Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

U.S. Consumer Bureau Loses Fight to Allow More Class-Action Suits

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 249 posts

Re: U.S. Consumer Bureau Loses Fight to Allow More Class-Action Suits

#181

Post by humanrebar »

specialist wrote: post #141
humanrebar wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's no way to have meaningful freedoms of speech, assembly, and petition while the government decides what counts as "fair" speech, assembly, and petition. Lobbying is literally talking to people in power. It involves money because advertising and marketing aren't free. A special interest group is literally a group of people who want to talk about a particular set of issues. So to return a question, what are some…

Where’s the line between lobbying and pay to play? Ultimaist defenses of individual rights, vs balancing rights, ends up with ridiculous conclusions like “money equals speech”. To fix is to reduce (or eliminate) the cost of campaigning. Mooting the whole problem.

I think making more issues local instead of national would help. As long as a few people sling around big piles of money, there will be incentives to lobby and buy influence.

I think messing around with campaign spending has similar issues to getting rid of lobbying. But making campaigns smaller and cheaper (by making local campaigns more important) could do the trick.

Re: U.S. Consumer Bureau Loses Fight to Allow More Class-Action Suits

#182

Post by noobermin »

okreallywtf wrote: post #137
fragsworth wrote: post #107

I'm losing faith in our system of government. Citibank did this to me on a credit card I had with them: 1. I stopped using the card for several months. 2. I then used it once on a small purchase. 3. They stopped sending me an e-mail reminders for my bill. (An "error" in their system disabled e-mails for my account specifically) 4. I racked up about $100 in late fees and interest charges. 5. I called them up and they…

Is it our system of government though that is the problem? There are problems that allow the GOP to have a disproportionate level of control but overall they've been very consistent on consumer protections (being against them that is), they are doing exactly what anyone paying attention to what they do expects. People bicker over politics and make false equivalencies and compare the parties but then complain about th…

You not mentioning the issues regarding voter suppression, gerrymandering, money in politics that keeps a party which has a minority of actual votes at time in power.

Re: U.S. Consumer Bureau Loses Fight to Allow More Class-Action Suits

#183

Post by achandlerwhite »

ksk wrote: post #172
orthecreedence wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Rather, under the rule, consumers would have fewer options for quickly and efficiently resolving financial disputes. This is actually retarded. How is arbitration OR trial less options than just arbitration? Last I checked, 2 > 1 but maybe I need to review my math skills. Just because a company can't force arbitration doesn't mean it isn't still an option. The Whitehouse is just flipping words around to make it see…

>Just because a company can't force arbitration doesn't mean it isn't still an option. That is not what is claimed. The CPFB banned financial products and services from using arbitration over class action.

This is false. The CFPB rule only prohibited mandatory arbitration. It still allowed for voluntary arbitration if an individual preferred that path in a dispute.

Re: U.S. Consumer Bureau Loses Fight to Allow More Class-Action Suits

#184

Post by noobermin »

grellas wrote: post #170

It is entirely superficial to cast this fight as one between good and evil. As much as anything, it was about proper process. Legislative, executive, judicial - those are the three branches under the Constitution that are supposed to check and balance one another. The legislature passed the federal arbitration act almost 100 years ago. It was signed into law by the president. And it has been consistently upheld by th…

>For those who don't like it, that is fine. The ballot box is open as the prescribed means to effect a change.

Every single sentence you wrote here is extremely ignorant of the political reality in which that usual proper process has been in the muck for years. You're not realizing the effect that gerrymandering, voter suppression, and money in politics has on the ability of the usual system to work to reflect the desires of people, and that redirecting people to traverse that maze is essentially sending them on a quest to square a circle that will effectively keep the status quo.

And the status quo isn't good enough. Remember, just a few years ago, someone would be denied healthcare due to pre-existing conditions and die. THAT was the status quo, and it was so toxic that the party in power now, controlling all parts of the three branches could not repeal it. Forced arbitration is similar to healthcare, most people don't realize how bad it is until they have to go to head with it.

Re: U.S. Consumer Bureau Loses Fight to Allow More Class-Action Suits

#185

Post by emodendroket »

defined wrote: post #32

> Today, it is hard to open up a checking account, rent a car, get cable service or check a loved one into a nursing home without agreeing to mandatory arbitration. This is the part that gives me ulcers, and it's no exaggeration. So many companies insist on us giving up our 7th Amendment rights that we either give in, or don't fly, buy a car, or get a job. We can't even go to the competition because they also have ma…

Yeah, between that and the rise of the plea bargain it's practically like the court system only exists for a select few.

Re: U.S. Consumer Bureau Loses Fight to Allow More Class-Action Suits

#186

Post by emodendroket »

wingspar wrote: post #61
defined wrote: post #32

> Today, it is hard to open up a checking account, rent a car, get cable service or check a loved one into a nursing home without agreeing to mandatory arbitration. This is the part that gives me ulcers, and it's no exaggeration. So many companies insist on us giving up our 7th Amendment rights that we either give in, or don't fly, buy a car, or get a job. We can't even go to the competition because they also have ma…

When I last purchased a car I used accepting the arbitration clause to extract $150 in accessories from the dealer. The sales agent was a bit confused, it’s usually the paperwork guy that deals with the arbitration and at point most people just want it over with..

It doesn't sound like a very big discount, to be honest.

Re: U.S. Consumer Bureau Loses Fight to Allow More Class-Action Suits

#187

Post by emodendroket »

morley wrote: post #114
dwyerm wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was offered over $1000 off to 'just sign the damned contract', but still ended up walking. I was fortunate to find a different dealer that didn't have an arbitration clause, though. I fear I wouldn't find that next time around, and was really hanging my hopes upon legislation like this.

I'm going to ask what might be a dumb question, because I don't know any better. But is there any statistical evidence that arbitration results in worse outcomes for the consumer, or is all the hate theoretical for now? People on HN and otherwise speak about arbitration like it's an auto-loss for the consumer, but it's not like our court systems are guaranteed to be much fairer. EDIT: It looks like the bottom of the…

You've found the data, but it's not surprising at all given the circumstances -- the arbiters are chosen by the company, so they know where their bread is buttered. What's more, class-action suits are just impossible under forced arbitration and who's going to go through a long process that will cost thousands because they got ripped off for a hundred bucks?

Re: U.S. Consumer Bureau Loses Fight to Allow More Class-Action Suits

#188

Post by passive »

grellas wrote: post #170

It is entirely superficial to cast this fight as one between good and evil. As much as anything, it was about proper process. Legislative, executive, judicial - those are the three branches under the Constitution that are supposed to check and balance one another. The legislature passed the federal arbitration act almost 100 years ago. It was signed into law by the president. And it has been consistently upheld by th…

This may be mostly correct, but the framing is nonsense.

Republicans, on issue after issue, don't give a shit about conforming to proper legislative processes. To pretend they have converted, on an issue that happens to benefit Wall St, and which all Democrats voted against, is willful blindness.

It's like saying there's something noble about an arsonist refusing to burn down the forest in his own backyard.

Re: U.S. Consumer Bureau Loses Fight to Allow More Class-Action Suits

#189

Post by emodendroket »

ashurbanipal wrote: post #166
fragsworth wrote: post #107

I'm losing faith in our system of government. Citibank did this to me on a credit card I had with them: 1. I stopped using the card for several months. 2. I then used it once on a small purchase. 3. They stopped sending me an e-mail reminders for my bill. (An "error" in their system disabled e-mails for my account specifically) 4. I racked up about $100 in late fees and interest charges. 5. I called them up and they…

How would this situation qualify for a class action? You don't seem to be a member of some large class of people to me.

Is this notification issue entirely localized to one person?

Re: U.S. Consumer Bureau Loses Fight to Allow More Class-Action Suits

#190

Post by emodendroket »

chillydawg wrote: post #37

Is this an opportunity for a new type of law firm that opens up to deal with one type of complaint for one company and offers extremely low fees to file? The idea would be that the paperwork is all the same for the X thousand/million people suing INDIVIDUALLY such that economies of scale take over and the cost of actually filing and pushing the suit through becomes cheap enough for almost anyone. On the side of Giant…

I don't see how that works when the plaintiff and the plaintiff's attorney still have to show up and make arguments.
Post reply on HN