Other Contributors

About Us

The contributors to the Consumer Law & Policy blog are lawyers and law professors who practice, teach, or write about consumer law and policy. The blog is hosted by Public Citizen Litigation Group, but the views expressed here are solely those of the individual contributors (and don't necessarily reflect the views of institutions with which they are affiliated). To view the blog's policies, please click here.

« How Should Businesses Deal with Online Criticism? | Main | Paper on Payment Card Security Measures »

Friday, January 11, 2013



This can appear a valid argument but there is a solution to this apparent problem: It is called pro-bono representation.
If attorneys were "requested" to contribute a certain amount of such cases to the community, weaker consumers would have access to open litigation and they would not be "hurt" by the removal of the Arbitration Clause.
I can clearly recall a situation, some 23 years ago, when a fraud perpetrated by stock brokers could only be "arbitrated" by a select panel. On close examination, the panel consisted solely of...stock brokers. Is this the kind of justice that we want to bring back?
I sincerely hope not.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Subscribe to CL&P

RSS/Atom Feed

To receive a daily email of Consumer Law & Policy content, enter your email address here:

Search CL&P Blog

Recent Posts

December 2022

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
        1 2 3
4 5 6 7 8 9 10
11 12 13 14 15 16 17
18 19 20 21 22 23 24
25 26 27 28 29 30 31