Congress votes to disallow consumers from suing Equifax and other companies with arbitration agreeme

GURPS

INGSOC
PREMO Member
Look at the way the votes were split and who cast the dividing vote and tell me that Trump has the best interests of the people at heart and is not just a different type of swamp.

https://techcrunch.com/2017/10/24/c...-other-companies-with-arbitration-agreements/


what does Trump have to do with the way CONGRESS Votes
do you not understand how the different branches of Gov Work.

there are already 23 separate lawsuits against Equifax seeking Class Action Status



Equifax removed the arbitration rule anyhow, public condemnation worked
 
Last edited:

transporter

Well-Known Member
what does Trump have to do with the way CONGRESS Votes
do you not understand how the different branches of Gov Work.

there are already 23 separate lawsuits against Equifax seeking Class Action Status



Equifax removed the arbitration rule anyhow, public condemnation worked

Obviously YOU are the one who doesn't understand how the three branches of govt work. Michael Pence, the Vice President of the United States, broke a 50-50 tie on this vote. The final vote therefore was 51-50.

Mr. Pence voted as he was instructed to do by the President.

As additional evidence of your stupidity and lack of understanding, a law or regulation governs all instances covered under that law or regulation. The Equifax situation was a single item in a single circumstance. No other contract has been changed.

So just to sum up...YOU aren't very bright.
 

This_person

Well-Known Member
Mr. Pence voted as he was instructed to do by the President.

This is a fact, verifiable, or your assumption?

As additional evidence of your stupidity and lack of understanding, a law or regulation governs all instances covered under that law or regulation. The Equifax situation was a single item in a single circumstance. No other contract has been changed.

It changed a single rule, not a single company's form of it.
 

Sapidus

Well-Known Member
Obviously YOU are the one who doesn't understand how the three branches of govt work. Michael Pence, the Vice President of the United States, broke a 50-50 tie on this vote. The final vote therefore was 51-50.

Mr. Pence voted as he was instructed to do by the President.

As additional evidence of your stupidity and lack of understanding, a law or regulation governs all instances covered under that law or regulation. The Equifax situation was a single item in a single circumstance. No other contract has been changed.

So just to sum up...YOU aren't very bright.

These people are so obsessed with the narrative that Trump is their savior that they are now defending him and Pence from acting against their best interests. This is exactly how dictatorships start and these morons think they are free thinkers. So sad
 

This_person

Well-Known Member
These people are so obsessed with the narrative that Trump is their savior that they are now defending him and Pence from acting against their best interests. This is exactly how dictatorships start and these morons think they are free thinkers. So sad

Look at the way the votes were split and who cast the dividing vote and tell me that Trump has the best interests of the people at heart and is not just a different type of swamp.

Please explain your objection.

Still waiting.
 

GURPS

INGSOC
PREMO Member
These people are so obsessed with the narrative that Trump is their savior that they are now defending him and Pence from acting against their best interests.

that is YOUR Progressive OPINION

This is exactly how dictatorships start and these morons think they are free thinkers.

Yes how many dictators of the 20th Century were leftists
so you have not facts to add, so you shift to insults


Yes, You Are Sad ....
 

Sapidus

Well-Known Member
Still waiting.

You should watch a Documentary called “Hot Coffee”

You would learn a lot about tort reform and this subject.


I object to the fact that companies s are allowed to limit their damages and take the power away from judicial system and monetize it. They also then benefit by having lawyers to minimize their damages vs law people who may have been injured by their products.

How is that a difficult position to understand?

Just like Citizens United it is shifting the balance of power unfairly to favor corporations who have more lawyers, Time and money to craft these agreements. many people unwillingly opt in to these just by purchasing something.

The EPA’’s decision to deregulate over 30 dangerous chemicals and the limiting of people’s rights to sue shoud they be injured by those chemicals should outrage every American.
 

This_person

Well-Known Member
I object to the fact that companies s are allowed to limit their damages and take the power away from judicial system and monetize it. They also then benefit by having lawyers to minimize their damages vs law people who may have been injured by their products.

Please explain how this does that.
 

Sapidus

Well-Known Member
Please explain how this does that.
Can you not read? Do you prefer I come
Over and dictate all the news to you?


This law allows companies to force consumer into arbitration. The results of which are generally under a gag order. So a company that makes a product can injure hundreds of consumers while quietly paying them off a small sum. Consumers then have no way of knowing the product is dangerous and continue to use it until the cost of arbitration is too much for the company or they redesign a faulty product.

They no longer will have to litigate these cases in public or say if they knew about the issue prior to sale and deem the risk worth the reward.

“It robs consumers of their most effective legal tool against corporate wrongdoing,” Cordray said. “As a result, companies like Wells Fargo and Equifax remain free to break the law without fear of legal blowback from their customers.”

George Slover, senior policy counsel for Consumers Union, said the vote “means that big financial companies can lock the courthouse doors and prevent consumers who’ve been mistreated from joining together to seek the relief they deserve under the law.”

For years, Wells Fargo used arbitration clauses to block lawsuits from customers who alleged that unauthorized accounts had been opened in their names. Ultimately, the bank estimated that as many as 3.5 million such accounts were opened.

The bank agreed to settle some class-actions suits, but not until the CFPB, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency and the Los Angeles city attorney’s office fined the bank over those practices last year. Even in cases that the bank settled, it had argued that the plaintiffs could not sue because of arbitration clauses.”


http://www.latimes.com/topic/business/equifax-ORCRP005319-topic.html



Watch Hot Coffe. You will see the same exact thing happened with story reform years ago to the detriment of the consumer
 

black dog

Free America
Watch Hot Coffy. You will see the same exact thing happened with story reform years ago to the detriment of the consumer

I told you before, We would take the bus to Anacostia to see Pam Grier's newest movie.
Coffy was ok but nothing special..

220px-Coffy.jpg
 

Restitution

New Member
I object to the fact that companies s are allowed to limit their damages and take the power away from judicial system and monetize it. They also then benefit by having lawyers to minimize their damages vs law people who may have been injured by their products.
.

But I guess you are perfectly fine with medical providers that can no longer afford to provide 'affordable' services due to the outrageous costs of malpractice insurance since jurys have awarded BILLIONS in lawsuit decisions? You are perfectly fine paying 200 to 300% of what the same services cost just a few years ago?

Of course you are. I am guessing you don't pay a cent! Probably the tax payers picking up the tab.....amiright?
 
Top