Court Upholds Uber Forced Arbitration, Ban on Customer Lawsuits

By | August 17, 2017

  • August 17, 2017 at 1:46 pm
    Roger says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 10
    Thumb down 2

    I don’t see how it is reasonable for the appeals court to have upheld Uber’s position on this. All of these terms and conditions are interminably long (whether it’s Uber, Apple, Microsoft or any other company doing business on the internet/smartphones). No one, other than the incurably pedantic, can possibly spare the time to read them, let alone summon the inclination to do so. All organisations know this and, some of them, deliberately hide all sorts of unfair conditions within these lengthy contracts.The law should be changed so that companies are required to summarize all pertinent conditions in the first page.

    • August 17, 2017 at 3:23 pm
      Jack says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 4
      Thumb down 2

      “I didn’t read the contract so it’s not my fault” Really? Let’s just throw out contract law altogether?

      • August 17, 2017 at 3:34 pm
        okt0ber says:
        Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 6
        Thumb down 1

        Contract law is fine, but the contract has to be accessible and easily understandable to the parties subject to the contract. Otherwise it’s predatory.

  • August 19, 2017 at 9:31 am
    peter gold says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    To be sure, the Arbitration clause is in place to; 1) deny the predatory practices of “low life attorneys”, 2) allow some breathing space for both consumer & business, 3) this breathing space usually leads to decisions on both sides, using common sense and on point, meaning, a resolution that is acceptable to the needs of the consumer and the business.

    These unscrupulous attorneys that seek redress in the form of a class action, stoke the fire of greed within the heart of the consumer. One writer states, business’ contracts are predatory. But, WHOM, is the real predator??

    There are a number of legal organizations, nationally which will remain unamed, but anyone who follow this publication knows who they are. Under the guise of leading the charge to help the small, weak, poor consumer, they seek to perpetuate a cottage industry for their own.

    Look at the on line ads, promoted by firms seeking to gather plaintiffs in virtually all models, selling all types of goods and services.I say, their ads should be governed, as a matter of law. These ads are highly misleading. Has anyone ever seen a probe by any AG office regarding these? No. They are both in the same tent. One feeds off the other. They both see themselves as having the same interests and goals. The acquisition of monies and resources, whether by way of, in a government action – fines and penalties, or by a Civil Action, a court awarded Judgement.

    Most people understand, the only winner in a class action is the legal firm representing the Plaintiffs. Everyone else looses.



Add a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*