Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Newsjock

(11,733 posts)
Wed Jan 11, 2012, 02:29 AM Jan 2012

U.S. Supreme Court rules credit repair firms can force arbitration

Source: Los Angeles Times

A 1996 law sought to protect struggling consumers from businesses promising to improve their credit rating, and specifically gave customers the right to sue any firm in violation.

But the U.S. Supreme Court ruled Tuesday that credit repair companies could block such lawsuits and instead force disgruntled customers into binding arbitration if they had agreed to such a provision in the fine print of their agreements.

The 8-1 decision is another in a string of high court rulings in recent years that have backed an arbitration clause over a customer's right to file a lawsuit.

... "This Supreme Court is just steam-rolling over the American civil justice system and throwing consumers to the wolves," said Doug Heller, executive director of Consumer Watchdog, an education and advocacy group.

Read more: http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-forced-arbitration-20120111,0,3901221.story

12 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies

Stuart G

(38,445 posts)
4. So, if you do not read the fine print, and it is so small you can't read it..you are screwed?
Wed Jan 11, 2012, 09:40 AM
Jan 2012

Is that it??

 

Lance_Boyle

(5,559 posts)
6. Yet another reason to read and understand contracts before signing them.
Wed Jan 11, 2012, 12:44 PM
Jan 2012

I remain baffled at how people expect "I didn't understand the contract I signed" to be a valid reason to escape it.

 

izquierdista

(11,689 posts)
7. Because it is not a contract
Wed Jan 11, 2012, 04:27 PM
Jan 2012

It is an ultimatum. A contract is the result of a negotiation between two parties. When a corporation presents a piece of paper approved by their legal department for a customer's signature, it should be called what it is, an ultimatum, not a contract.

hack89

(39,171 posts)
11. When I signed a contract with Verizon there were no negotiations
Wed Jan 11, 2012, 04:55 PM
Jan 2012

it was definitely a take it or leave it deal.

Contract has a specific legal meaning.

 

Hawkowl

(5,213 posts)
10. This is why we must vote for Obama!
Wed Jan 11, 2012, 04:53 PM
Jan 2012

Because of the Supreme Court appointments! Oh, wait.... My bad

Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»U.S. Supreme Court rules ...