Re: National Arbitration Forum

More | Report Post

On 7/17/04, DC wrote:
> On 7/08/04, Dave Schwimmer wrote:
>> Below is what I've been able to dig up so far. Hope it helps
>> you and I'm looking for more so if you get any more info
>> please email it to me.
>> Thank You,
>> Dave Schwimmer
>>
>> THE ARBITRATORS DESIGNATED IN THE AGREEMENT
>> BETWEEN CLAIMANT AND RESPONDENT ARE BIASED IN
>> FAVOR OF CREDITORS.
>>
>> Out of nearly 20,000 consumer cases involving First USA
>> Bank that went to arbitration under the National Arbitration
>> Forum’s iron fist of justice, one of the arbitrators designated
>> in the agreement, in all but 87 NAF ruled in favor of First USA
>> Bank – a success rate of 99.6 percent. Carolyn E. Mayer,
>> Win Some Lose Rarely? Arbitration Forum’s Rulings Called
>> One-Sided, Wash. Post, March 1, 2000.
>> The response to this statistic? According to one of NAF’s
>> principals, the statistics are not significant, because the
>> cases were collection cases in which one would expect a
>> bank to win 99.6 percent. Id.
>> An in depth analysis of the bias of the NAF was produced as
>> Petition of Plaintiffs and of Defendant Salmons Agency to
>> Docket Certified Questions, Toppings v. Meritech Mortgage
>> Services, Inc., No. 011984 (W.Va. Dec. 4, 2001). Among
>> other things, the brief points to NAF’s marketing literature,
>> which shows the advantage creditors will have in their
>> relationship with consumers if they sign up with NAF. NAF
>> solicitation letters to would-be clients promise to eliminate
>> class actions for companies who join, and coach creditors
>> on how they can reduce their liabilities to consumers. NAF
>> marketing letters also promise to limit the consumer’s
>> recovery to the original claim, to limit consumers to “little or
>> no discovery,” and not to issue injunctive relief. The brief
>> also shows how NAF argues that past NAF actions and the
>> past employment history of NAF personnel also display
>> pro-creditor bias.
>> There is no question that NAF is biased in favor of
creditors,
>> and thereby is biased in favor of Respondent. The fact of
>> NAF’s bias, unrevealed to Claimant, calls into question the
>> other arbitrators as well. Claimant will have no chance of a
>> fair hearing before NAF’s insidious Kangaroo Court, nor any
>> other arbitrator designated by Respondent, as the result for
>> Respondent is nothing more than predetermined.
>
>
> About 6 months ago I received some mail from the National
Abitration
> Forum stating that the claim against me was dismissed. Today I
> received another mailing from the National Abritration Forum
> stating that I owe the claimant (MBNA) more than $12,000. Does
> anyone know what is going on? Is $12,000 chump change to MBNA and
> just an attempt to scare, or is it the the first step in a lawsuit?
> And was the National Abitration Forum setup by credit card
> companies, or by some other parties? The previous note indicates it
> is something of a scam by the credit card companies.
>
> DC

I also received a notice from an attorney's office representing MBNA
that uses NAF as well. The weird part is that they sent it to my ex
girlfriend's address. We haven't been together for over a year.
MBNA has my most current address on file since I received notices
from them prior to NAF's presence. I am disturbed since now her
entire family knows about my personal matters along with my SSN. Is
there anything I can do about this?