This is a letter I sent to BJ's in response to their new terms:

My wife and I have been members for years and have had an overwhelmingly positive experience with BJ’s. Recently I went to your web site with the intention of renewing my membership. I was disheartened to see a pop-up claiming using your web site or visiting your store would subject me to legal terms. Click-through agreements are deceitful because rarely do people bother to read them and therefore they aren’t actually agreeing to those terms. That wasn’t the only bad thing. What was most distressing was the inclusion of a mandatory binding arbitration clause and its sibling, a class action waiver.

Rarely do I encounter a person who has even heard of binding arbitration, let alone knows what it means. Be assured I do, and I fully oppose it. I understand BJ’s wishes to avoid litigation whenever possible, but taking away my legal rights is not an acceptable solution. I have never had cause to sue a company, and I hope I never will, but the legal system exists not only as a remedy of bad behavior, but as a disincentive to bad behavior.

Studies have shown that binding arbitration disfavors consumers. If it did not, your legal department wouldn’t have chosen it. But this has an unfortunate side effect--if failing to do the right thing doesn’t carry as much of a cost, it becomes a more attractive choice. That’s bad for your customers, and ultimately BJ’s.

Please reconsider your terms. I’ve opted out and will renew my membership, but only because my wife asked me to. Would this have been just me, I wouldn’t have gone to the trouble to read through all the hoops to opt-out and you’d have lost a customer.

By the way, why isn’t the opt-out a simple check box on the web site? It’s an inconvenient and time consuming method. That tells me you that don’t have my best interests in mind. Or at least you’re not paying attention to what potential damage your legal department is doing to your business.