3 ms·

There will be no "court". Mandatory binding arbitration bans courts of law from making any decision. They are only allowed to enforce the decision of the arbit

There will be no "court". Mandatory binding arbitration bans courts of law from making any decision. They are only allowed to enforce the decision of the arbiter, who does not have to follow any laws except the American Arbitration Act.

effingwewt 6y ago
I was renting a storage unit recently, and even they had a binding arbitration clause where they decide the mediator, etc. This really has been a cancer on our nation, I remember the day after citizens united even xbox live had binding arbitration in a mandatory update the very next day. Reason 749274937295 I am done with this country.
- kevin_b_er 6y ago
  You're thinking of AT&T Mobility LLC v. Concepcion when class action was ended.
colejohnson66 6y ago
I hate mandatory arbitration clauses as much as the next guy, but what you said is just not true. Arbitration clauses are thrown out by the courts regularly. The reason is the simple fact that the arbitration clause is only enforceable by the courts, and they can always decide to do the other thing. If you go to arbitration and you feel the result was unfair, you can always appeal to the courts. There, the judge can either affirm the decision or throw it out entirely.
- kevin_b_er 6y ago
  You're presuming judicial review. The arbiter result is final and binding. Appeals are exhausted. You may only argue the arbitration section under a very very limited set of choices under the arbitration act. And only the arbitration section. The rest of the agreement can be capricious, unfair, and malicious. That's for the arbiter to decide on, however. And the arbiter only gets to keep making money by hearing "cases" as long as they don't rule against the company. The problem is the court system has chosen to liberally interpret the arbitration act against the citizenry. Now show me all these agreements being "thrown out". What's instead happening is state laws attempting to protect the citizenry being thrown out instead.
m463 6y ago
in california, you have the right to opt-out of binding arbitration within a period of time after signing any agreement.

effingwewt 6y ago

I was renting a storage unit recently, and even they had a binding arbitration clause where they decide the mediator, etc. This really has been a cancer on our nation, I remember the day after citizens united even xbox live had binding arbitration in a mandatory update the very next day. Reason 749274937295 I am done with this country.

kevin_b_er 6y ago
You're thinking of AT&T Mobility LLC v. Concepcion when class action was ended.

colejohnson66 6y ago

I hate mandatory arbitration clauses as much as the next guy, but what you said is just not true. Arbitration clauses are thrown out by the courts regularly. The reason is the simple fact that the arbitration clause is only enforceable by the courts, and they can always decide to do the other thing. If you go to arbitration and you feel the result was unfair, you can always appeal to the courts. There, the judge can either affirm the decision or throw it out entirely.

kevin_b_er 6y ago
You're presuming judicial review. The arbiter result is final and binding. Appeals are exhausted. You may only argue the arbitration section under a very very limited set of choices under the arbitration act. And only the arbitration section. The rest of the agreement can be capricious, unfair, and malicious. That's for the arbiter to decide on, however. And the arbiter only gets to keep making money by hearing "cases" as long as they don't rule against the company. The problem is the court system has chosen to liberally interpret the arbitration act against the citizenry. Now show me all these agreements being "thrown out". What's instead happening is state laws attempting to protect the citizenry being thrown out instead.

m463 6y ago

in california, you have the right to opt-out of binding arbitration within a period of time after signing any agreement.