If you have a legal dispute with Ford about the website, it must be resolved through private arbitration in Michigan — not in public court — except for intellectual property claims, which Ford can bring to a Michigan court.
This analysis describes what Ford'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
Mandatory arbitration means you give up the right to sue Ford in court or join a class action lawsuit for website-related disputes, and you must travel to or litigate from Michigan.
Interpretive note: Enforceability of mandatory arbitration clauses varies by jurisdiction and by the presence or absence of an opt-out mechanism; the document as available does not confirm whether a class action waiver is explicitly stated or whether an opt-out window exists.
The updated Terms no longer disclose how Ford collects customer reviews, manages the third-party vendor (MaritzCX) responsible for survey administration, or applies moderation standards to published feedback. Previously, the Terms explained that reviews are moderated to remove profanity, fraud, personal identifying information, competitor references, dangerous behavior, and inadequate text. Users can no longer see these operational details or understand what standards govern how their submitted reviews are processed and displayed.
View change record →Website disputes must go through confidential arbitration in Michigan, which limits transparency, may require significant cost and inconvenience for users outside Michigan, and forecloses the option of a public court proceeding or class action.
How other platforms handle this
This Agreement will be governed by the laws of the State of Washington, without regard to principles of conflict of laws. Any dispute relating in any way to your visit to or use of the Amazon Site or to products or services sold or distributed by Amazon or through the Amazon Site will be resolved by...
Any dispute or claim relating in any way to your use of the Service or to any Kindle Content will be resolved by binding arbitration, rather than in court, except that you may assert claims in small claims court if your claims qualify. The Federal Arbitration Act and federal arbitration law apply to...
This Agreement will be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Delaware, without regard to its conflict of laws principles. Any disputes arising out of or relating to this Agreement will be resolved exclusively in the state or federal courts located in Delaware, and eac...
Monitoring
Ford has changed this document before.
Receive same-day alerts, structured change summaries, and monitoring for up to 25 platforms.
"Any dispute relating in any way to your visit to ford.com shall be submitted to confidential arbitration in Michigan, except that, to the extent you have in any manner violated or threatened to violate Ford's intellectual property rights, Ford may seek injunctive or other appropriate relief in any state or federal court in the state of Michigan.— Excerpt from Ford's Ford Terms and Conditions
(1) REGULATORY LANDSCAPE: Mandatory arbitration clauses in consumer contracts are subject to scrutiny under the FTC Act and have been the subject of CFPB rulemaking and congressional attention, though the Federal Arbitration Act generally permits such clauses. The CFPB has pursued rules limiting mandatory arbitration in certain financial product contexts; applicability to general website terms depends on whether the site involves financial services. State arbitration laws in California and other states may impose additional requirements, including prohibition of class action waivers in certain contexts. (2) GOVERNANCE EXPOSURE: High. The mandatory arbitration clause, combined with a Michigan venue requirement, creates significant practical barriers for users in other states who may have legitimate disputes. The confidentiality aspect of the arbitration further limits public accountability. Courts have in some circumstances declined to enforce arbitration clauses in consumer contracts where they are deemed unconscionable, particularly where there is no opt-out mechanism stated. (3) JURISDICTION FLAGS: California courts have been particularly active in scrutinizing mandatory arbitration and class action waiver clauses in consumer contracts. EU consumer protection law generally prohibits mandatory arbitration that deprives consumers of access to courts. UK consumer rights regulations similarly restrict unfair arbitration terms. (4) CONTRACT AND VENDOR IMPLICATIONS: Partners and vendors who use ford.com as part of their business operations should note that website disputes would be channeled to Michigan arbitration; B2B contracts should not rely on this clause and should establish separate dispute resolution terms. (5) COMPLIANCE CONSIDERATIONS: Legal teams should evaluate whether an arbitration opt-out mechanism should be offered to users, whether the clause's confidentiality requirement conflicts with any regulatory transparency obligations, and whether class action waiver language — if present — satisfies applicable state and federal enforceability standards. The absence of a stated opt-out window is a notable omission relative to common industry practice.
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.
Mandatory arbitration means you give up the right to sue Ford in court or join a class action lawsuit for website-related disputes, and you must travel to or litigate from Michigan.
Website disputes must go through confidential arbitration in Michigan, which limits transparency, may require significant cost and inconvenience for users outside Michigan, and forecloses the option of a public court proceeding or class action.
ConductAtlas has identified this type of provision across 201 platforms. See the full comparison.
No. ConductAtlas is an independent monitoring service. We are not affiliated with, endorsed by, or sponsored by Ford.