You buy an Amtrak ticket. Your train derails. You are severely injured. And you can’t sue. Why? Blame the fine print in your ticket rules.
Back in January, Amtrak quietly revised the language of its ticket terms and conditions. Any dispute, including a deadly crash, must be resolved by arbitration. Individual and class action lawsuits are explicitly prohibited. Arbitration is the settlement of a dispute by a “neutral” party rather than going to court.
An Amtrak spokesperson said “the clause was added to resolve customer claims more efficiently.”
Be wary of the word “efficiently” whenever it is being used by a railroad or airline.
Democratic party politicians are now taking notice.
Senator Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), a senior member of the Senate Commerce Committee, which oversees Amtrak, said:
“There’s no reason why consumer complaints about Amtrak should involve mandatory arbitration. Consumers might wish to have arbitration … but they shouldn’t be forced to.”
Now 14 Senate Democrats including four presidential candidates (Cory Booker, Kamala Harris, Bernie Sanders, and Elizabeth Warren) have signed a letter to Amtrak urging it to abandon its arbitration policy. Key points include:
Claims subject to forced arbitration are relegated to private forums where powerful defendants, like Amtrak, can stack the deck against claimants and cover up wrongdoing. Faced with these daunting odds, many potential claimants decline to file claims in the first place. Moreover, the closed-door nature of forced arbitration lacks transparency in the form of public proceedings or hearings. This is particularly troubling in instances of major injury and fatality – removing the public’s ability to stay informed of issues that impact their health and safety…
There is no public review of decisions to ensure the arbitrator got it right, and federal law does not require that arbitrators have legal training or even follow the law. Forced arbitration can also cost thousands of dollars that most Americans cannot afford…
It is also concerning that claims of gross negligence and wrongful death would be forced into arbitration…
Amtrak’s decision to disallow class action claims is equally problematic. The new agreement discourages passengers from making formal complaints about small violations, and by not allowing passengers to band together to file suit, they are less likely to file at all.
You can read the full letter here (.pdf).
CONCLUSION
I’m also not a favor of arbitration clauses, especially from a railroad my tax dollars help to fund. Even the threat of a lawsuit is enough to hold many accountable. Amtrak travelers should not be excluded from requesting a trial by jury or joining a class action lawsuit to settle their grievances. While Amtrak’s fine print switcheroo may be legal, it is not ethical. If Amtrak truly stands behind its product, it should have nothing to fear.
image: Amtrak
“Democratic party politicians are now taking notice.”
Thank you for this. I am no means a Democrat supporter but republicans = party of treason and tax cuts for the rich
The travel blogger who is also an arbitration law specialist needs to write an ad which refutes your blog post, explaining that mandatory binding arbitration for consumer disputes is the new normal, providing data that shows that arbitration leads to adequate outcomes for people particularly those who hire him, and saying that he’s disappointed by the misinformation spread by the mainstream travel blogger community.
He’s welcome to and I personally prefer arbitration to lawsuits when feasible…but I don’t like to see lawsuits for gross negligence secretly prohibited by fine print.
That travel blogger/lawyer has helped me out substantially when a certain very large credit card company decided to back out of a promise for no reason better than being cheap. I was grateful that he helped and benefited as a result. I’m not saying that arbitration in some panacea but it absolutely is one avenue to examine. The problem with Amtrak is that they are trying to force this one avenue as the only choice, which is flat out wrong.
And who is the CEO of Amtrak??? Do I need to say anything else? This policy does not surprise me. Many years ago I used to take Amtrak twice a day for 2 full years from NJ to Philadelphia. I don’t miss those days at all.
“Be wary of the word “efficiently” whenever it is being used by a railroad or airline.”
Just by a railroad or airline?
True.
The real question here is this enforceable? I’m not a layer obviously but I strongly suspect that sneaking a waiver of fundamental rights into a ticket sale would be viewed dimly by the courts.
That was my first thought too, but these sorts of arbitration clauses are generally held to be enforceable.
And who should be blamed for “the fine print in your ticket rules”?
The problem is not so much the language itself (though I find the change problematic) but the fact that the change was quietly slipped in without notice.
Given that we have a ridiculous legal system with excessive awards for pain and suffering and punitive damages, it is understandable a lot of companies are moving toward arbitration as a means to reduce excessive compensation and legal costs. Amtrack is already losing a billion or two a year and 1 derailment with the loss of hundreds of passengers can magnify that significantly. It is not about denying fair compensation but a family receiving 25 million which is astronomical. If we had legal reform maybe the legal system would be an actual place of justice and fairness and arbitration’s would be unnecessary.
With that said, I am uncomfortable with forced arbitration for Amtrack because it is a quasi government organization and it is a fundamental right of citizens and tourists to be able to sue a government for damages.
You don’t like the ticketing conditions, one of which is a mandatory arbitration clause, you have easy redress: do not ride Amtrak. Riding Amtrak and then whining that they set the rules by which you can ride is not going to move the needle, and whether 14 or 40 Senators write about, regardless if some of them are democratic nominees, also isn’t going to be effective until such time is they (read: Congress) repeal the FAA and prohibit arbitration, something which is never going to happen in our lifetimes.
–Class action lawyer
It’s not that simple. Amtrak may be able to legally get away with an arbitration clause, but it cannot (for example) waive liability for gross negligence or discrimination based upon the fine print of its ticket. We don’t have to prohibit arbitration. Congress should simply require Amtrak to modify its terms and conditions as part of its annual reauthorization and funding package to allow lawsuits OR arbitration by disgruntled passengers.
You’ve apparently misread. Who said anything about *waiving liability* for gross negligence or discrimination? That is not possible, nor is it, based on my understanding, what Amtrak’s ticketing conditions provide. The arbitration clause simply requires the parties arbitrate what I presume is any dispute, including those for gross negligence or discrimination.
I was simply responding to your blanket, “You don’t like the ticketing conditions…you have easy redress: do not ride Amtrak” statement.
Exactly. They can, in their ticketing conditions, require anything that is not unlawful, including forcing their passengers to arbitrate all manner of disputes. Many companies do this today.
Not completely true.
For minor incidents, yes Amtrak is trying to force arbitration.
But in the result of a major crash, Amtrak’s indemnity agreements with the host freight railroads require it to accept liability.
You should be just as upset with airlines or other private transportation companies then. Not sure why it’s relevant that it’s a state-owned enterprise. In fact if argue that if these clauses reduce Amtrak’s expenses, then they actually save taxpayer dollars in the aggregate.
Not the worst thing in the world. It’s unwelcome but should save both parties money. Pretty much something every company does now.
I wonder if travel insurance with the CSR would cover train crashes. I know it covers plane crashes up to $1 MM.
i think kamala harris dropped out.
After I wrote this.