Alternative Ways to Resolve Disputes Related to Consumer Protection of Financial Services in Hong Kong, Singapore and the United States: Innovations 2017 – 2019
Abstract
The authors explore regulatory innovations in financial services consumer protection in Hong Kong, Singapore, and the United States. It was revealed that: (1) the priority of such an alternative way of regulating financial demand with the participation of consumers as mediation is ensured by the activities of the FDRC Center in Hong Kong, and in Singapore – by the new law on mediation in 2017; (2) the creation of a unified mediation model, which is mandatory for all member states – the Singapore Convention on Mediation 2019 – will allow mediation to become the most widely used alternative way to resolve cross-border, including financial, disputes; (3) a positive result of the application of arbitration in the field of settlement of financial disputes with the participation of large banks can be achieved by creating certain conditions, including by attracting highly professional arbitrators with extensive practical experience, as, for example, was done by the Hong Kong International Arbitration Center (HKIAC); (4) on the example of the US experience, one can also identify another way to improve the mechanisms for resolving financial disputes, the goals and objectives of which are shifted from the vector of propaganda and updating alternative methods of resolving financial disputes to improving the mechanism for providing financial services; (5) the inclusion of a clause on the mandatory resolution of possible disputes in arbitration, as a mandatory part of the contract itself with consumers, indicates the deprivation of the right to choose the method of resolving the dispute by the consumer, and also deprives them of the right to file collective claims.
References
[2] Campbell, A. 2019. The House just passed a bill that would give millions of workers the right to sue their boss. Vox Media. Sep 20, 2019. https://www.vox.com/identities/2019/9/20/20872195/forced-mandatory-arbitration-bill-fair-act (accessed 02.11.19).
[3] Cheng, Т. 2019. Speech by SJ at ASIFMA Compliance and Legal Conference. Department of Justice of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region. May 29,2019. https://www.doj.gov.hk/eng/public/sj/20190529_sj1.html, (accessed 22.09.19).
[4] Chua, E. 2019. The Singapore convention on mediation – A brighter future for Asian dispute resolution. 1-2019. https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=4827&context=sol_research (accessed 02.10.19).
[5] Ermakova, E., Frolova, E., et al 2018. Main Components of Protecting Consumers of Financial Products in Asian-Oceanic (APAC) Countries. International Journal of Engineering and Technology (UAE), Vol. 7, No 4.38, 157-163. ISSN2227524X-United Arab Emirates-Scopus. DOI: 10.14419/ijet.v7i4.38.24343.
[6] FDRC. 2018. Financial Dispute Resolution Scheme. FDRS Guidelines on Intake Criteria of Cases. January 2018. URL: https://www.fdrc.org.hk/en/doc/FDRS_Guidelines_on_Intake_Criteria_of_Cases_2018_en.pdf, (accessed 20.09.19).
[7] Foo, Y. 2019. Singapore Convention on Mediation 2019: Embarking on a new era in alternative dispute resolution. Mediation in Today's News https://www.clydeco.com/insight/article/singapore-convention-on-mediation-2019-embarking-on-a-new-era-in-alternativ? (accessed 23.08.19).
[8] Freeman, J., Fisher, L. 2018. The rise and rise of Arbitration in banking and finance disputes. Allen &Overy. 09 February 2018. URL: http://www.allenovery.com/publications/en-gb/Pages/The-rise-and-rise-of-Arbitration-in-banking-and-finance-disputes.aspx, (accessed 22.09.19).
[9] Frolova, E. et al. 2018. Information Security of Russia in the Digital Economy: The Economic and Legal Aspects. Journal of Advanced Research in Law and Economics, vol. 9(1), 89-95. ASERS Publishing, DOI: 10.14505/jarle.v9.1(31).12).
[10] Global Financial Centres Index. 2018. https://www.longfinance.net/media/documents/GFCI_24_final_Report.pdf, (accessed 21.09.19).
[11] Gross, J. 2010. The End of Mandatory Securities Arbitration? Pace University School of Law. https://digitalcommons.pace.edu/plr/vol30/iss4/5/ (accessed: 20.10.2019).
[12] Lim, S. 2019. Innovating the Future: Recent Changes and Developments in Global and Regional Arbitral Institutions. Global Arbitration Review, The Asia-Pacific Arbitration Review 2020. 11 June 2019. URL: https://globalarbitrationreview.com/b, (accessed 21.09.19).
[13] Suressh, S. Developments in Singapore mediation law: E-briefing. Eversheds Harry Elias LLP: 08 Aug 2018. https://www.eversheds-harryelias.com/content/e-briefing-developments-singapore-mediation-law, (accessed 24.09.19).
[14] Szalai, I. 2019. The Prevalence of Consumer Arbitration Agreements by America’s Top Companies. Regents of the University of California. https://lawreview.law.ucdavis.edu/online/vol52/52-online-Szalai.pdf, (accessed: 20.10.2019).
[15] The NY Times. 2011. Gutting Class Action. The New York Times Company. https://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/13/opinion/13fri1.html, (accessed: 20.11.2019).
[16] The U.S. Chamber of Commerce. 2019. U.S. Chamber Commends Supreme Court for Preserving Availability of Arbitration to Consumers and Businesses. https://www.uschamber.com/press-release/us-chamber-commends-supreme-court-preserving-availability-arbitration-consumers-and, (accessed: 20.10.2019).
[17] United States Senate. 2019. Brown Introduces Bill to Restore Victims of Financial Scams Right to a Day in Court. United States Senate. https://www.brown.senate.gov/newsroom/press/release/brown-introduces-bill-to-restore-victims-of-financial-scams-right-to-a-day-in-court, (accessed: 20.10.2019).
[18] Xin, Z. 2018. HKIAC launches Panel of Arbitrators for Financial Services. HKIAC. 10 May 2018. https://www.hkiac.org/news/hkiac-launches-panel-arbitrators-financial-services-disputes, (accessed 21.09.19).
[19] Arbitration Fairness Act of 2018. Congress.gov. https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/senate-bill/2591, (accessed: 20.10.2019).
[20] Arbitration Fairness for Consumers Act. Congress.gov. https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/senate-bill/630, (accessed: 20.11.2019).
[21] Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act. Congress.gov. https://www.congress.gov/111/plaws/publ203/PLAW-111publ203.pdf, (accessed: 20.11.2019).
[22] Mediation Act 2017. Singapore Statutes Online. https://sso.agc.gov.sg/Act/MA2017 Дата обращения 15.09.19.
[23] Sherman Act; 15 U.S. Code § 1. Legal Information Institute URL: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/15/1, (accessed: 20.11.2019).
[24] The United States Arbitration Act; 9 U.S Code. Legal Information Institute https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/9, (accessed: 20.11.2019).
[25] AT&T Mobility LLC v. Concepcion 2011. Supreme Court of the United States. https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/10pdf/09-893.pdf, (accessed: 20.11.2019).
[26] Shearson/American Express Inc. v. McMahon. 1987. Thomson Reuters. URL: https://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-supreme-court/482/220.html, (accessed: 20.11.2019).
The Copyright Transfer Form to ASERS Publishing (The Publisher)
This form refers to the manuscript, which an author(s) was accepted for publication and was signed by all the authors.
The undersigned Author(s) of the above-mentioned Paper here transfer any and all copyright-rights in and to The Paper to The Publisher. The Author(s) warrants that The Paper is based on their original work and that the undersigned has the power and authority to make and execute this assignment. It is the author's responsibility to obtain written permission to quote material that has been previously published in any form. The Publisher recognizes the retained rights noted below and grants to the above authors and employers for whom the work performed royalty-free permission to reuse their materials below. Authors may reuse all or portions of the above Paper in other works, excepting the publication of the paper in the same form. Authors may reproduce or authorize others to reproduce the above Paper for the Author's personal use or for internal company use, provided that the source and The Publisher copyright notice are mentioned, that the copies are not used in any way that implies The Publisher endorsement of a product or service of an employer, and that the copies are not offered for sale as such. Authors are permitted to grant third party requests for reprinting, republishing or other types of reuse. The Authors may make limited distribution of all or portions of the above Paper prior to publication if they inform The Publisher of the nature and extent of such limited distribution prior there to. Authors retain all proprietary rights in any process, procedure, or article of manufacture described in The Paper. This agreement becomes null and void if and only if the above paper is not accepted and published by The Publisher, or is with drawn by the author(s) before acceptance by the Publisher.