Kia Franklin
Arbitration Horror Story… Victim Fights On
Read the story here. Then tell me arbitration is a fair and efficient process for consumers. With a straight face, that is.
Posted at 5:28 PM, Feb 20, 2008 in Arbitration | Permalink | Comments (7) | TrackBack (0)
Comments
Did you even read the story, Kia? The arbitrator issued a pro-consumer ruling, and the court violated the Federal Arbitration Act by refusing to issue a judgment on it. The arbitration worked; the corrupt Louisiana courts are what failed her.
Posted by: Ted Frank | February 27, 2008 07:09 PM
When I read the article it seems to show that arbitration works but the "tort courts" do not. The victim is fighting on because of our tort system!
Posted by: throckmorton | February 27, 2008 08:03 PM
somebody is becoming even more incoherent.
Posted by: wavemaker | February 27, 2008 09:43 PM
What value of contract performance justifies payment by the plaintiff of $800 an hour door to door for a hack retired lawyer to conduct an arbitration hearing in Fallujah, Iraq, on a work day at 2 AM?
Compare to the click and deter system of EBay, with nearly total deterrence and universal performance.
Posted by: Supremacy Claus | February 28, 2008 08:31 AM
Um . . . seems like the arbitration worked just fine here -- Right up until the point that the court defied federal law (not to mention commeon sense) and threw out the award. In what perverse alternate universe is this evidence that the arbitration system was unfair?
Posted by: Richard A. Harrison | February 28, 2008 08:47 AM
This link goes to the wrong story! My mistake and my apologies! Oh, human error.
I do think this is an important case to discuss, though, and had flagged it for such purposes. My comments and revisions will come soon. Apologies.
Posted by: Kia | February 28, 2008 10:03 AM
Kia: Can you me a favor? Buy or sell an object on EBay. I am interested in your opinion of its contract performance enforcement.
Posted by: Supremacy Claus | February 28, 2008 05:22 PM