Reminder: You'll no longer be able to join in class-action suits against PayPal unless...

7 replies
  • OFF TOPIC
  • |
Reminder: You'll no longer be able to participate in class-action suits against PayPal unless you snail-mail them an Opt-Out Notice by December 1. (Scroll down to 14.3e: Agreement to Arbitrate/Opt-Out Procedure.)

https://cms.paypal.com/us/cgi-bin/?c...locale.x=en_US
  • Profile picture of the author HeySal
    It says mail - not snail mail. As in with a postage stamp mail.
    Signature

    Sal
    When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
    Beyond the Path

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7272056].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author garyv
      Originally Posted by HeySal View Post

      It says mail - not snail mail. As in with a postage stamp mail.
      I believe that's the same thing as snail mail.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7273680].message }}
    • Originally Posted by HeySal View Post

      It says mail - not snail mail. As in with a postage stamp mail.
      This is the way it's reading to me Sal,

      Opt-Out Procedure. (14.3e)

      You can choose to reject this Agreement to Arbitrate ("opt out") by mailing us a written opt-out notice ("Opt-Out Notice"). For new PayPal users, the Opt-Out Notice must be postmarked no later than 30 Days after the date you accept the User Agreement for the first time. If you are already a current PayPal user and previously accepted the User Agreement prior to the introduction of this Agreement to Arbitrate, the Opt-Out Notice must be postmarked no later than December 1, 2012. You must mail the Opt-Out Notice to PayPal, Inc., Attn: Litigation Department, 2211 North First Street, San Jose, CA 95131.

      The Opt-Out Notice must state that you do not agree to this Agreement to Arbitrate and must include your name, address, phone number, and the email address(es) used to log in to the PayPal account(s) to which the opt-out applies. You must sign the Opt-Out Notice for it to be effective. This procedure is the only way you can opt out of the Agreement to Arbitrate. If you opt out of the Agreement to Arbitrate, all other parts of the User Agreement, including all other provisions of Section 14 (Disputes with PayPal), will continue to apply. Opting out of this Agreement to Arbitrate has no effect on any previous, other, or future arbitration agreements that you may have with us.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7273793].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author JustVisiting
    So if every company implements this clause there will be no more class actions? Drugs manufacturers, auto makers, airlines...etc. all they need do is ask us to sign a disclaimer before we buy or use their products or services? Surely a company's t & c 's cannot circumvent the law? It would seem to me that Paypal are actually breaking the law with this clause.
    Signature
    "...If at first you don't succeed; call it Version 1.0"
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7274223].message }}
    • Originally Posted by JustVisiting View Post

      So if every company implements this clause there will be no more class actions? Drugs manufacturers, auto makers, airlines...etc. all they need do is ask us to sign a disclaimer before we buy or use their products or services? Surely a companies t & c 's cannot circumvent the law? It would seem to me that Paypal are actually breaking the law with this clause.
      Well, I certainly agree it looks illegal - and can be tested...the irony right now is, if you want to test the veracity of their claim as a group, for now it has to conform to their illegal rule...:p

      But I do certainly see this being tested in court. T&C's are sometimes filled with 'brown M&M's' to see if anyone is paying attention...:rolleyes: (and sometimes the errors are unintentional)
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7274312].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Sarevok
    Lol.

    For some god aweful reason, I received a check from Google Adsense a while back resulting from some lawsuit. (I know, not Paypal, but still).

    I think it had something to do with Howard Stern.

    Eh what the hell, it brought me a free big mac.

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7274327].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author HeySal
    I'm not sure if it's the same as it used to be. It used to be that the law trumped any claims a service made that they are not responsible for "damages" and when they said so, that was just a deterrent from people suing. It was termed "a question of bailment".

    I wouldn't count on that still being effective anymore the way we're getting scammed, looted, and defrauded without seeing arrests for it. Perhaps Brian (kindsvater) could give us legal info on this.
    Signature

    Sal
    When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
    Beyond the Path

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[7274850].message }}

Trending Topics