Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I'd much rather be in the arbitrator section than the lawsuit one
The arbitration is for individuals, as you have noted. As an individual you would need to pay a lawyer to go up against a huge financial institution like Wells Fargo whose funding for lawyers is bottomless. An enormous amount of your time, probably years, and money would go towards settling what might well be a beef over say a few hundred dollars. Who is going to do that? It's not worth it. The lawyers fees alone to take on a big institution would be in the tens of thousands, or more likely the hundreds of thousands. And if, as an individual, you do not win, you might well find yourself responsible for the winning side's legal fees, which would be in the hundreds of thousands. So, very few consumers are going to take that on.
These lawsuits are not about the amount of money an individual consumer can win against a financial institution. It is about making the big financial institutions play fair and not rip consumers off. It's about consumer protection.
It might not have been clear when I initially posted, but my main motivation for allowing class action lawsuits is that it serves as a bigger deterrent against bad behavior by corporations, due to larger overall payouts as well as bad publicity. That benefits all consumers.
I'm not sure how you can honestly believe that given the average payout is $29
If there is some big bad behavior, and banks have to pay out thousands to large number of consumers, that would be a much more severe punishment, and even come at a faster pace given banks can prolong class action lawsuits years. They cant prolong an onslaught of arbitration cases.
The arbitration is for individuals, as you have noted. As an individual you would need to pay a lawyer to go up against a huge financial institution like Wells Fargo whose funding for lawyers is bottomless. An enormous amount of your time, probably years, and money would go towards settling what might well be a beef over say a few hundred dollars. Who is going to do that? It's not worth it. The lawyers fees alone to take on a big institution would be in the tens of thousands, or more likely the hundreds of thousands. And if, as an individual, you do not win, you might well find yourself responsible for the winning side's legal fees, which would be in the hundreds of thousands. So, very few consumers are going to take that on.
These lawsuits are not about the amount of money an individual consumer can win against a financial institution. It is about making the big financial institutions play fair and not rip consumers off. It's about consumer protection.
you dont usually need lawyers for arbitration cases, but you do however need them for class action lawyers.
Wells Fargo would probably rather have a group of lawyers fighting one class action lawsuit over thousands of different arbitration cases. Now all of a sudden they will need to hire even more individuals to show up at arbitration cases, and given their average payouts are 150 times higher, this might actually be the worse
thing in the world for a bank in the event they really do something stupid in volume.
I'm not sure how you can honestly believe that given the average payout is $29
If there is some big bad behavior, and banks have to pay out thousands to large number of consumers, that would be a much more severe punishment, and even come at a faster pace given banks can prolong class action lawsuits years. They cant prolong an onslaught of arbitration cases.
I'm not talking about the payout per person, I'm talking about the payout per case.
"NERA’s data indicates that the median settlement fund value fluctuated between $9 million and $9.8 million for each year from 2010 through 2013, with the largest percentage of settlements valued at less than $10 million."
This data on consumer class action settlements is a bit old, and settlements are even higher now. So if you're a corporation, are you going to be more worried about losing a few thousand in an arbitration case, or millions in a class action lawsuit?
Big win for banks!
Big loss for consumers!
You've waived your right to sue big banks that cheat and defraud you! Yay!
Thanks GOP voters !!!! Your votes did count!
KAC! KEEPING AMERICA CORRUPT!
The Trump administration and its co-conspirators have become so bold, that they no longer bother to try to conceal their corruption. After another year of this, we won't be much different than Putin's Russia.
The number of arbitration cases will seriously climb, if you think it'll stay at 39 per year you're kidding yourself.
its far easier to file an arbitration case than a lawsuit anyways, and its far cheaper.
this makes it easier for the consumer to seek recourse, especially poor consumers
I dont agree with taking away a right to sue, but to pretend this means banks can do what or this destroys consumers ability to recover damages, is just idiotic.
Arbitration is a scam. Much like prosecutors investigating police misconduct. Arbitrators aren't going to bite the hand that feeds them.
Is this how we "drain the swamp?" By letting billionaires who run the banks tank our economy with their subprime bubbles and open up accounts in our names without consent?
At any rate, this is not surprising because GOP is a party that serves only the rich. All their policies are designed to help the rich getting richer and to screw everyone else, especially the poor, sick, and elderly. So expect to see more **** like this.
There would be no swamp to drain if it was only the GOP.
I didnt state otherwise, but the stats posted clearly shows arbitration awards are far higher than class action ones on behalf of the consumers..
not even close to one another..
To whine that $20 payments are fair for people the left proclaims is being ripped off, is just idiotic..
It's not up to you to decide for others what is best for them. It's not up to the government. The Constitution gives us a right to assemble with whoever I want. If I am harmed and my neighbors are harmed there is NO reason the government should step in and state that we all can not sue together.
I spent the last eight years arguing against the undefendable and here we are again.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Your votes did count!
By letting billionaires who run the banks tank our economy with their subprime bubbles and open up accounts in our names without consent?
