The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) faces pressure from 170 law professors urging action on a rulemaking petition targeting pre-dispute arbitration clauses that was submitted by Public Justice, the American Association for Justice, and other consumer advocacy groups. This push aims to protect consumers from unwittingly forfeiting their rights.
According the an article by Alison Frankel for Reuters, at the heart of the issue lies a procedural debate: Does a new proposed rule, barring pre-dispute arbitration, resemble the previously rejected ban on class action waivers? Industry groups argue they're similar, rendering the CFPB unable to readdress the issue. However, law professors insist the new rule differs, offering post-dispute choices to consumers, unlike the prior one favoring class actions.
The professors stress the urgency to shield consumers, citing evidence of their misunderstanding and lack of consent regarding arbitration clauses. They emphasize the CFPB's duty to counter abusive practices, aligning with Dodd-Frank’s intentions.
On the opposing side, industry voices raise concerns about regulatory overreach, moral hazards, and the need for updated studies to justify changes.
The CFPB, maintaining neutrality, is reviewing comments without an immediate response. The decision the CFPB makes could profoundly impact consumer rights in financial agreements.
Advocate Capital, Inc. is thankful for the opportunity to support the important work done by Public Justice. If you would like to be a financial supporter, click here to be taken to Public Justice's website.
