Arbitration

[gregtu]

Arbitration

Arbitration is submission of a dispute to one or more impartial parties for a final and binding decision. The arbitrators may be attorneys or business people with expertise in a particular field. The parties control the range of issues to be resolved by arbitration, the scope of the relief to be awarded, and many of the procedural aspects of the process. Arbitration is less formal than a court trial, the hearing is private. The courts review few awards because the parties have agreed to be bound by the decision of their arbitrator. In some cases, it is prearranged that the award will only be advisory.



Why Arbitrate?

Most creditors do not want to become involved in lawsuits. Litigation can entail lengthy delays, high costs, unwanted publicity, and ill will. Appeals might be filed, causing further delay, after a decision has been rendered. Arbitration, on the other hand, is usually faster and less expensive, and it is also conclusive.



Some important points about arbitration:



* Speed: Despite the best efforts of our court systems to improve processing time, the burdens of criminal cases, tight budgets, and other factors still create delays of years to bring a case to court in many jurisdictions. Appeals extend the time required to reach a result still further.

* Choice and expertise of impartial neutrals: Parties who resolve their disputes through ADR enjoy the assistance of neutrals that are already expert in the subject matter of their disputes. The panel consists of expert and knowledgeable neutrals from many professions and industries.

* Informality and flexibility: ADR is conducted in a manner that is more business-like than litigation. Each party tells its side of the story to the arbitrator in an atmosphere that is less formal than a court proceeding.

* Privacy: Arbitration, Mediation and other forms of ADR are not open to public scrutiny like disputes settled in court. The hearings and awards are kept private and confidential, which helps to preserve positive working relationships.

* Economy: Time saved is money saved. ADR processes are designed to be faster, more streamlined, and more informal than litigation. Many of the costly procedures associated with formal court processes, such as filing appeals and motions can be eliminated.

* Finality: Arbitration awards are final, binding, and legally enforceable, subject only to limited review by the courts. The court does not second-guess the arbitrator's decision as to the facts or the law. Of course, parties may also agree in advance that awards will be advisory only.<font color=red>[/color][b]

[gregtu]

The courts review few awards because the parties have agreed to be bound by the decision of their arbitrator.

[chuckhs12]

gregtu,



How would you use this process to resolve defaults on the banks and cc's not answering your request for verification of debt?



I have been following other threads on this subject.



chuckhs12

Yeah arbitration is bad news in my opinions because you the alleged debtor is essentially waiving your rights under the law. This is because arbitrators are not bound by the substantive laws found in cases, statutes, etc. and can basically decide the case any way they choose so long as they comply with a few exceptions to this rule (i.e. arbs must not engage in impropriety, be baised, exceed their power to arbitrate, etc.)

[Jerseee]

good analysis cute chick.

I recently read the entire NAF "Code of Procedure". About 50 pages of pretty poorly written BS. As discussed in other threads, I can confirm that you are under absolutely NO obligation to participate in their "arbitration".



As stated in RULE 1. A.



Parties who contract for or agree to arbitration provided by the Forum or this Code of Procedure agree that this Code governs their arbitration proceedings, unless the Parties agree to other procedures.



RULE 13.A.2. states:



Upon service of an initial Claim, Counter Claim, Cross-claim, or Third Party Claim on a Respondent, the Respondent shall serve on the Claimant and file with the Forum, within thirty (30) days from receipt of service, a Response which shall include: an objection to the arbitration of the Claim, if the Respondent so objects. <u>A Response that does not assert this objection is an agreement to the arbitration of the Claim and a waiver of this objection;</u> [my emphasis]



Thus, if you respond with anything other than very specific verbiage as defined in 13.A.2,, they will consider you to have accepted their "Offer" and to you having granted them jurisdiction over you. The NAF response letter in the downloads section very nicely handles rejecting their "Offer" without dishonor.



Further on in the NAF "Code", it states that their arbitration procedure is based on 9 U.S.C.§§ 1-16 and 9 U.S.C.§§ 201 - 208.

I read all of it. Here is the most interesting thing that I found:



§ 202. Agreement or award falling under the Convention

Release date: 2004-02-11

An arbitration agreement or arbitral award arising out of a legal relationship, whether contractual or not, which is considered as commercial, including a transaction, contract, or agreement described in section 2 of this title, falls under the Convention. An agreement or award arising out of such a relationship which is entirely <u>between citizens of the United States</u> [my emphasis] shall be deemed not to fall under the Convention unless that relationship involves property located abroad, envisages performance or enforcement abroad, or has some other reasonable relation with one or more foreign states. For the purpose of this section a corporation is a citizen of the United States if it is incorporated or has its principal place of business in the United States.



Ergo, if you are considered a U.S. Citizen for pruposes of the arbitration and its award, then the award does NOT apply to you. Please tell me if I am reading this correctly. It would seem a solid basis for voiding arbitration "awards" in which they trap/trick you into becoming a "Respondent" as well as follow up jugdments based on these "awards".

[Jerseee]

Buscador,



it is either US Citizen or citizen of the United States.



One is in reference to the corporate side the other to the republic.

I have uploaded a copy of the NAF procedure handbook for anyone who is interested. Should be available in a couple of days.

[b][color=green]Jerseee,



I understand the distinction between "citizen of the United States" and "U.S. Citizen". However, in <u>this</u> particular section of <u>this</u> Code, "citizen" is defined as "U.S. Citizen". That is why I wrote "U.S. Citizen".



That having been said, my question still stands.

[Jerseee]

Answer:



Let your accusor prove his claim.