Thread regarding Wells Fargo & Co. layoffs

This is standard FINRA arbitration practice. Both sides get a long list of potential arbitrators that get negotiated down to 3 with input and challenges from both sides. Plaintiffs attorneys do the exact same thing. This judge either didn’t understand the process, didn’t like the process, had an axe to grind, or is using it as an opportunity for self-promotion / re-election.

If you read the article, an outside atty told the arbitrator that a firm on the list had a bone with them. They considered this and removed them. How is it fair to WF to leave a firm on if they are biased? It’s the ENTIRE point of an arbitrator to provide a list of neutral firms. If you were about to go up against an attorney this is your ex-spouse and you had an awful divorce/hated each other, why should your ex be on a list that a customer could solicit?

Either way you look at it, it’s no reflection on WF EMPLOYEES.

You think WF legal has that close of a pulse on these cases managed by external attorneys? Especially a small case like this? Ha

WF engaged in shady sh-t? I'm shocked. /s

There goes the asset cap.

@ert+1fbonxIR a lawyer doing as instructed by their client

I don’t doubt it one bit. Wells Fargo has repeatedly shown themselves to egregiously put profits above treating customers fairly, or even lawfully. Wells will always push the limits on what they can get away with, crossing their fingers they don’t get caught. And if they do get caught on one misbehavior, there are another 99 they are gleefully getting away with.

It should be legally challenged that financial institutions force customers to sign arbitration agreements.

If you'd read closely, this is due to the outside attorney making those decisions.

Not surprised - WF is a cult.

So corrupt - every part of WF from the top down.