Finally, Justice For Consumers Wronged By Banks Is Within Reach
The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau is on the verge of correcting a fundamental perversion of our justice system and restore to consumers their right to their day in court when they are wronged by a bank or credit card company.
A new regulation that the agency announced on Thursday it is publishing for public comment will sharply limit the routine use of binding arbitration to keep disputes consumers have with financial services companies out of the court system.
If you have a bank account, credit card or receive some other financial service, you most likely have a binding arbitration clause buried in the fine print of the contract associated with the service. It basically says that if you agree to use the service, you also agree to resolve any disputes you have with the company through an arbitrator.
To most consumers, that sounds like an OK deal - arbitration in theory is a simple and fair way to deal with a billing dispute or some other disagreement. But it turns out, it's not. That's what The New York Times discovered when it did its own investigation into the arbitration process. It turns out few customers use the arbitration process, and when they do, consumers lose roughly two-thirds of the time.
The big win for financial institutions and other businesses in requiring binding arbitration is that consumers who have the same problem can't come together to file a class action suit. It means that companies can commit the same injustice millions of times, but can proceed with impunity knowing that only a handful of people will challenge it - and not under the purview of a judge with the power to order the company to stop the unjust practice.
The CFPB's own study of these clauses also found that consumers rarely use arbitration - or are even aware of the arbitration process. But it showed why financial institutions would do whatever they can get away with to keep consumers from filing class action suits, because "class actions provide a more effective means for consumers to challenge problematic practices by these companies," and have succeeded in a five-year period to channel $2.7 billion in relief to aggrieved consumers.
The CFPB calls these binding or mandatory arbitration clauses "contract gotchas" in its news release. "With this contract gotcha, companies can sidestep the legal system, avoid accountability, and continue to pursue profitable practices that may violate the law and harm countless consumers. The CFPB's proposal is designed to protect consumers' right to pursue justice and relief, and deter companies from violating the law."
Americans for Financial Reform, a coalition of organizations of which the Campaign for America's Future is a part, released a statement Thursday that gave these clauses an even harsher name: "ripoff clauses." The proposed regulation does not eliminate binding arbitration entirely, the statement said - and it notably does not affect businesses outside the financial sector that the CFPB does not regulate, such as wireless carriers and cable companies. But "it does prohibit [financial services] companies from using one of the most damaging and common elements of the practice -- bans on class actions. ... By allowing consumers to once again band together to hold companies accountable, the CFPB will ensure that one of the corporate avenues for forcing consumers into individual arbitration is foreclosed."
This regulation will face fierce opposition from Wall Street. Expect to hear ads on television and complaints from Republican elected officials about the "unaccountable CFPB" taking actions that will cause consumers some trumped-up harm. Behind the scenes, the CFPB will be bombarded with comments from the financial sector essentially insisting on the right to be able to bilk consumers without them being able to band together and fight back.
Tell the CFPB that you as a consumer don't want Wall Street to keep getting away with locking people into abusive relationships in which you have no effective recourse. Send an email to FederalRegisterComments@cfpb.gov or make a comment on Regulations.gov, referring to Docket No. CFPB-2016-0020 or RIN 3170-AA51 in the subject line, saying that you support the CFPB reining in arbitration abuse and restoring the right of citizens to demand justice against Wall Street institutions in a court of law.
Urgent. It's never been this bad.
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission from the outset was simple. To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It’s never been this bad out there. And it’s never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed and doing some of its best and most important work, the threats we face are intensifying. Right now, with just three days to go in our Spring Campaign, we're falling short of our make-or-break goal. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Can you make a gift right now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? There is no backup plan or rainy day fund. There is only you. —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau is on the verge of correcting a fundamental perversion of our justice system and restore to consumers their right to their day in court when they are wronged by a bank or credit card company.
A new regulation that the agency announced on Thursday it is publishing for public comment will sharply limit the routine use of binding arbitration to keep disputes consumers have with financial services companies out of the court system.
If you have a bank account, credit card or receive some other financial service, you most likely have a binding arbitration clause buried in the fine print of the contract associated with the service. It basically says that if you agree to use the service, you also agree to resolve any disputes you have with the company through an arbitrator.
To most consumers, that sounds like an OK deal - arbitration in theory is a simple and fair way to deal with a billing dispute or some other disagreement. But it turns out, it's not. That's what The New York Times discovered when it did its own investigation into the arbitration process. It turns out few customers use the arbitration process, and when they do, consumers lose roughly two-thirds of the time.
The big win for financial institutions and other businesses in requiring binding arbitration is that consumers who have the same problem can't come together to file a class action suit. It means that companies can commit the same injustice millions of times, but can proceed with impunity knowing that only a handful of people will challenge it - and not under the purview of a judge with the power to order the company to stop the unjust practice.
The CFPB's own study of these clauses also found that consumers rarely use arbitration - or are even aware of the arbitration process. But it showed why financial institutions would do whatever they can get away with to keep consumers from filing class action suits, because "class actions provide a more effective means for consumers to challenge problematic practices by these companies," and have succeeded in a five-year period to channel $2.7 billion in relief to aggrieved consumers.
The CFPB calls these binding or mandatory arbitration clauses "contract gotchas" in its news release. "With this contract gotcha, companies can sidestep the legal system, avoid accountability, and continue to pursue profitable practices that may violate the law and harm countless consumers. The CFPB's proposal is designed to protect consumers' right to pursue justice and relief, and deter companies from violating the law."
Americans for Financial Reform, a coalition of organizations of which the Campaign for America's Future is a part, released a statement Thursday that gave these clauses an even harsher name: "ripoff clauses." The proposed regulation does not eliminate binding arbitration entirely, the statement said - and it notably does not affect businesses outside the financial sector that the CFPB does not regulate, such as wireless carriers and cable companies. But "it does prohibit [financial services] companies from using one of the most damaging and common elements of the practice -- bans on class actions. ... By allowing consumers to once again band together to hold companies accountable, the CFPB will ensure that one of the corporate avenues for forcing consumers into individual arbitration is foreclosed."
This regulation will face fierce opposition from Wall Street. Expect to hear ads on television and complaints from Republican elected officials about the "unaccountable CFPB" taking actions that will cause consumers some trumped-up harm. Behind the scenes, the CFPB will be bombarded with comments from the financial sector essentially insisting on the right to be able to bilk consumers without them being able to band together and fight back.
Tell the CFPB that you as a consumer don't want Wall Street to keep getting away with locking people into abusive relationships in which you have no effective recourse. Send an email to FederalRegisterComments@cfpb.gov or make a comment on Regulations.gov, referring to Docket No. CFPB-2016-0020 or RIN 3170-AA51 in the subject line, saying that you support the CFPB reining in arbitration abuse and restoring the right of citizens to demand justice against Wall Street institutions in a court of law.
The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau is on the verge of correcting a fundamental perversion of our justice system and restore to consumers their right to their day in court when they are wronged by a bank or credit card company.
A new regulation that the agency announced on Thursday it is publishing for public comment will sharply limit the routine use of binding arbitration to keep disputes consumers have with financial services companies out of the court system.
If you have a bank account, credit card or receive some other financial service, you most likely have a binding arbitration clause buried in the fine print of the contract associated with the service. It basically says that if you agree to use the service, you also agree to resolve any disputes you have with the company through an arbitrator.
To most consumers, that sounds like an OK deal - arbitration in theory is a simple and fair way to deal with a billing dispute or some other disagreement. But it turns out, it's not. That's what The New York Times discovered when it did its own investigation into the arbitration process. It turns out few customers use the arbitration process, and when they do, consumers lose roughly two-thirds of the time.
The big win for financial institutions and other businesses in requiring binding arbitration is that consumers who have the same problem can't come together to file a class action suit. It means that companies can commit the same injustice millions of times, but can proceed with impunity knowing that only a handful of people will challenge it - and not under the purview of a judge with the power to order the company to stop the unjust practice.
The CFPB's own study of these clauses also found that consumers rarely use arbitration - or are even aware of the arbitration process. But it showed why financial institutions would do whatever they can get away with to keep consumers from filing class action suits, because "class actions provide a more effective means for consumers to challenge problematic practices by these companies," and have succeeded in a five-year period to channel $2.7 billion in relief to aggrieved consumers.
The CFPB calls these binding or mandatory arbitration clauses "contract gotchas" in its news release. "With this contract gotcha, companies can sidestep the legal system, avoid accountability, and continue to pursue profitable practices that may violate the law and harm countless consumers. The CFPB's proposal is designed to protect consumers' right to pursue justice and relief, and deter companies from violating the law."
Americans for Financial Reform, a coalition of organizations of which the Campaign for America's Future is a part, released a statement Thursday that gave these clauses an even harsher name: "ripoff clauses." The proposed regulation does not eliminate binding arbitration entirely, the statement said - and it notably does not affect businesses outside the financial sector that the CFPB does not regulate, such as wireless carriers and cable companies. But "it does prohibit [financial services] companies from using one of the most damaging and common elements of the practice -- bans on class actions. ... By allowing consumers to once again band together to hold companies accountable, the CFPB will ensure that one of the corporate avenues for forcing consumers into individual arbitration is foreclosed."
This regulation will face fierce opposition from Wall Street. Expect to hear ads on television and complaints from Republican elected officials about the "unaccountable CFPB" taking actions that will cause consumers some trumped-up harm. Behind the scenes, the CFPB will be bombarded with comments from the financial sector essentially insisting on the right to be able to bilk consumers without them being able to band together and fight back.
Tell the CFPB that you as a consumer don't want Wall Street to keep getting away with locking people into abusive relationships in which you have no effective recourse. Send an email to FederalRegisterComments@cfpb.gov or make a comment on Regulations.gov, referring to Docket No. CFPB-2016-0020 or RIN 3170-AA51 in the subject line, saying that you support the CFPB reining in arbitration abuse and restoring the right of citizens to demand justice against Wall Street institutions in a court of law.