what's the difference in abritaration and being sued?

Arbitration = a form of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) is a legal technique for the resolution of disputes outside the courts, wherein the parties to a dispute refer it to one or more persons (the "arbitrators", "arbiters" or "arbitral tribunal"), by whose decision (the "award") they agree to be bound.

Lawsuit = Is a civil action brought before a court in which the party commencing the action, the plaintiff, seeks a legal or equitable remedy.

So its better to be sued, at least then you stand a chance?

I wouldn't agree to go to arbitration. I think they are biased toward the credit industry.

Here's a good link to info on "The Arbitration Trap"

http://www.citizen.org/publications/release.cfm?ID=7545

I don't think it was that site but I saw an article somewhere that showed stats on some arbitration groups that filed in favor of the creditors 100% of the time and this was on 1000's of cases. Basically they are paid by the creditor so of course the are bias toward said creditor and the article even showed kick backs for cases won. They are a scam in my opinion and provide a lot less protection than a public court would for an individual.

Here's a little know tidbit -- many creditors that have arbitration agreements do it mainly to keep themselves from being sued by the customer.

Suppose a customer has a cause of action against the creditor -- it could go in front of a jury and the jury would award lots of punitive damages. Well if you signed an arbitration agreement, you waive some of your rights, and the arbitrations won't award nearly as much as a jury would. They also help to curb class-action lawsuits.