The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit refused to enforce an adhesive arbitration agreement between a bank and a consumer customer already suing that bank.
The Dasher v. RBC Bank (11th Cir. Feb. 13, 2018) plaintiffs alleged the bank had processed debit card transactions in such a way that it would increase overdraft charges. When the suit was brought, the bank had no arbitration agreement with plaintiffs, but during the case the bank sent customers an amended customer agreement that included an arbitration provision. By continuing to use their bank accounts, the customers arguably assented to the amended customer agreement. But the 11th Circuit said that was overridden by the fact that, as Liz Kramer puts it, "Through counsel, the named plaintiff [customer] was fighting the motion to arbitrate in the courts."
Kramer's Arbitration Nation blog goes on to say: "This is an important decision for many reasons. First, it offers future courts an alternative argument to “waiver” in situations like this one.... Second, it offers an important reminder to defendants that courts do not take kindly to repeated motions to compel arbitration based on evolving arbitration agreements."
A blog about Arbitration law, by Stephen Ware, a law professor at KU, in Lawrence, Kansas.
Search This Blog
Showing posts with label financial arbitration. Show all posts
Showing posts with label financial arbitration. Show all posts
Thursday, February 15, 2018
Wednesday, January 15, 2014
Arbitration and Ombuds of Consumer Financial and Securities Disputes
This interesting paper by Shahla F. Ali of the University of Hong Kong Faculty of Law
contains a useful global perspective on US arbitration of consumer
financial and securities claims and one alternative to it, an ombudsman. A big question about ombuds is
what power they have over the parties and how it compares to the arbitrator’s power to issue a
legally-binding ruling.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)