Lawyer Members of Judiciary Kill Consumer Bill

The Oklahoma Senate Judiciary Committee killed a bill that would have given consumers more options when they have disputes with large corporations, including a trial by jury.  The bill, SB1852, as filed by Senator Lerblance, was voted on in committee yesterday and received a tie vote, due to the power sharing agreement the bill is now dead for the remainder of the session. 

Those senators voting against the bill include Senators Williamson, Crane, Sykes, and Lamb. You can write them by clicking here and telling them how disappointed you are in their vote.

TAKE ACTION- CLICK HERE

Consumer Experience with Mandatory Arbitration

One Oklahoman recently got a taste of what arbitration clauses can do to a consumer.  The Oklahoma resident purchased a Dell computer, Dell wrongfully taxed certain items.  Dell has a mandatory arbitration clause buried in the documents they generate.  They actually put your invoice in the bottom of the box your computer is in, which has their arbitration agreement in it.  They tell you, if you are one of the few who read it, that if you don’t want to be bound by the agreement then send your computer back; otherwise you agree to be bound.

The agreement is so one sided it says that the customer agrees to be bound by arbitration.  The company can resort to the court system if they choose. 

While the SB 1852 might not have directly banned the clauses such as these due to federal law, Oklahoma transactions can still have these kinds of clauses thanks to four senators, Williamson, Crane, Sykes, and Lamb. You can write them by clicking here and telling them how disappointed you are in their vote.

TAKE ACTION- CLICK HERE

Too many businesses are taking away consumer’s right to jury trial by imposing on consumers take-it-or-leave-it contracts of adhesion by mandating binding arbitration in the fine print of the contract, often without the signer’s full or even partial understanding of the consequences.

Other problems with these agreements are that they are often one-sided, requiring only the weaker party (the consumer) to arbitrate his or her claims, while allowing the dominant party (the corporation) to sue in court on its claims.  

One of the most egregious things to consumers is that some arbitration agreements require the consumer to go to another state to seek justice.  For example, the internet auction site e-Bay requires its customers to travel to its home turf of San Jose, California to arbitrate any dispute.  Binding Mandatory Arbitration favors the corporate interest over the consumer in that it is designed to produce up-front fees that are so high that they dissuade consumers from enforcing their rights under the law.

READ MORE: TRUTH ABOUT BINDING MANDATORY ARBITRATION (CLICK HERE)

READ OUR PRESS RELEASE (CLICK HERE)

The Oklahoma Foundation for Consumer and Patient Rights takes on big industries and the politicians every day in legislatures, the courts and in the media. We also provide a number of resources for consumers to make informed decisions in the marketplace and as patients. The Foundation for Consumer and Patient Rights is a non-profit 501(c)(3) organization. We rely upon the support of people like you.

If you see the value in our research, education and advocacy, please make a contribution today. You can also donate by mail making a check payable to OKFCPR and mailing to 6539 East 31st Street, Suite 11 . Tulsa, Oklahoma 74145.

Donate Today Via Secure Server