Non-legal Arbitration Language

[NPN]

I seem to recall running across a post about Non-legal Arbitration Language to include with the final purchase agreement. Anyone?

 

[Alex]

I seem to recall running across a post about Non-legal Arbitration Language to include with the final purchase agreement. Anyone?

I'm not sure about non-legal arbitration language, but there was talk about that you should opt out of the arbitration and I think you have 60 days to do it by sending an email to a specific address. See https://lucidowners.com/threads/opt-out-pros-and-cons.618/

 

[Pete44]

There is a thread on that called opt out pros and cons. Or just search for arbitration.

 

[WildRide47]

I opted out. Down at the bottom of the purchase agreement it tells you where to e-mail your decision to opt out. Once sent, I got back confirmation from Lucid.

 

[NPN]

Thanks for all the useful replies. You all figured out what I was looking for despite my inept description!

 

[Steveinarizona]

I would opt out but...then...I am a retired litigator so I wouldn't have any attorney cost expenses if I ever had to sue. I don't anticipate needing to do so but it would be a nice retirement gig.

For others...the cost is much less if one uses arbitration but arbitration tends to be company biased. So one pays one's money and takes one's chances (paraphrase of a Tammany Hall politician at the turn of the 20th century).

 

[Paladin732]

I would opt out but...then...I am a retired litigator so I wouldn't have any attorney cost expenses if I ever had to sue. I don't anticipate needing to do so but it would be a nice retirement gig.

For others...the cost is much less if one uses arbitration but arbitration tends to be company biased. So one pays one's money and takes one's chances (paraphrase of a Tammany Hall politician at the turn of the 20th century).

My understanding is a large reason arbitration tends to be company based is because people are absolutely terrible about arguing their cases. So you end up with an inexperienced end user arguing against an experienced litigator in front of the arbitrator. The litigator will run circles around the end user.

The actual arbitrator is often not biased, its just the process creates an innate bias.

I would expect someone like yourself to do quite well in an arbitration case.

 

[Steveinarizona]

My understanding is a large reason arbitration tends to be company based is because people are absolutely terrible about arguing their cases. So you end up with an inexperienced end user arguing against an experienced litigator in front of the arbitrator. The litigator will run circles around the end user.

The actual arbitrator is often not biased, its just the process creates an innate bias.

I would expect someone like yourself to do quite well in an arbitration case.

I think the reason is different. Arbitrators have to be agreed upon by the parties from a pool of potential arbitrators. The customer is there once; the car company is there hundreds if not thousands of times. It is human nature that the arbitrators want to keep the guy who keeps coming back happier than the one single litigator. Judges don't have that problem.

 

[borski]

I think the reason is different. Arbitrators have to be agreed upon by the parties from a pool of potential arbitrators. The customer is there once; the car company is there hundreds if not thousands of times. It is human nature that the arbitrators want to keep the guy who keeps coming back happier than the one single litigator. Judges don't have that problem.

This is my understanding as well, both as a consumer and as a founder.