ABSTRACT
This chapter conducts a descriptive analysis of the data collected through online surveys. Despite the small samples, it tests the hypotheses on whether the clients were really in a weaker position due to uncertainty of their legal position arising from one-sided contracts that do not provide all related laws and regulations governing private banks. It examines how well clients understand these laws and regulations, and their actual experiences. It also unveils their preferences on the arbitration process. There are four observations: first, clients generally perceive that every activity in banking is regulated. Second, clients’ knowledge of the laws and regulations governing private banking is largely aligned with their experiences with the private bank. Third, there are very few disputes in private banking. Fourth, the arbitration process is preferred by most clients, except those who do not prefer judgments without reasons, judgments with stringent grounds to appeal, and the non-public nature of arbitration. It suggests that arbitration can be a viable option and that the low utilisation of arbitration is triggered by the low number of private banking disputes. The chapter concludes with factors that hinder the use of arbitration from clients’ perspectives.
