Corporations using Arbitration Clauses to get out of Lawsuits

As much as I don't believe in frivolous lawsuits this is very wrong. Corporations that wrong people are basically exempt from any liability now because they are using arbitration clauses to shut down lawsuits. If you put false charges on someone's account and refuse to fix it then you are stealing from them and are a criminal. It's too bad criminals in our society are valued more than working people.

www.seattletimes.com...

a reply to: CB328

That's why I won't sign a contract with an arbitration clause.

I fear soon enough I will have to enter into some agreement or other to avoid being homeless as more and more of this trickery arises everywhere I look.

Too bad so many people think they are too busy to read the T&C of the agreements they enter into, too bad it isn't in the best interests of their lawyer to point out the very real risk of entering into these types of unfair agreements.

It is getting bad out there....

a reply to: CB328

You're right. And it's getting worse. Even banks... There used to be a law that set a max. amount between the interest they charged for loans and the interest they paid on accounts. That law was somehow overturned by Congress and now, banks can pay .2% and charge 30%.

There's no doubt that the wealth in this country has been redistributed to the top 1% through laws EXACTLY like these. But talk about redistributing some of it back down, and you're an "evil commie socialist"...

I don't want the wealthy or the government to support me. I just want my FAIR share. And laws like these that allow a corporation to basically do whatever they want, without protecting workers or customers, make that impossible.

originally posted by: MyHappyDogShiner
a reply to: CB328

That's why I won't sign a contract with an arbitration clause.

I fear soon enough I will have to enter into some agreement or other to avoid being homeless as more and more of this trickery arises everywhere I look.

Too bad so many people think they are too busy to read the T&C of the agreements they enter into, too bad it isn't in the best interests of their lawyer to point out the very real risk of entering into these types of unfair agreements.

It is getting bad out there....

Most folks couldn't afford a lawyer to begin with, or understand the 25 pages of legalese if you had a gun to their head.

Any contract that needs to be interpreted by a lawyer in the first place should be void.

They should all be common speech, and short.

Just like laws should.

If it takes multiple pages, that simply means it says "we are going to screw you at some point" in it.

a reply to: CB328

I believe I read that now that TTP is going to be signed that suing corp. is a thing of the past. Even if you win,the taxpayers of that country have to foot the bill,not the corp.

a reply to: Drinking

And the legal trolls say they write these things in for the protection of themselves and you, convincing the ignorant that it will be less expensive because (the one who would be exploited) they won't need to hire a lawyer.....

Just sign it "All rights reserved" in the signature line and hope that the person filing it doesn't check it thoroughly.

Then you keep your junk and they lose their job, but most often they won't even do business with you unless you agree to their terms.

Like making someone say "I promise" before you tell them what it is they are promising.

Corporations struggle to be in charge, and make all dissent illegal. They don't put it like that, they hire lawyers to bury that language in volumes of documents.


State controlled Capitalism is Fascism.

a reply to: intrptr

Trouble is those same lawyers and the huge law suits are the reason for arbitration.....

a reply to: Benevolent Heretic

I recently read something to the effect ... a - interest rate would allow the banks to charge a amount on the money you have in your accounts . This it would or could also be applied to pension funds .....I think it was Mike Hudson that was talking about it ....

originally posted by: MyHappyDogShiner
Like making someone say "I promise" before you tell them what it is they are promising.

Exactly... "Pinky Swearing" just doesn't protect us like it used to.

a reply to: Benevolent Heretic

It is really funny putting it to people like that and then mentioning they agree to a promissory note even when using a credit card, and then pointing out to them they can promise anything they would like but have no control of future events.

They just blurt out "That's what insurance is for" without really understanding the conditions of the agreement with the insurance company tend to trick us into arbitration agreements also.

Even the cable and phone companies are leaning toward the same garbage agreements because too many people are too ignorant to realize what it is they are agreeing to because they "want stuff"....

Remember the man the ssued AT&T and won? They were wrong and their response was to threaten to terminate his service. Companies don't care. We can vote with our dollars and that's about it.

Pretty soon they'll have a clause that says if you can't pay your bill then you have to work for them as an indentured servant, but we have "liberty".

a reply to: Drinking

"If it takes multiple pages, that simply means it says "we are going to screw you at some point" in it."

Yes, if it has lots of tiny writing, too, then it has the same meaning. I keep as far away from it all as possible. I have to have a minimum of dealings with it, but I know wherever IT is there is gonna be trouble. I have made it clear that if they come too close to me it is them who get screwed (I'm not joking either). This is WAR (goes off whistling like a trooper).

I know this practice has been going on for quite some time. I have received updated 'terms and service' agreements from several companies over the years and have ended up terminating business relationships rather than accept this agreement.

However, I have had personal experience with this and the arbitration works both ways. You usually also gain the ability to arbitrate disputes and it is SIGNIFICANTLY more expensive than traditional litigation. You can almost always gain a settlement if you threaten to enforce the arbitration agreement because it usually costs companies more than a $45 filing fee.

originally posted by: Drinking
Most folks couldn't afford a lawyer to begin with, or understand the 25 pages of legalese if you had a gun to their head.

Any contract that needs to be interpreted by a lawyer in the first place should be void.

They should all be common speech, and short.

Just like laws should.

If it takes multiple pages, that simply means it says "we are going to screw you at some point" in it.

Common speech leaves things up to interpretation. If we make a contract for me to to do job X and I say it's done but you say there's more to do we'll have a dispute. Jobs, expectations, and everything else should be explicitly defined in order to prevent misunderstandings.

That said, legalese doesn't need to be excessively wordy in order define a law. Glass-Steagall was very descriptive and took less than two pages.

Not a single tax paying citizen would agree with any of the nonsense going on, much of it pointed out in this very post- if only they knew.

Their voices were muffled, their educations stifled.
What can we do but watch and wait?

Fight it and they'll lock you away in a prison system that benefits them- at the expense of the rest of us.

originally posted by: lordcomac
Not a single tax paying citizen would agree with any of the nonsense going on, much of it pointed out in this very post- if only they knew.

Their voices were muffled, their educations stifled.
What can we do but watch and wait?

Fight it and they'll lock you away in a prison system that benefits them- at the expense of the rest of us.

Go into politics, start on a local level. Most local politics are part time jobs. That's not where your highest taxes come from, but it's where the policies that most effect you daily are designed. As the saying goes, all politics are local. I talk to our local politico's all the time, sometimes they listen to me and sometimes they don't.

originally posted by: Benevolent Heretic
a reply to: CB328

You're right. And it's getting worse. Even banks... There used to be a law that set a max. amount between the interest they charged for loans and the interest they paid on accounts. That law was somehow overturned by Congress and now, banks can pay .2% and charge 30%.

There's no doubt that the wealth in this country has been redistributed to the top 1% through laws EXACTLY like these. But talk about redistributing some of it back down, and you're an "evil commie socialist"...

I don't want the wealthy or the government to support me. I just want my FAIR share. And laws like these that allow a corporation to basically do whatever they want, without protecting workers or customers, make that impossible.

Exactly what I see.
Your a commie socialist if you don't allow corporate fascists to get there way via rape and pillage.