
The Arbitration Trap: How Credit Card Companies Ensnare
Consumers
This report details how arbitration firms and credit card
companies enjoy a cozy, mutually beneficial relationship at the expense of
consumers they force into binding mandatory arbitration. Using data from
California, the findings provide a glimpse of how arbitration traps consumers
throughout the country in unfair, secret proceedings where for-profit
arbitrators make the rules. Public Citizen's research uncovered consumers who
spent years fending off collection agencies, cleaning up identity theft messes
and struggling to bounce back from credit rating hits.
Read the
testimony of Laura
MacCleery [pdf] before the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Commercial and
Administrative Law regarding the Arbitration Fairness Act of 2007
Read our
fact
sheet on the Arbitration Fairness Act of 2007
NAF
California data Jan. 2003 to Mar. 2007* [Excel file]
*This
spreadsheet consists of the information on 33,948 National Arbitration Forum
cases conducted in California between Jan. 1, 2003 and Mar. 31, 2007. It was
compiled from quarterly reports that the National Arbitration Forum posted in a
difficult-to-find place on its Web site in Adobe Systems’ Portable Document
Format (PDF). Public Citizen converted them to an Excel spreadsheet so
California residents and others interested in binding mandatory arbitration may
do their own analysis of NAF arbitrations in California and of the records of
NAF arbitrators.
The PDF reports can be found
here. To
reach the reports from the
NAF home
page, click on the Focus Areas link across the top of the page beneath the
NAF logo, and then click on “Consumer” on the drop down menu. On the consumer
page, go to the “Resources” menu on the right side of the page and click on
"California CCP 1281.96 Report."