Limits on AT&T v. Concepcion
U.S. District Court Says Consumer Can’t Be Forced into AT&T Arbitration
San Francisco Chronicle
May 25, 2011
In light of the AT&T Mobility v. Concepcion decision, we are now seeing attempts to limit or expand this holding by plaintiffs and defendants. In the Lucy v. Bay Area Credit Svc LLC, et al. matter, the U.S. District Court ruled that the debt collecting agency could not invoke the arbitration clause contained in Lucy’s service agreement with AT&T.
Lucy’s attorney said, “this is excellent news for consumers who are abused by debt collectors” which “sends a clear message that the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act is not going to be gutted by arbitration clauses that were never intended to cover collection activities.” Afterall, in the agreement between AT&T and the debt collection agency, it expressly states that the agency is not an agent of AT&T and therefore should not be able to hide behind the fine print of the original service agreement to compel arbitration.
Reader Comments