Binding arbitration - who's opted out?

[ElGuano]

I'm going through the purchase agreement in anticipation of delivery next month.

In some cases, customers make a big deal to opt out of binding arbitration, to preserve your right to bring direct claim at court. Just curious, has anyone here done this with Rivian?

Sponsored

 

[ThirteenElectrics]

I did!

 

[good2go]

Arbitration is a lot cheaper. I would much rather go to arbitration and get it settled quickly.

 

[Dave Cundiff]

We opted out for both our Rivians, @ElGuano.

We don't expect any irreconcilable conflicts. We've never even had to raise our voice with any Rivian representative. Once we had to explain (nicely) why a situation worried us more than it seemed to worry Rivian. So our actual experience has been very good.

Still, there's something about customers' having ALL the legal options that incentivizes corporations to behave well.

A few of us opting out won't hurt Rivian. It's the lawyers who file large class action suits (large numbers in the class, but small harms or none at all to each class member) who can extort Rivian grievously if they don't enroll most customers in mandatory arbitration.

Very best wishes!

 

[DD4ST]

I opted out. But I can afford attorneys.

 

[Donald Stanfield]

I didn't bother because this wouldn't cover anything I'd likely sue them for. You cannot indemnify yourself from gross negligence. Lemon law will cover me from the other big one I'd likely need to sue for. It wouldn't hurt to opt yourself out though so go for it if it makes you feel better.

 

[ElGuano]

Yah, of all the various arbitration agts I've oped out of (one actually required that I mail a postcard to a PO Box), I've never sued anyone. And I don't expect to here either, but I'm with Dave:

there's something about customers' having ALL the legal options that incentivizes corporations to behave well.

It's a consumer right that I would prefer not to cede. And as I understand it, you still have the option of arbitration if you (and Rivian) agree, you are just not LIMITED to it as your only recourse.

 

[Hereforthesnacks]

I opted out. But I can afford attorneys.

Ok, but if you get more net out of arbitration vs litigation, once you include costs, then you still kinda lose. ?‍

You usually get more net out of arbitration vs litigation. That being said, nothing wrong with keeping options open.

 

[Hereforthesnacks]

I didn't bother because this wouldn't cover anything I'd likely sue them for. You cannot indemnify yourself from gross negligence. Lemon law will cover me from the other big one I'd likely need to sue for. It wouldn't hurt to opt yourself out though so go for it if it makes you feel better.

Technically not correct. Some states do not prohibit indemnity for gross negligence. But courts in those states very typically construe those contracts to not allow such an indemnity.

 

[ElGuano]

Also, gross negligence isn't just an arbitrary claim you can make, there are major differentiators at law that separate it from ordinary negligence (speaking to "extreme carelessness," "lack of even slight care," etc.). I suspect most claims either at arbitration or in court against auto makers don't make the cut at gross negligence.

 

[ndmiller]

The only ones who win in any litigation civil or class action are the attorneys.

Sponsored