Forced Arbitration Without Opt-Outs

saver123
  |     |   13 posts since 2015

It seems EFCU is just the latest credit union to change their terms to now REQUIRE arbitration -- WITHOUT ANY Opt-Out provision. Accept arbitration or close out your account. Arbitration has become more common, but for a while, credit unions usually had an opt-out provision, as long as it was done within XX days of opening your account. No longer. Just over the last couple months I've seen more and more CUs with Forced Arbitration with NO Opt-Out, and EFCU is now the latest (slated to take effect March 2023.)

Interestingly, here's a recent article on how a court in NY found against a bank for trying to enforce their arbitration agreement by using the loophole of how you must "opt out within XX days of opening your account" -- but the bank didn't institute the Arbitration agreement until well after the one suing joined them (the old connundrum that has been talked about a lot here on DA):

https://www.consumerfinancialserviceslawmonitor.com/2022/12/federal-court-holds-that-banks-arbitrati...

However, now FIs are not even giving the consumer ANY way to Opt-Out.

If you want to stay when them, you MUST use Arbitration. This of course absolutely flies in the face of every American's right to a trial by jury, but money talks. With the banking industry lobby $$ it wasn't stopped even with the democrats in control of congress, and with republicans in control of the house now, you can absolutely forget it. The hurdles one had to go thru just to do Opt-Outs were put there to make it hard on purpose -- but now, even that isn't allowed. Waive your right to a trial by jury or close your account and keep your money under your mattress. Lovely.




lou
  |     |   1,004 posts since 2010
The cost of litigating a dispute with a credit union or bank would be prohibitively expensive and time consuming, probably far outweighing the amount of money you're disputing. Your lawyer would like it but I doubt you would. Under the circumstances most people would elect arbitration. Just because you can sue someone doesn't mean you're going to get justice in our system. In fact, it's probably less likely.
RickZ
  |     |   218 posts since 2010
The purpose of an arbitration provision is to preclude class action lawsuits (which are handled on a contingent fee basis).
lou
  |     |   1,004 posts since 2010
And where the plaintiffs' attorneys get rich at the expense of their clients.
Choice
  |     |   937 posts since 2020
The counter argument to no class actions…there must be “a lot” of disputes and under most state laws these are “consumer actions” and the business must pay the costs…with the cost, most businesses elect to waive the bar or a motion to consolidate all those arbitrations is granted…should work. Talk to an attorney
One goal in class actions is to have the business pay…focus on the pain!
lou
  |     |   1,004 posts since 2010
I am not against all class actions, just the ones where the ambulance-chasing lawyers are shopping clients to force frivolous class actions lawsuits on unsuspecting businesses to compel them to settle, providing a quick buck for these charlatan law firms. Most of these suits fall in this category.


The financial institution, product, and APY (Annual Percentage Yield) data displayed on this website is gathered from various sources and may not reflect all of the offers available in your region. Although we strive to provide the most accurate data possible, we cannot guarantee its accuracy. The content displayed is for general information purposes only; always verify account details and availability with the financial institution before opening an account. Contact [email protected] to report inaccurate info or to request offers be included in this website. We are not affiliated with the financial institutions included in this website.