Judge: Stephen P. Pfahler, Case: 21CHCV00795, Date: 2022-08-10 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 21CHCV00795    Hearing Date: August 10, 2022    Dept: F49

Dept. F-49

Date: 8-10-22

Case #21CHCV00795

Trial Date: Not Set

ARBITRATION

MOVING PARTY: Defendant, Melanie Arakelian, pro per

RESPONDING PARTY: Unopposed/Plaintiff, Synchrony Bank

RELIEF REQUESTED

Motion to Compel Arbitration

SUMMARY OF ACTION

On October 12, 2021, Plaintiff Synchrony Bank filed a complaint for common counts alleging a balance due of $29,712.90 on a certain account. On February 2, 2022, Defendant Arakelian, in pro per, answered the complaint.

RULING: Granted.

Defendant Melanie Arakelian, in pro per, moves to compel arbitration and stay the action. Defendant brings the motion pursuant to the arbitration provision in the contract. Plaintiff filed a separate proof of service on the same date as the motion. Plaintiff Synchrony Bank submits neither an opposition nor stipulation to arbitrate. The court electronic filing system shows no opposition or reply at the time of tentative ruling posting cutoff.

“A written agreement to submit to arbitration an existing controversy or a controversy thereafter arising is valid, enforceable and irrevocable, save upon such grounds as exist for the revocation of any contract.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 1281.) “On petition of a party to an arbitration agreement alleging the existence of a written agreement to arbitrate a controversy and that a party thereto refuses to arbitrate such controversy, the court shall order the petitioner and the respondent to arbitrate the controversy if it determines that an agreement to arbitrate the controversy exists, unless it determines that: (a) The right to compel arbitration has been waived by the petitioner; or (b) Grounds exist for the revocation of the agreement.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 1281.2.)

In a motion to compel arbitration, the moving party must prove by a preponderance of evidence the existence of the arbitration agreement and that the dispute is covered by the agreement. The burden then shifts to the resisting party to prove by a preponderance of evidence a ground for denial (e.g., fraud, unconscionability, etc.). (Rosenthal v. Great Western Fin'l Securities Corp. (1996) 14 Cal.4th 394, 413-414; Hotels Nevada v. L.A. Pacific Ctr., Inc. (2006) 144 Cal.App.4th 754, 758.) Any challenges to the formation of the arbitration agreement should be considered before any order sending the parties to arbitration. The trier of fact weighs all evidence, including affidavits, declarations, documents, and, if applicable, oral testimony to determine whether the action goes to arbitration. (Hotels Nevada v. L.A. Pacific Ctr., Inc., supra, 144 Cal.App.4th at p. 758.)

“‘Under “both federal and state law, the threshold question presented by a petition to compel arbitration is whether there is an agreement to arbitrate.”’” (Long v. Provide Commerce, Inc. (2016) 245 Cal.App.4th 855, 861.) “Private arbitration is a matter of agreement between the parties and is governed by contract law. (Platt Pacific, Inc. v. Andelson (1993) 6 Cal.4th 307, 313.)

The arbitration agreement language provides that either party may submit account disputes to arbitration. The agreement specifically excepts the creditor from initiating arbitration in case of a collection matter, but nothing in the language bars a customer from initiating arbitration under any circumstance. “If either you or we make a demand for arbitration, you and we must arbitration any dispute or claim between you or any other user of your account…except as noted below…We will not require you to arbitrate…(2) a case we file to collect money you owe us. However, if you respond to the collection lawsuit by claiming any wrongdoing, we may require you to arbitrate.” “If a party files a lawsuit in court asserting claim(s) that are subject to arbitration and the other party files a motion with the court to compel arbitration, which is granted, it will be the responsibility of the party seeking asserting the claim(s) to commence the arbitration proceeding.” The section also provides that any questions over whether the arbitration clause governs certain claims or not, however, is to be determined by the arbitrator, rather than the court. Arbitration rules are governed by the FAA, unless in Utah.

Again, the subject action arises on the collection of a past due amount on an account opened with Plaintiff. The answer itself presents a general denial, and denial of proper service. While nothing in a general denial presents a claim for wrongful conduct, the contractual language allows for Defendant’s enforcement of the arbitration clause as an account based issue. Neither party claims any unconscionable provisions. The court finds the agreement complies with the procedural and substantive elements for arbitration. Plaintiff offers no opposition. The court therefore grants the unopposed motion and compels arbitration. The parties are ordered to proceed with the arbitration pursuant to the terms of the agreement, including Plaintiff’s initiation of arbitration and payment of costs.

“If a court of competent jurisdiction, whether in this State or not, has ordered arbitration of a controversy which is an issue involved in an action or proceeding pending before a court of this State, the court in which such action or proceeding is pending shall, upon motion of a party to such action or proceeding, stay the action or proceeding until an arbitration is had in accordance with the order to arbitrate or until such earlier time as the court specifies.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 1281.4.) The court stays the action in its entirety.

The court will set an OSC re: Arbitration Status at the time of the hearing.

Moving party to give notice.