, and I have yet to get anything worth while. The latest class action was with some credit monitoring thing I signed up for a couple of years ago, all I get is one free month of service. However, rest assured, the lawyers involved received millions of dollars in compensation. |
|
|
texans20
1 recommendation |
to ossito16
Re: Castro, was he right?said by ossito16:For years I have been reading DSLr forums. It seems these corporations get worse every month in the things they do to squeeze every dollar from the people. I can definitely see why companies need to be nationalized if they get to big. A "no class action" clause should not be allowed EVER. Why do we need laws against exploitation by the companies? Also, the lawyers should not be allowed to profit so much for pushing class action lawsuits. Any money won should go back to customers and maybe the school systems. Move to North Korea, every corporation there is nationalized. |
|
|
Time for Plan B"In short, such fine print bans on class action participation remain intact if your state laws prohibit them."
So clearly the next course of action by these companies is to fire up the great lobby machine and have these laws changed. |
|
hopeflickerCapitalism breeds greed Premium Member join:2003-04-03 Long Beach, CA
1 recommendation |
to texans20
Re: Yay!said by texans20:said by ctggzg:No, score one for gold-diggers and frivolous lawsuits. Exactly, most class action lawsuits do nothing but drive the prices we pay up. I get several notifications per year of me being involved somehow in some stupid class action suit, and I have yet to get anything worth while. The latest class action was with some credit monitoring thing I signed up for a couple of years ago, all I get is one free month of service. However, rest assured, the lawyers involved received millions of dollars in compensation. So do we just allow these corporations to walk all over us? |
|
|
to ossito16
Re: Castro, was he right?Wow. Just wow. Nationalize all corporations? That has got to be one of the worst ideas I have ever heard. Look at such places where that has happened or is happening right now. Former Soviet Union, N. Korea, Cuba, and thats just a start. Their economies were/are terrible and the people are crushed at each step. Just a horrible idea. |
|
|
to hopeflicker
Re: Yay!said by hopeflicker:said by texans20:said by ctggzg:No, score one for gold-diggers and frivolous lawsuits. Exactly, most class action lawsuits do nothing but drive the prices we pay up. I get several notifications per year of me being involved somehow in some stupid class action suit, and I have yet to get anything worth while. The latest class action was with some credit monitoring thing I signed up for a couple of years ago, all I get is one free month of service. However, rest assured, the lawyers involved received millions of dollars in compensation. So do we just allow these corporations to walk all over us? That's what 'free market'ers seem to want. Many fail to realize that the idea behind a 'class action' is not necessarily to realize large damage awards for the members of the class, but to provide large enough punitive awards to the class as a whole to deter the corporation from doing wrong/illegal/damaging activities. |
|
texans20 Premium Member join:2002-09-28 Texas! |
to ender7074
Re: Castro, was he right?said by ender7074:Wow. Just wow. Nationalize all corporations? That has got to be one of the worst ideas I have ever heard. Look at such places where that has happened or is happening right now. Former Soviet Union, N. Korea, Cuba, and thats just a start. Their economies were/are terrible and the people are crushed at each step. Just a horrible idea. Yes but it fits the lazy socialist well. See, the lazy socialist generally tends to be a loser in life, especially economically speaking. In America, one can work hard and become well off. In countries like Cuba, though, regardless of how hard you work or how marketable your skills are you are worth as much as everyone else. The lazy socialist would rather bring everyone down to his or her level instead of working hard to gain new skills or polish current skills to make him or her more marketable. I have yet to meet anyone doing well in life with extreme socialist ideas such as nationalizing corporations. They tend to be unemployed, undereducated, and the type of personality that blames everything negative on everyone else. They hang out at coffee houses on weekday afternoons when they should be working. |
|
hopeflickerCapitalism breeds greed Premium Member join:2003-04-03 Long Beach, CA |
to viperlmw
Re: Yay!I, for one, do not care if i was to receive a small $$$ amount from a class action suit. I would just hope that a suit alone would change a corporations business practice. If lawyers win big bucks, so what. As long as the shady business practice ends. |
|
|
And that's the point of class action suits. In very rare cases are the actual complainants looking for large damage awards. In most cases class actions are launched and prosecuted with the understanding that the claimants will get little other than a promise of behavior change by the corporation while the lawyers get a nice payout for taking the risk.
Do I agree with every class action? No, but in the vast majority of cases they are used the advantage of consumers in a system where government is no longer protecting consumer rights. |
|
rahvin112 |
to texans20
Re: Castro, was he right?It's not socialism, it's called communism. A certain very famous SOCIALIST wrote a book about communism called animal farm.
Socialism is about a society creating a social safety net where people at the bottom have at least basic needs accounted for during the toughest of times. Please don't equate socialism and communism. |
|
|
to ctggzg
Re: Yay!Sure, because anytime anything other than a multi-billion dollar corp stands to gain any kind of money, it's a bad thing. The U.S. should just allow corps to run amok and do precisely whatever benefits their bottom line regardless of laws or who gets hurt. It's just the "gold diggers," after all filing "frivolous" suits. |
|
KrKHeavy Artillery For The Little Guy Premium Member join:2000-01-17 Tulsa, OK Netgear WNDR3700v2 Zoom 5341J
|
KrK to ctggzg
Premium Member
2008-May-27 2:14 pm
to ctggzg
Generally, for a class action to occur, it can hardly be frivolous. Now, the results to the class members are usually frivolous, but the guilty company is usually ordered to change it's evil ways.
Just don't expect to get rich off one, unless you're a lawyer. |
|
|
to rahvin112
Re: Castro, was he right?said by rahvin112:Please don't equate socialism and communism. The only real difference is that communists shoot people that try to leave. Remember communist Russia called themselves the Soviet Socialist Republic. |
|
EPS4 join:2008-02-13 Hingham, MA |
to rahvin112
Bah, the term has meant the same thing as Communist as long as it's also had the meaning that you're trying to declare is the sole meaning... The USSR, the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, for example. |
|
woody7 Premium Member join:2000-10-13 Torrance, CA |
woody7
Premium Member
2008-May-27 2:34 pm
hmmmm....Why is it that whenever there is something pro consumer, it always turns into a "scum sucking only lawyers are going to make money and we all will pay in the end for it " the trolls and corporate "shills" seem to always take a pro consumer as a way to vent on the corporations behalf. If the corporations weren't such greedy a$$ holes, this wouldn't be an issue. Yes I understand they are subsidizing the free or almost free phones. |
|
SLD Premium Member join:2002-04-17 San Francisco, CA 1 edit |
to footballdude
Re: Castro, was he right?Yes, France and Communist Russia are so similar ... Oh, and the US is a republic - does that make us like the old Soviets? |
|
ScottMoOnce in a Lifetime MVM join:2000-12-15 New York, NY |
Flawed jouralismThe "proof" that arbitration is more favorable to companies than to be individuals shouldn't be used. First the report reads: Major Arbitration Firm in California Rules Against Consumers 94 Percent of the Time, Uses Arbitration as Debt Collection Mechanism, New Report Shows And that somehow morphs into "The report stated that one arbitration outfit frequently used by credit card companies ruled in favor of its corporate clients 95% of the time, if not more". That's not what it said. How did 94% become "95% of the time, if not more" And secondly (and more to the point) the cases that were brought to arbitration were largely by the credit card companies (or those who bought debt from them) as a means of collecting debts and that those debts were the ones the credit card companies were sure they were going to win. So, the Public Citizen report shows that if you default to a credit card company and go to arbitration, you're most likely going to lose. Key word is "default". If a consumer defaults on a credit card balance, chances are they're going to lose in arbitration. So how does that extrapolate into "eroding your rights"? It doesn't. |
|
1 edit |
to texans20
Re: Castro, was he right?I guess I came off wrong, I was not a nationalized all Corp., just the ones that repeatedly try to circumvent (illegally or on the line legal) the rules and laws that are in place to protect the people using the services of these companies. Why use fine print, why use opt-out instead of opt-in choices, why do we need to have labor laws for "children". I'm not saying we need to nationalize Starbucks. Only the ones who blatantly don't give a f#%! about the people and believe they do not have to answer to anyone as long as they can keep lobbying (indirect kickbacks,etc) I would even go for temporary nationalization of a company and then sell it to someone else who has some sense. |
|
|
to SLD
said by SLD:Oh, and the US is a republic - does that make us like the old Soviets? If the socialists had their way, yes. |
|
SLD Premium Member join:2002-04-17 San Francisco, CA |
SLD
Premium Member
2008-May-27 5:41 pm
Time for you to travel a bit beyond Missouri. |
|
|
Old Coot
Anon
2008-May-27 6:52 pm
Providers can't use mouse print to ban class actionsWhy not? the US government has imposed this on railway workers for years. |
|
|
to ender7074
Re: Castro, was he right?not saying nationalized all companies, just the ones who continue to act ad though we the people owe them something. Maybe even give state attorneys more power (zero interference from federal branches) and let them loose on these companies. All winnings go to the states. Just like the tobacco industry. |
|
a333A hot cup of integrals please join:2007-06-12 Rego Park, NY 2 edits |
a333 to SLD
Member
2008-May-27 7:45 pm
to SLD
Guys, get real. IMHO, there isn't a real difference... the commies/socies/whatever you want to label them as are at least open about it. Our gov't isn't really any better, when we spend half our resources bombing other countries and trumpeting our fake 'democracy', while spending the other half on listening into our own citizens and occasionally strip-searching them. And yes, the 'democracy' we trumpet IS fake.. we're a republic, and anyone that attempts to gloss that over with the shiny coating of democracy is an idiot who needs to take high school history over again. And for crissake, keep an open mind to other ideas. Funny how we expect N. Korea/China/Former commies to accept our "democratic"/liberal ways, when we ourselves edge away from their ideals as if it was a bad disease. Now, back on topic: I think it's at least a step in the right direction, although hardly a setback for the 'evil-uns' |
|
|
Dakota2255
Anon
2008-May-27 8:10 pm
FTCAt one time our government did protect its citizens from big corporations. The Federal Trade Commission had the power and ability to force corporations involved in interstate commerce to do the right thing with threats of fines and increased regulations. Today, the FTC (as are most other Federal consumer organizations) are toothless bureaucracies that do their best not to upset corporations for fear the corporations will report them to any one of a number of Congressmen that are on the corporate payroll. Our politicians have sold out to corporate America and there's really nothing we can do about it. Middle-class jobs will continue to be sent overseas while corporate executives become even richer. We the people have no one looking our for us or our interests. To both the politicians and the corporations, we're nothing but a source of money. |
|
cdruGo Colts MVM join:2003-05-14 Fort Wayne, IN |
to ScottMo
Re: Flawed jouralismHey now. The general public shouldn't be concerned about the facts of the hearings. All they need to know is a cliff note summary of FUD.
I thought pretty much the same thing when I read the summary above. Just because an arbitrator finds one way an overwhelmingly high percentage of the time doesn't necessarily mean that something is wrong.
I would expect arbitration for defaulted credit cards to mostly go with the credit card companies. By the time that arbitration (or a lawsuit) would be necessary the CC company has already looked at 1.) do they really think that they are right, 2.) do they think that they can win, and 3.) if they do win, will they have a chance to get any of the money that they do win. If any of the questions aren't sufficiently affirmative, then they may just write it off, make a settlement, etc. It may never even get to arbitration. |
|