Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Brokerage-Chat Site Securities Fraud: A Lawsuit -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Yogizuna who wrote (1268)	6/25/2003 12:37:10 PM
From: CountofMoneyCristo	Respond to of 3143

Those of you who are unaware of exactly how arbitration works, here is a very good explanation: tlpj.org Arbitration's initial intent was speedy resolution of commercial claims between large corporations - through NEUTRAL arbitrators. If you look around you today this process has been utterly abused as a method for wealthy and powerful individuals and companies to seek to avoid trial by jury of claims against them. If you have a telephone, electricity, a bank account and/or credit card or any of a multitude of everyday consumer agreements you will likely find that buried on page 593 or some such there will be an agreement you never heard of destroying all of your legal rights to haul those who do you wrong before a jury of our peers to seek remedy. The arbitration panels are often loaded against you by biased arbitrators who have clear conflicts of interest through their ties with the industry. As I stated earlier here, NASD arbitration calls for the following: 1. Limited discovery 2. Limited witnesses 3. The arbitrators may ignore "all factual or legal reasoning" in rendering judgment (they might as well flip a coin with tails on both sides) 4. "A minority of the arbitrators are connected with the securities industry" It gets worse. Read the TLPJ links. You'll see that the arbitrators' fees are often paid by the brokers - no conflict there! Furthermore, the other arbitrators, who purport to be neutral, often have ties to the securities industry. For example, Schwab counsel in my case is himself an NASD arbitrator. It has been eye-opening. Yes, Schwab has some nerve. They actually have argued that it is ridiculous that I would dare argue I never agreed to arbitrate anything with CyberTrader, their subsidiary. They provided blank evidence and claimed I agreed! They are not shy, either. By the way, speaking of charges of libel and slander, those of you who read the NYT article can see that if these defendants filed suit against me they would be quite frivolous and not only that but then they might as well sue the New York Times as well. Also NBC Nightly News and Bloomberg, both of which picked up that story on Monday, October 16, 2000.