Another ruling against mandatory arbitration clauses

Early last month, a judge ruled that the provision in T-Mobile’s contract that mandated arbitration was “unconscionable” and “unenforceable.” Last week, a judge ruled similarly with Cingular/AT&T’s contract, allowing disgruntled customers to band together and sue the company as a class. Or, as Consumerist puts it: “Therefore, lawsuits can proceed against Cingular and go to real court, not monkey court. Hooray!”

[Consumerist]

Related Posts

3 Responses

1. AT&T sued over poor service | Prepaid Reviews Says
   

   [...] in California ruled that the provision in AT&T’s contract that bars class action suits was unconscionable, and that such a case could proceed against them. Today, we bring you the case. It seems that some [...]

   
   Posted on August 21st, 2007 at 9:00 am
2. A surefire way to avoid an early termination fee | Prepaid Reviews Says
   

   [...] though, is a good thing for the slow elimination of unfair contracts. We’re already seeing mandatory arbitration clauses being struck down. Now let’s get greedy and work for [...]

   
   Posted on August 22nd, 2007 at 9:02 am
3. Cause and effect: Suing your wireless carrier | Prepaid Reviews Says
   

   [...] behind, a 9th Circuit judge ruled last week that the clause in AT&T’s contract that bars class action suits is unenforceable. This comes a month or so after the same ruling was made against T-Mobile. [...]

   
   Posted on August 24th, 2007 at 10:34 am

Leave a Reply