|
Support HOBB |
|
|
Who's Online |
|
We have 1 guest and 1 member online |
|
|
Organizing your community to bring public attention to builder’s bad deeds and seeking assistance from local, state and federal elected officials has proven to be more effective and much quicker for thousands of families. You do have choices and alternatives. Janet Ahmad |
Arbitration Latest News |
|
Jordan Fogal Testifies in Washington DC on Binding Arbitration |
|
Tuesday, 12 June 2007 |
|
The Subcommittee on Commercial and Administrative Law
Mandatory Binding Arbitration Agreements: Are They Fair For Consumers?
Foreclosure rates are in the news almost every day, but bad builders and arbitration clauses don't make the news. The majority of us have no voice. We are threatened with arbitration, and most are confused and afraid. Some homeowners patch up their new houses and dump them on the next unsuspecting buyer. Some houses in my neighborhood have had as many as five owners. Previous owners are being sued by new owners. We can sue each other for non-disclosure, but the builders are above the law.
|
|
Read more...
|
|
|
MSN Money: Binding Arbitration Not Good For Consumers |
|
Thursday, 17 May 2007 |
|
Arbitration ties consumers' hands
Unhappy customers used to threaten, "I'll see you in court!" That often won't work anymore. These days, consumers are increasingly forced to resolve disputes via mandatory binding arbitration. Unfortunately, though many people now are covered by binding-arbitration agreements, most don't know what they are, how they work, when they come into play or who would decide the fate of their complaints. Businesses love binding arbitration. For them it's a faster and cheaper way to settle disputes and a great way to generate debt collections. |
|
Read more...
|
|
|
Anti-Binding Arbitration Movement Growing |
|
Saturday, 12 May 2007 |
|
Card Check: Binding Arbitration Invites Trouble
More excellent work comes from the Heritage Foundation's James Sherk on the spuriously named Employee Free Choice Act... Congress should reject the idea of forcing workers into binding arbitration because it would put millions of American's retirement security at risk. Unaccountable government arbitrators could force newly organized workers into severely underfunded multiemployer pension plans. Employers' retirement contributions would shore up union finances, rather than provide for their workers' retirements. It is understandable that unions support binding arbitration, but Congress should not give into their demands. |
|
Read more...
|
|
|
House Bill 1338 - Homeowner Protection Act of 2007 to restore legal rights |
|
Sunday, 01 April 2007 |
|
Colorado Senator Veiga Discusses Homeowner Protection Act
Home buyers deserve a threshold of basic legal proteections, according to Senator Jennifer Veiga (D-Denver), and a new measure introduced in the House will give homeowners the legal foundation to protect themselves against predatory home builders. House Bill 1338 will enact the Homeowner Protection Act of 2007, making it illegal for home builders to force or coerce buyers into signing away their rights. The Homeowner Protection Act will restore the rights of home buyers, by making these waivers illegal. "This measure is pro consumer," said Senator Veiga. "It is a fair and accurate balance between builders and buyers." |
|
Read more...
|
|
|
Binding Abritration decision devistating for homebuyer in California |
|
Sunday, 01 April 2007 |
|
C.A.: State Law Banning Forced Arbitration Preempted
The Federal Arbitration Act preempts a California law that bars enforcement of predispute arbitration agreements in construction and design defect disputes, the Third District Court of Appeal has ruled... The defendants asked Judge Suzanne Kingsbury to compel Shepard to comply with a binding arbitration clause in the real estate purchase agreement. Shepard opposed the motion on the basis of Code of Civil Proceedure Sect. 1298.7, which permits a purchaser of real property to pursue defect litigation regardless of any arbitration clause. |
|
Read more...
|
|
|
Two Binding Arbitration Bills Filed |
|
Tuesday, 13 March 2007 |
|
Leveling the Arbitration Playing Field for Consumers
Consumers and state legislators are quite concerned about these practices, but there is an incorrect perception that states can do little about this because of the preemptive effect of the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) and other federal law. This model law developed by the
National
Consumer
Law
Center
avoids such preemption and significantly limits abuses in this area. The model demonstrates that states have broad authority to regulate such abuses, despite the preemptive effect of the FAA. |
|
Read more...
|
|
|
Texas Curbing Mandatory Arbitration |
|
Saturday, 03 March 2007 |
|
Progress on Curbing Mandatory Arbitration in Texas
As predicted this year is shaping up to be one of the best in many years, for the restoration of consumer protection rights. The filing of a bill (HB1686) by Representative Ruth Jones McClendon of Texas last week has to rank as one of the most exciting news events thus far.The McClendon bill would effectively ban the use of binding mandatory arbitration (BMA) agreements in contracts for new homes as well as home repairs. |
|
Read more...
|
|
|
Pattern of Binding Mandatory Arbitration (BMA) - Builder Wins Again |
|
Saturday, 03 March 2007 |
|
Why? Question About Arbitration
After enduring the three day insidious arbitration process and three years of torment, my husband and I received our "Award of the Arbitrator from the American Arbitration Association ("AAA"). (It takes thirty days for the arbitrator to make a ruling. Those days are referred to as post study. We were billed $1687.00 dollars, for her painstaking post study, for an already made-up mind.)...We are staring at this piece of paper issued because we were fraudulently induced to purchase a substandard, defective, $360,000 dollar, uninhabitable house. This award says: for our attempt to exercise our seventh amendment rights and for going before a judge for a hearing, on fraud becasue of fraud we are to pay the builders, Tremont/Stature, $14,597.50. We are to pay them because WE breached the contract. |
|
Read more...
|
|
|
Tort Deform Blog: The Two Faces of the National Arbitration Forum |
|
Friday, 02 March 2007 |
Valkyrie Hanson: The Two Faces of the National Arbitration Forum
Adrianne was forced into arbitration by dept collectors for an alleged dept she owed on an MBNA credit card. The dispute was handled by the National Arbitration Forum or (NAF). The entire proceeding went on without her knowledge or a chance to clear it up. It would be bad enough if the story ended there, but it gets worse. Adrianne has never held an account with MBNA and she didnt owe the money. She was notified of the alleged dept and the secret arbitration proceeding 3 months after the award was granted to the dept collector. She was told that she owed close to $15,000.00. When she inquired about the mysterious account and the debt, the sum suddenly changed to $8,000.00. Despite the fact that Adrianne never held an account with MBNA and did not owe the debt, NAF refuses to vacate the award. |
|
Read more...
|
|
|
Bill address Binding Arbitration Clauses in Builder Contracts |
|
Saturday, 24 February 2007 |
|
A service to homebuyers
The lead article in the Denver & the West section of last week's Sunday Denver Post took on a very important topic: the rights of homeowners to sue homebuilders over defective construction. Unfortunately, the article was missing some important information. The article, by Karen Crummy, looked at the current debate in the state legislature about a bill to prohibit new home sales contracts in which the buyer waives some of his rights to sue the homebuilder. The article performed a very important public service by informing readers that some of these waivers may be unenforceable in court, according to a University of Denver professor. Related article: Homebuyers cede rights
|
|
Read more...
|
|
| << Start < Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next > End >>
| | Results 56 - 66 of 106 |
|
|