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

191–200 of 249 posts

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

#191

Post by gowld »

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…

You should go to small claims court for that. They never sent you a bill, then they lied to you. Slam dunk case.

Or just refuse to pay, and realize that a $100 charge from one vendor doesn't harm your ability to obtain credit.

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

#192

Post by gowld »

lostdog wrote: post #22
self_assembly wrote: post #18

This is probably a dumb question but I would appreciate a serious answer. How am I considered a consumer of Equifax? Aren't the consumers the people that use Equifax to check my credit? When did I ever enter into an agreement with Equifax that binds me to arbitration?

Did you freeze or lock your credit with Equifax? Have you ever checked your credit report with Equifax so you knew it would be in advance? Congratulations. You no longer have access to the court system.

That's the rumor floating around, but there is no evidence behind it. If I buy a license to of Windows, with an arbitration agreement, and then Satya Nadella hits me with his car, I don't have to go to arbitration for the car incident.

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

#193

Post by gowld »

tantalor wrote: post #110
tertius wrote: post #79

What's the best argument for this vote?

It's not very good: "the rule would harm our community banks and credit unions by opening the door to frivolous lawsuits by special interest trial lawyers." http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/10/25/559950275/...

You can understand a statement better by replacing the words "special interest" with ", and I am lying now,"

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

#194

Post by dredmorbius »

s73ver_ wrote: post #121
dredmorbius wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Information and markets fundamentally do not work . A topic I've addressed (and cited people who do not manifest on the Internet as Space Alien Cats, including Joseph Stiglitz) numerous times. And you can read for free! https://www.reddit.com/r/dredmorbius/search?q=information+ma... Or this yesterday on HN: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15540536

Ok. How do those journalists, web devs, publishers, photographers, etc pay their bills?

That's addressed at length in the links provided.

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

#195

Post by doornail »

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…

A century ago, you and I would would hammer out the terms of a contract to our mutual and equitable interest and sign it. Both of us being bound.

Today, corporations want contractual "concepts" to only apply in one direction -- against the consumer. They expect to be able to strip away legal rights in their Terms of Service and End User Licensing Agreements, while also retaining the right to change ANYTHING at ANY time they please yet still have courts treat them like binding contracts.

What we need is a core set of consumer rights that are immutable.

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

#196

Post by shostack »

noobermin wrote: post #184
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 de…

Unfortunately, this may not make the headlines nearly as much as the healthcare did.

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

#197

Post by ifhd »

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…

> meaning, it is neither unjust, unfair

It's absolutely both of those.

> but it does uphold the rules of law favoring the electorally-accountable legislative branch over the authority of an unaccountable bureau chief.

Who gave the bureau chief the power?

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

#198

Post by pktgen »

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…

> The problem with CFPB is that it sought to carve out its own view of what is right and proper for consumers of financial services without regard to the intent of Congress in having enacted the existing arbitration laws.

Dodd-Frank specifically required the CFPB to conduct a study on arbitration in financial agreements, and provided the CFPB authority to impose rules depending on the findings of that study. (12 U.S.C. § 5518, https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/12/5518)

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

#199

Post by ifhd »

dwyerm wrote: post #95
wingspar wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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..

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.

Arbitration clauses with dealers seem decidedly less evil though.

The loss of class action status is terrible and enabled atrocious corporate behavior.

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

#200

Post by ifhd »

orthecreedence wrote: post #150
tertius wrote: post #144

So I'm trying to figure out why this was even done. Here's the White House statement on it. From https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2017/10/24/state... > Statement Regarding Senate Passage of H.J. Res. 111 > President Donald J. Trump applauds the Congress for passing H.J. Res. 111, Disapproving of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau's (CFPB) Arbitration Agreements Rule. According to a recent report by t…

> 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…

> Last I checked, 2 > 1

Fake news.

Post reply on HN