4 ms·
Or just amend the Federal Arbitration Act to deny the use of arbitration as a tool to suppress legitimate use of the courts to address remedies. In the meantim
by nimish 6y ago
Or just amend the Federal Arbitration Act to deny the use of arbitration as a tool to suppress legitimate use of the courts to address remedies.
In the meantime create a tool to allow for mass arbitration actions.
- nickff 6y agoHow would you "amend the Federal Arbitration Act to deny the use of arbitration as a tool to suppress legitimate use of the courts to address remedies"? Do you just want to get rid of mandatory arbitration? That sounds like repealing the FAA and replacing it with its mirror image.
- nimish 6y agoForbid mandatory arbitration for b2c and b2smb Or forbid it entirely. What exactly is the problem with writing a law to stop an abusive practice?
- nickff 6y agoWell, I (and many others) think that making the courts the sole venue for resolving these disputes is not necessarily better. Getting rid of mandatory arbitration means that only large cases (with lawyers on contingency) and class-actions (where the lawyers are the only ones who benefit) will go forward. Mandatory arbitration is the best venue for medium-sized individual (settlement/judgement) cases, and courts are not viable for them. I see mandatory arbitration as a trade-off, and would simply prefer that people take that kind of clause into account when they transact with others.