CONSUMER NEWS RECALLS COMPLAINT FORM SCAM ALERTS

Small Claims Guide \| Class Actions \| Lemon Law \| FAQ \| Resources \| Newsletters \| Spanish
Automotive Education Electronics Family Finance Health Homeowners Shopping Travel

Homeowners Hung Out To Dry By Arbitration Clauses

August 20, 2004

Forced Arbitration
• Court Rules Credit Card Arbitration Lawsuit Can Go Forward
• Court Throws Out T-Mobile's Forced Arbitration Clause
• Mandatory Arbitration Stacks Deck Against Consumers
• Appeals Court Shreds AT&T Arbitration Clause
• Court Rules for Consumers in Arbitration Challenges
• Texas Court Invalidates KB Home's Forced Arbitration
• North Carolina Court Strikes Down CitiFinancial's Arbitration
• Suit Says Banks Conspired to Force Consumers Into Arbitration
• Arbitrator Declares Class-Action Ban Unfair
• Homeowners Hung Out To Dry By Arbitration Clauses
• Supreme Court Upholds AT&T Customers' Right to Day in Court
• AT&T Can't Require Arbitration, Court Rules
• Judge Overturns PayPal Arbitration Policy
• W. Va. Court Rejects Forced Arbitration
• Chevy Chase Ruling Casts Doubt on Arbitration Clauses
• Consumers Unwittingly Giving Up Their Right to Sue

A national consumer group charges Colorado homeowners are at a distinct disadvantage when they try to settle disputes over defects in their houses.

Public Citizen has asked Colorado insurance commissioners to investigate whether insurance companies have been improperly requiring homebuyers to arbitrate disputes using Construction Arbitration Services (CAS), a private firm that hears cases over defects in new homes.

In letters to state officials, Public Citizen describes how CAS is co-owned by a former lawyer who was disbarred for stealing client funds and operates in apparent violation of 12 states' laws.

The letters also request investigations of the Home Buyers Warranty (HBW) companies, which insure many homebuilders and have designated CAS as the sole legal forum available to tens of thousands of Americans who buy new homes each year.

Arbitration is a private legal system that is usually less favorable to consumers than the court system. The HBW companies have selected CAS to arbitrate cases filed against them, despite CAS's co-ownership by Marshall Lippman, who Public Citizen says was disbarred by the state of New York in 1997. Lippman has reportedly told a Texas state legislator that CAS arbitrates such disputes in all 50 states - even though 11 states prohibit arbitration clauses in insurance contracts.

In addition, Public Citizen says it has received a letter, signed by CAS's other owner, Lester Wolff, refusing to comply with California's law requiring disclosure of all arbitration outcomes.

"When arbitrators are selected by the business defending the lawsuit, the arbitrator's bias will be to rule in the business's favor or award less than full damages. In this instance, we see that the HBW companies have very low loss ratios, indicating that CAS may allow them to systematically deny or underpay valid claims from homeowners," said Jackson Williams, legislative counsel for Public Citizen.

Public Citizen's letter to the commissioners in the four states where HBW companies are domiciled-Colorado (where HBW is headquartered), Hawaii, Nevada and Virginia-asks that HBW's claims procedures be scrutinized for patterns of unfair practices.

The letter tells commissioners that "Lippman's position in CAS is analogous to that of a supervisory judge in a court system. If you are one of the many thousands of Americans who buy newly constructed homes each year, Mr. Lippman wields more influence over your life than the Chief Justice of the United States. It is simply shocking that someone with this record of dishonesty has been entrusted by insurers with so much power."

Additional letters to commissioners in 11 states where arbitration clauses are banned from insurance contracts - Arkansas, Georgia, Hawaii, Kentucky, Louisiana, Nebraska, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Virginia and Washington - ask that those laws be enforced against HBW and CAS. Another letter asks California's commissioner to order HBW and CAS to comply with that state's disclosure law.

Another way that CAS arbitration is uniquely disadvantageous to consumers is CAS's policy of making consumers pay the entire cost of the arbitration process - $500 or more. All other major arbitration providers limit the consumer's filing fee to $375 or less, making the business that selects arbitration pay the biggest share of the cost.

The letters were made public at today's session of the Insurance Regulatory Examiners Society (IRES) annual conference, held in Denver. One of the IRES conference workshops is devoted to the issue of mandatory arbitration. IRES members, who staff the various state insurance departments, are in the front lines of insurance regulation and have authority to conduct the investigations requested by Public Citizen.

Report Your Experience
If you've had a bad experience -- or a good one -- with a consumer product or service, we'd like to hear about it. All complaints are reviewed by class action attorneys and are considered for publication on our site. Knowledge is power! Help spread the word. File your consumer report now.

July 5 2008

Print, mail, etc.

FREE CONSUMER NEWSLETTERS

The Daily Consumer
Afternoons M-F
Sign up now!

Consumer News & Alerts
Every Sunday
Sign up now!

Knowledge is free.
Knowledge is power.

Back to the top |

Terms of Use Your use of this site constitutes acceptance of the Terms of Use

Advertisements on this site are placed and controlled by outside advertising networks. ConsumerAffairs.com does not evaluate or endorse the products and services advertised. See the FAQ for more information.

Company Response Welcome If complaints about your company appear on our site, we welcome your response. Please see the Response Form for more information.

For more information, see the FAQ and privacy policy. The information on this Web site is general in nature and is not intended as a substitute for competent legal advice. ConsumerAffairs.com Inc. makes no representation as to the accuracy of the information herein provided and assumes no liability for any damages or loss arising from the use thereof.