[blueash]

I received a letter from JP Morgan/ Chase [they have now merged]. It is one of those things I usually don't open and go directly into the recycling bin. But this one I read and its contents need to be shared.

I have a Chase credit card. This "Important Information" letter tells me that the terms will be changing unless I opt out. I will loose my right to a judge and jury in the case of a dispute with Chase. I will forced into binding arbitration with an arbiter they agree to use. Chase and other banks were prohibited from requiring forced arbitration under an agreement they accepted in a previous legal action where the banks "misbehaved" But that agreement has expired. And the Consumer Protection Agency, doing you know what its name suggests they might do, Protect Consumers, had made a rule saying that banks could not force powerless consumers into arbitration.
However in early 2017 that policy was reversed and the banks got the protection they wanted and are now acting upon.

So if Chase accidentally enrolls you in their monthly $2.99 recurring credit monitoring program which you never signed up for, as well as say 1 million other customers making them a cool 36 million dollars a year in profit there is nothing you one million people can do except try to individually get your $36 back. No one is going to file an arbitration claim for $36 dollars or at least almost no one. And of course the fine print said if you didn't dispute the charge in the first 60 days it is final. Only class action litigation can address these "accidents" which if you keep abreast of the news happen a lot in many industries. See VW and mileage fraud. Or a very recent up to multibillion fraud by a bank


Forced arbitration is a get out of jail free card for huge corporations at the expense of consumers. You can opt out of this forced arbitration by Chase. Online sources indicate they will not cancel your credit card although I don't see that in the paperwork they sent me.


You must send a snail mail letter "stating that you reject this agreement to arbitrate and include your name, account number, address and personal signature...mailed to P O Box 15298, Wilmington DE 19850-5298." Be sure that each card holder sign this notice of rejection. Fax and email are not accepted, just a snail mail letter. Your rejection must be received by Aug 23, 2019.

It is possible that different cards have different required addresses and deadlines. Call the 800 number on the back of your card for specific information. Some consumers may be receiving this notification by email only depending on how you interact with your credit card provider.

[Boomer]

Thank you, blueash,

We have a Chase card and I would cancel and replace it. But my guess is that I could go through all that rigmarole to cancel, only to find that those in the upper echelon of all big banks are dancing in the streets, laughing at consumers who are having their rights pulled out from under them — while they are not paying attention.

Even though we do not have credit issues, this makes me wonder what kind of quagmire a consumer could be pulled into because of a data entry mistake or by identity fraud or some other version of fraud.

Unfortunately, travel arrangements, etc. make it necessary to have a credit card so we are stuck doing business with credit card companies. Consumers are abdicating their rights more and more and most do not even realize it.

[CWGUY]

Originally Posted by blueash

I received a letter from JP Morgan/ Chase [they have now merged]. It is one of those things I usually don't open and go directly into the recycling bin. But this one I read and its contents need to be shared.

I have a Chase credit card. This "Important Information" letter tells me that the terms will be changing unless I opt out. I will loose my right to a judge and jury in the case of a dispute with Chase. I will forced into binding arbitration with an arbiter they agree to use. Chase and other banks were prohibited from requiring forced arbitration under an agreement they accepted in a previous legal action where the banks "misbehaved" But that agreement has expired. And the Consumer Protection Agency, doing you know what its name suggests they might do, Protect Consumers, had made a rule saying that banks could not force powerless consumers into arbitration.
However in early 2017 that policy was reversed and the banks got the protection they wanted and are now acting upon.

So if Chase accidentally enrolls you in their monthly $2.99 recurring credit monitoring program which you never signed up for, as well as say 1 million other customers making them a cool 36 million dollars a year in profit there is nothing you one million people can do except try to individually get your $36 back. No one is going to file an arbitration claim for $36 dollars or at least almost no one. And of course the fine print said if you didn't dispute the charge in the first 60 days it is final. Only class action litigation can address these "accidents" which if you keep abreast of the news happen a lot in many industries. See VW and mileage fraud. Or a very recent up to multibillion fraud by a bank


Forced arbitration is a get out of jail free card for huge corporations at the expense of consumers. You can opt out of this forced arbitration by Chase. Online sources indicate they will not cancel your credit card although I don't see that in the paperwork they sent me.


You must send a snail mail letter "stating that you reject this agreement to arbitrate and include your name, account number, address and personal signature...mailed to P O Box 15298, Wilmington DE 19850-5298." Be sure that each card holder sign this notice of rejection. Fax and email are not accepted, just a snail mail letter. Your rejection must be received by Aug 23, 2019.

It is possible that different cards have different required addresses and deadlines. Call the 800 number on the back of your card for specific information. Some consumers may be receiving this notification by email only depending on how you interact with your credit card provider.

I don't have a dog in this fight and I'm not looking to upset anyone. What caught my attention was you NOT shredding any financial correspondence.

[Toymeister]

If you opt out your account will be closed to future charges. Call and ask and this is exactly what you will be told

Might as well just close the account outright and move on. It is vastly more satisfying

[blueash]

Originally Posted by CWGUY

I don't have a dog in this fight and I'm not looking to upset anyone. What caught my attention was you NOT shredding any financial correspondence.

Nothing financial in the form letter. Just my name and an explanation of the change in terms. Not my account number or anything else. The actual statements do get shredded. But a good warning for everyone.

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

Anyone who'd been paying attention to actual news would know this became a very real possibility in the current administration, because of the way the laws were rewritten to benefit the financial institutions.

I'm not surprised in the least that Chase did this. I wouldn't be surprised if any bank does it, or even if every bank does it. If it really bothers you, then use the power of your vote to try and change it. Other than that, I got nothing for ya. It's the world we're living in now. Either bend over and get used to it, or become part of the solution.

[aninjamom]

Reading the fine print is always a good idea. It's not just banks and credit cards; odds are that just about any company you deal with now, including Google, Amazon, that video game, your furniture store, your cable provider and your financial advisor, etc. all have an arbitration paragraph in that agreement you signed.

[queasy27]

If anyone is looking for a new credit card, USAA has several options, including cash back cards. They generally have no annual fee and fairly reasonable interest rates, although those have been increasing lately. I suspect it's moot since most of us pay in full anyway.

So far, they do not have forced arbitration.

Credit unions are sometimes not as predatory.

[retiredguy123]

If the Consumer Protection Agency wants to help bank customers, why don't they require banks to provide a clear, concise, and short document that contains all of their terms and conditions, so that customers can read and understand it?

[retiredguy123]

I don't understand everything that this law affects, but, if it prevents lawyers from filing a class action lawsuit "on my behalf" where the lawyers make millions, and I get almost nothing, then I may be in favor of it.

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

Originally Posted by retiredguy123

I don't understand everything that this law affects, but, if it prevents lawyers from filing a class action lawsuit "on my behalf" where the lawyers make millions, and I get almost nothing, then I may be in favor of it.

It prevents you from hiring a lawyer to sue the bank at all. If you have a beef with the bank, you have to go before one of THEIR arbitrators to fight it out. Since the arbitrator is on the bank's payroll, how do you think that will end?

[Velvet]

The ability to sue a bank is very important. My mother in law had an incident. She was 75 and handicapped. An individual living in her home used her credit card to purchase personal items for themselves worth several thousand dollars before MIL realized it. MIL had not authorized these purchases and the bank was stubborn. MIL had to hire her father’s law firm to sue the bank. The bank not only fully refunded her money but apologized profusely over and over again.

[dewilson58]

"arbitrator is on the bank's payroll"...............not true,

[dewilson58]

Originally Posted by retiredguy123

If the Consumer Protection Agency wants to help bank customers, why don't they require banks to provide a clear, concise, and short document that contains all of their terms and conditions, so that customers can read and understand it?

Answer = Attorneys





Everyone thinks going to court is the answer..........posts on this thread are perfect examples.

[retiredguy123]

Originally Posted by dewilson58

"arbitrator is on the bank's payroll"...............not true,

It I were an arbitrator, I would be fair to both sides, regardless of who was paying me. Isn't that their job?