Jump to content

Did Cap One remove it's arbitration clause?


GeorgiaAutoGuy
 Share

Recommended Posts

All banks have removed their arbitration clauses.

That's not true. Discover just changed the language of their arbitration clause. They removed NAF and left everything else the same. Effective date 6/30/2010

federalreserve.gov/CreditCardAgreementsContent/creditcardagreement_2184.PDF

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just looked at the cardmember agreement that I was sent from the previous proceding.

In the Arbitration section, under Misc., Waiver, and Survivability section, it says,

...Arbitration provision shall survive (i) suspension, termination, revocation, closure, or changes to this agreement, your account and your relationship with us...etc.

Hmmm...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just looked at the cardmember agreement that I was sent from the previous proceding.

In the Arbitration section, under Misc., Waiver, and Survivability section, it says,

...Arbitration provision shall survive (i) suspension, termination, revocation, closure, or changes to this agreement, your account and your relationship with us...etc.

Hmmm...

Yes it does, the contract is contract! The Cap1 did not objected in my case but informed me that I must initiate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Deadbeat - how did it gi with them?

I have two cards (business) with Cap1 5k+penalty=9k and 2k+penalty=3k

In the case of 5k+ they did not pay arbitration fee so I am planing to push them via the CRA see http://www.debt-consolidation-credit-repair-service.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1080181&postcount=1

In the case of 2K+ I am starting initiation with JAMS. In about March, I have informed them in DV letter that I have elected Arbitration and included JAMS forms, signature green card returned. They did not reacted to my Arbitration but verified the debt and included new contract without the arbitration clause and my original signature dated 2006 which triggered bunch of FDCPA violations. I have inform them of that and they did not responded, instead started their scripted harassment collection via the Global which added more FDCPA and TCPA violations. At this point it was waste of time to react to them because they pay no attention and have been waiting until I got settlement letter from their Arbitration law firm Google "Burr". I was expecting dunning letter form the local lawyer here in the California. That happened in September. They inform me that I have right to file arbitration but I must initiate. I guess under the new law they can't initiate. I like to initiate anyway because it gives me leverage against them for negotiation purposes but I do initiate against them ONLY for for their violations against me. I do not mention their debt claim. That is what they must do in their response. SO NOW THEY CAN'T SUE ME. They offered pathetic settlement of 2K removing penalties. So now I have filed with JAMS and soon they get demand from them for $800 fee and after that for $2000 and and all arbitration cost is on them. I am responsible for only $250 but have filed exemption so I pay $0.

My settlement on the table is a mutual dismissal.

I have done same in 5k+ case above and they did not responded. So now they can't sue me and they can't arbitrate so I have no clue what they are up to. I do not think that they know either. Maybe they will sell it to JDB years later. For that reason I want to also bring in the CRA since I believe that Cap1 failed to prosecute me for the alleged debt by not responding to my arbitration demand. I believe that CRA must remove the debt from the report or substantiate it by Cap1 statement which will be difficult for Cap1 to do since they did not appeared in the Arbitration.

So we will see what will happen.

In general I would ignore new contract and file arbitration anyway. There is noting they can do as you have pointed out from the arbitration clause. Stick to that clause. I would file arbitration before they file lawsuit. It will simplify the process. There are plenty of posts here on how to do that properly.

Good luck!:smile:

Edited by deadbeat00
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Deadbeat;

Thanks for all the info!

The reason that I am waiting to see if they sue me anyway (after my election to arbitrate in the DV letter) is to trigger more violations...is that not a good idea?

It will be to late for arbitration game after they serve you IMO. To file arbitration there is no need to have any prove for any violations. I would claim them anyway. I believe that they committed ample of violations accept that you do not see them.

I would file with JAMS and on the form under NATURE OF DISPUTE I would put FDCPA, FCRA, TCPA and breach of contract.

Under CLAIM & RELIEF SOUGHT BY CLAIMANT I would put $100,000

That is all you need. Do not pay $250 until they pay and Ask them to pay it for you.

Study carefully articles at this forum on this subject.;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's not true. Discover just changed the language of their arbitration clause. They removed NAF and left everything else the same. Effective date 6/30/2010

federalreserve.gov/CreditCardAgreementsContent/creditcardagreement_2184.PDF

Hmm...I recall reading in the late summer that they were going away. Thanks for the fact checking.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

In their 2005 agreement, they have this -

2005CapitalOne.gif

Notice the part about "you may make a motion or request in court to compel arbitration".

Then I notice in their 2008 agreement, that part is gone from that paragraph, but they still have it (as WearyTraveler pointed out) in 15-16.

The 2005 and the 2008 agreement both list Jams, so that is good!

Edited by Linda7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It looks like if you initiate and choose JAMS, they can't object but if they initiate and choose AAA, you can object and have it changed to JAMS.

AAA is running just short of NAF in its attitudes and actions towards consumers so YEAH...go with JAMS...lol

RL

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was under the impression that even though most are removing their arbitration clauses... in 2010 for the most part, all prettymuch had them still there as of 12-31-2009.

I was told, that the contract in agreement either during the year the account was defaulted on or the year that the account was closed was the contract you would follow.

So, if the default happened 2009 or earlier, you can elect arbitration.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was under the impression that even though most are removing their arbitration clauses... in 2010 for the most part, all prettymuch had them still there as of 12-31-2009.

I was told, that the contract in agreement either during the year the account was defaulted on or the year that the account was closed was the contract you would follow.

So, if the default happened 2009 or earlier, you can elect arbitration.

Yes, the reason being is typically you accept new terms to credit card agreements via using the card. If you defaulted prior to 12/31/2009, you don't have the ability to accept new terms in the customary way via charges and payments.

My understanding is once you default what ever contract was in place is the terms of agreement. Remember default is 1st missed payment, they don't charge off until 6 missed payments. If your first missed payment was 12/2009 they may not have charged off the account until June 2010. You should still be under the contract with arbitration.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And don't forget this -

CapitalOnemisc.gif

It is my understanding that it doesn't matter if they did take out arbitration - "if" you had an account with them at any time that had arbitration, this part of the agreement will still give you arbitration rights. Check out the part - "This arbitration provision will survive . . . changes of this agreement!!" The only way Capital One can get away from arbitration is people not knowing about this or the actual brand new accounts that have started that never had the arbitration clause.

Edited by Linda7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yuppers...they were given enough rope and they have successfully hung themselves with it. (ahhhh...poor them...lol)

Its funny how when NAF was administering arbitration, the cc issuers were first in line to initiate arbitration. NAF was their best friend! Now that their 'best friend' is gone...they want to change the rules to make it 'more fair' for them. When it was totally unfair for the consumer...all was well.

And I can't wait for the court rulings as mentioned in another thread on this site about the window closing. How are they gonna get around the 'survivability clauses' of these contracts? Can they simply take out the parts of the contracts that no longer suit them and still leave the rest intact? And wouldn't picking and choosing which parts of the contract stay and which parts go make the entire contract null and void?

This will be interesting to watch...

RL

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...

I have a question regarding the arbitration option.

Actually, I'm not sure if I have that option or not.

I had a Cap 1 account opened in 12/2009, charged off in 2011.

Being that this forum post is from 2010, is there anything that contradicts today that I should be able to initiate my right for arbitration?

I'm hoping to be able to go this route, but obviously, all current agreements with Cap1 no longer have the arbitration clause and I don't know if what the last poster stated, that:

Arbitration provision shall survive (i) suspension, termination, revocation, closure, or changes to this agreement, your account and your relationship with us...etc.

has held up in a court.

Thank you so much in advance for your assistance with this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Arbitration provision shall survive (i) suspension, termination, revocation, closure, or changes to this agreement, your account and your relationship with us...etc.

has held up in a court.

If your 2009 agreement has that clause in it; you should be good to go.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have a question regarding the arbitration option.

Actually, I'm not sure if I have that option or not.

I had a Cap 1 account opened in 12/2009, charged off in 2011.

Being that this forum post is from 2010, is there anything that contradicts today that I should be able to initiate my right for arbitration?

I'm hoping to be able to go this route, but obviously, all current agreements with Cap1 no longer have the arbitration clause and I don't know if what the last poster stated, that:

Arbitration provision shall survive (i) suspension, termination, revocation, closure, or changes to this agreement, your account and your relationship with us...etc.

has held up in a court.

Thank you so much in advance for your assistance with this.

The 2008 and 2009 Capital One agreements were one and the same. If you opened an account in 2009, Capital One sent you an agreement from 2008 as nothing had changed. It wasn't until December 2009 that they decided to take out the arbitration provision and then early in 2010 sent out the new agreements and notices of the change. However, if you had already opened the account under the arbitration provision (and you did) then you are covered by the survivability clause.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you for your response.

That being said, would I be better off, or in a better position negotiating an amount rather than paying off entire amount shown due going through the arbitration process, and I've heard many things about initiating the process pre-trial with JAMS.

I am not familiar with arbitration whatsoever, but from everything I'm reading, if I have the ability to work it out in this process it takes it completely away from the courts?

Is JAMS a fair arbitrator? (Hope I'm titling that correctly) and if I go ahead and pay the fee and initiate that, what are my chances of the judge allowing this in MI?)

Just wondering if anyone has any ideas on this.

Thanks so much again for your assistance :)

ADDITIONALLY:

My debt with Cap 1 is apparently still owned by Cap 1 according to all the paperwork sent to me by the assigned attny.

I'm wondering why if I offered to settle for a lesser amount, not substantially lower, but a lesser amount, why they would not consult with their clients (Cap 1) on that before telling me unequivocally no.

Edited by cleanitup
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you for your response.

That being said, would I be better off, or in a better position negotiating an amount rather than paying off entire amount shown due going through the arbitration process, and I've heard many things about initiating the process pre-trial with JAMS.

I am not familiar with arbitration whatsoever, but from everything I'm reading, if I have the ability to work it out in this process it takes it completely away from the courts?

Is JAMS a fair arbitrator? (Hope I'm titling that correctly) and if I go ahead and pay the fee and initiate that, what are my chances of the judge allowing this in MI?)

Just wondering if anyone has any ideas on this.

Thanks so much again for your assistance :)

ADDITIONALLY:

My debt with Cap 1 is apparently still owned by Cap 1 according to all the paperwork sent to me by the assigned attny.

I'm wondering why if I offered to settle for a lesser amount, not substantially lower, but a lesser amount, why they would not consult with their clients (Cap 1) on that before telling me unequivocally no.

Have you read this thread - http://www.creditinfocenter.com/forums/arbitration/314030-strategy-steps-arbitration.html

And for Michigan, you need to file a brief in support as will be pointed out in this thread below.

Submitted this MTC Arbitration (MI) to the court today so please critique :)

I'm sending you a pm in a minute. :)++

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.. For more information, please see our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.