9 Reasons To Ban Mandatory Binding Arbitration

Mandatory binding arbitration is great for businesses to use in dealing with one another, but it sucks for consumers. Here’s 9 ways you get screwed in arbitration land, courtesy of the National Association Of Consumer Advocates

High cost: You have to pay a bunch of money, usually at lest $750, just to start a claim.
Biased Arbitrators: Companies are the only repeat customers of arbitration firms so guess who the arbitrators usually find in favor of?
Limited discovery: Good luck getting the necessary evidence in the room.
Prohibition of class actions: Arbitration clauses routinely don’t allow you to participate in a class action lawsuit, “only effective remedy for wide-scale scams that rip off individual consumers or farmers in small amounts.”
Inconvenient locations: Gas dollars rack up as you trek to their out-of-the way offices.
One-way requirements: The company still gets to sue in a real court if it wants, you however have to go through arbitration monkey court.
No public record: Only businesses requiring arbitration agreements have access to the body of previous arbitration findings — and which firms ruled in their favor.
Limited judicial review: Decisions can only be overturned in cases of fraud or “manifest disregard of the law,” very difficult legal positions to establish.
Limited remedies: “Injunctive relief – a court order compelling the offending party to do something, or prohibiting that party from taking some action – cannot be obtained through arbitration. Arbitrators often split the difference between the two sides in awarding damages instead of determining the true costs of injuries. As a result, arbitration awards to consumers and employees are substantially lower than court awards.”

And that’s nine reasons why you should support the Arbitration Fairness Act.

Ban Mandatory Binding Arbitration [National Association Of Consumer Advocates]
(Photo: Getty)