If you have a dispute with Bank of America, this clause requires you to resolve it through individual arbitration rather than through a court. It also prevents you from joining or leading a class action lawsuit against the bank.
This analysis describes what Bank of America's agreement states, permits, or reserves. It does not constitute a legal determination about enforceability. Regulatory applicability and practical outcomes may vary by jurisdiction, enforcement context, and individual circumstances. Read our methodology
This provision significantly limits how you can pursue a legal claim against Bank of America, especially for smaller-dollar disputes where individual arbitration may be economically impractical.
Interpretive note: The exact verbatim arbitration clause text was not extractable from the encrypted PDF provided; the presence and general terms of this clause are inferred from standard Bank of America Online Banking Agreement structure and publicly known versions of this document.
Consumers who accept these terms waive the right to litigate disputes in court and cannot participate in class action lawsuits, which are often the only practical mechanism for pursuing small individual claims against a large financial institution.
How other platforms handle this
You and Teachable agree to resolve any disputes through final and binding arbitration, except as set forth under Exceptions to Agreement to Arbitrate below. You also agree that disputes will only be resolved on an individual basis and not as a class, consolidated, or representative action.
Any dispute arising from or relating to the subject matter of these Terms shall be finally settled by arbitration in San Francisco County, California, in accordance with the Streamlined Arbitration Rules and Procedures of Judicial Arbitration and Mediation Services, Inc. ("JAMS") then in effect, by ...
THESE TERMS REQUIRE THE USE OF ARBITRATION (SECTION 12.2) ON AN INDIVIDUAL BASIS TO RESOLVE DISPUTES, RATHER THAN JURY TRIALS OR CLASS ACTIONS, AND ALSO LIMIT THE REMEDIES AVAILABLE TO YOU IN THE EVENT OF A DISPUTE.
Monitoring
Bank of America has changed this document before.
Receive same-day alerts, structured change summaries, and monitoring for up to 25 platforms.
REGULATORY LANDSCAPE: This provision implicates the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA), which generally governs the enforceability of arbitration agreements in the United States. The CFPB issued a rule in 2017 that would have prohibited mandatory arbitration clauses with class action waivers in consumer financial contracts, but Congress repealed that rule under the Congressional Review Act. The CFPB retains supervisory authority and has signaled continued interest in this area. State attorneys general in California and other states may challenge class action waivers under state consumer protection statutes, though federal preemption under the FAA creates significant complexity. GOVERNANCE EXPOSURE: High. Mandatory arbitration with class action waivers in consumer financial agreements is a well-established practice in the U.S. banking sector but remains politically and regulatorily contested. The provision shields the bank from aggregated consumer claims, which can represent the most significant financial exposure in cases of systematic error or unauthorized fee practices. JURISDICTION FLAGS: California courts have historically been more skeptical of class action waivers, though the U.S. Supreme Court's decisions under the FAA have generally upheld such provisions in consumer contracts. Consumers in states with strong consumer protection statutes should be advised that enforceability may still be subject to challenge depending on the specific dispute. The provision may not apply to disputes arising under certain federal statutes that independently provide for class or collective action rights. CONTRACT AND VENDOR IMPLICATIONS: Business customers and institutional counterparties should verify whether this arbitration clause extends to commercial account agreements, as the regulatory and contractual treatment of arbitration in B2B contexts differs materially from consumer contexts. Procurement teams should flag this clause when evaluating Bank of America as a financial services vendor. COMPLIANCE CONSIDERATIONS: Compliance teams should audit the disclosure and opt-out mechanism for this provision to confirm it meets any applicable state law disclosure requirements and that the opt-out window and process are clearly communicated at the point of account opening. The bank should maintain records of customer consent to this provision and any opt-out requests received.
Full compliance analysis
Regulatory citations, enforcement risk, and due diligence action items.
Free: track 1 platform + weekly digest. Monitor: 25 platforms + same-day alerts. No credit card required.
Coinbase's User Agreement includes a mandatory arbitration clause that most users may not have reviewed. Here is what the clause states and how the opt-out process works.
561 arbitration provisions across 197 platforms. ConductAtlas tracks how dispute resolution is being restructured across the internet.
Compliance Governance Intelligence
Need to monitor specific governance provisions?
Compliance includes provision-level monitoring, governance timelines, regulatory mapping, and audit-ready analysis.
Built from archived source documents, structured governance mappings, and historical version tracking.
This provision significantly limits how you can pursue a legal claim against Bank of America, especially for smaller-dollar disputes where individual arbitration may be economically impractical.
Consumers who accept these terms waive the right to litigate disputes in court and cannot participate in class action lawsuits, which are often the only practical mechanism for pursuing small individual claims against a large financial institution.
ConductAtlas has identified this type of provision across 132 platforms. See the full comparison.
No. ConductAtlas is an independent monitoring service. We are not affiliated with, endorsed by, or sponsored by Bank of America.