Chris Morran
Chris Morran is a blogger for The Consumerist. Morran frequently writes attacks on arbitration that grossly misrepresent the facts. This page will clarify the truth about arbitration.
Morran's misconceptions
Attorney general actions
Morran wrote that, if a user agrees to Instagram's arbitration clause, "if your state’s Attorney General takes Instagram to court over any sort of violation that could result in settlements with a class of users, you’re out of luck."[1] This is false. An individual arbitration clause is not binding on a government nonparty (like a state Attorney General) and cannot prevent that nonparty from obtaining individual classwide relief. See EEOC v. Waffle House, Inc., 534 U.S. 279, 294 (2002), Rent-a-Center, Inc. v. Iowa Civil Rights Com'n, 843 N.W. 727, 728 (Iowa 2014), Joulé, Inc. v. Simmons, 459 Mass. 88, 95 (2011).
Damages limitations
Morran argues that damages that can be awarded in arbitration are limited.[2] This is incorrect. (fill in explanation later)
Opting out
Morran argues that consumers should always opt out of arbitration because you "[c]an still agree to arbitrate, if you would prefer that option."[3] This is bad legal advice. In the absence of a predispute arbitration agreement, a consumer cannot choose to arbitrate a claim against a business without the business's consent.
References
- ↑ https://consumerist.com/2012/12/21/heres-how-to-opt-out-of-instagrams-new-arbitration-clause/
- ↑ https://consumerist.com/2015/12/22/debt-collectors-can-sue-you-but-court-might-not-let-you-sue-debt-collector-back/
- ↑ https://consumerist.com/2014/02/25/why-you-should-opt-out-of-forced-arbitration-in-3-sentences/