Class Actions Blog

Archive for the ‘Forced Arbitration’ Category

Article in The Hill explains why the new CFPB banning mandatory arbitration is a good thing

Posted on: July 13th, 2017 by Steve Larson

Paul Bland has written an excellent article in The Hill that reviews the background behind the publication of the new CFPB rule banning mandatory arbitration, and addresses the merits and criticisms of the new rule.

Here is the link.  http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/finance/341472-who-will-gop-lawmakers-stand-with-the-people-or-crooked-bankers.

Share

CFPB issues rule banning mandatory arbitration agreements in consumer finance documents

Posted on: July 12th, 2017 by Steve Larson

On July 10, 2017, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) announced a new rule to ban companies from using mandatory arbitration clauses to deny groups of people their day in court. Many consumer financial products like credit cards and bank accounts have arbitration clauses in their contracts that prevent consumers from joining together to sue their bank or financial company for wrongdoing. By forcing consumers to give up or go it alone – usually over small amounts – companies can sidestep the court system, avoid big refunds, and continue harmful practices. The CFPB’s new rule will deter wrongdoing by restoring consumers’ right to join together to pursue justice and relief through group lawsuits.

Share

U.S. Justice Department switches sides in NLRB case before Supreme Court

Posted on: June 20th, 2017 by Steve Larson

The Department of Justice announced on June 16, 2017 that it will switch sides in a Supreme Court case, dropping its previous support for workers to throw its weight behind management.

The case, NLRB v. Murphy Oil, had held that an employment contract that requires the employee to waive his or her right to bring a class-action lawsuit against the employer violates the National Labor Relations Act.

Read more…

Share

CBS News does great piece on how forced arbitration harms consumers

Posted on: May 18th, 2017 by Steve Larson

CBS News recently published an article on how forced arbitration harms consumers. The article, “AT&T and DirectTV face thousands of complaints linked to overcharging, promotions” can be read by clicking here.

Share

BBC World News connects passenger being dragged off of United Airlines plane to unequal bargaining power between consumers and corporations in America as a result of forced arbitration clauses

Posted on: April 12th, 2017 by Steve Larson

On the April 11, 2017, BBC World News Program, the announcer told a reporter for the Atlantic that traditionally in the United States, if a group of consumers were being treated unfairly by a large corporation, it might result in a lawsuit. The announcer questioned why that was not the case here. The reporter for the Atlantic said that class actions have been vitally important in the past in the United States at leveling the playing field when consumers have disputes with large corporations. The reporter noted that an individual consumer would never have the financial wherewithal to get into a legal dispute with a company the size of United Airlines over an individual claim, but if the claim was on behalf of a number of consumers, that would give the consumers more leverage.

Read more…

Share

Class action alleges that Uber charges consumers for longer route than it pays drivers

Posted on: April 11th, 2017 by Steve Larson

A proposed class action filed in California federal court alleges that Uber’s upfront pricing model charges passengers a higher fare based on a longer route, but requires drivers to take the shortest route, allowing Uber to pocket the difference. The plaintiff alleges that Uber instituted the new “upfront” pricing model sometime between June and September 2016. The upfront pricing model gives prospective riders using the Uber app a fare estimate based on a longer than intended route. Upon conclusion of the ride, the Uber defendants collect the upfront rate from the user based on the longer route and time calculations but do not transmit the full fare collected to the drivers (minus the per transport service fee to which the Uber defendants are entitled).

Read more…

Share

Legal Disclaimer

The information contained in this blog does not constitute legal advice, and does not create an attorney-client relationship. We make no claims, promises or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of the information contained in or linked to this blog.

About Class Actions:

About this blog

This blog is intended to provide information to the general public and to practitioners about developments that may impact Oregon class actions.

About the author

  • Steve Larson

  • Steve Larson
  • Steve Larson has been representing investors, consumers and employees in class actions in Oregon for over 20 years. He is a shareholder at the law firm of Stoll Berne in Portland, Oregon.
Follow stollberne on Twitter

Subscribe to this blog