The undersigned organizations strongly recommend the Federal Communications Commission consider banning forced arbitration clauses in your effort to update and strengthen the data breach rule for telecommunications carriers. The NPR states that the purpose of the proposed rule is to “provide greater protections to the public.” This is a laudable goal, but providing greater rights…
The CFPB rule would have had an enormous impact on returning to consumers remedies they had lost through the widespread use of arbitration clauses with class action bans. Nevertheless, consumers have a number of ways to defeat an arbitration requirement, as set out below.
In the Matter of the Arbitration between case no. 01-20-0000-2900; Adam Veltri vs. Americor Funding, Inc.
Read More about Interim Award of Arbitrator in Adam Veltri v. Americor Funding, Inc.
Forced arbitration clauses take away constitutional rights to a day in court when companies break the law. Instead of a judge, a private arbitrator, often chosen and paid by the company, decides cases in a secretive proceeding with no appeal. Below, we break down how each state is impacted by this harmful practice. Alabama Alaska…
Read More about State Fact Sheets: Forced Arbitration Harms Consumers, Servicemembers, and Veterans
The National Consumer Law Center, on behalf of its low-income clients, writes in strong opposition to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB)’s proposed changes to the federal poverty line adjustment methodology which will, over time, result in millions of consumers losing their eligibility for low-income assistance programs or experience a reduction in the amount of assistance received.
The court concluded that there was no enforceable agreement between Uber and the plaintiffs, and therefore the dispute was not arbitrable.