Malek

In this appeal, we must determine the consequences of failing to comply with the arbitration disclosure requirements of Health & Safety Code section 1363.1. That statute requires health care service plans to disclose in clear and understandable language, appearing “as a separate article” and “prominently displayed on the enrollment form” “immediately before the signature line” that the plan requires binding arbitration of any dispute, and that both parties are giving up their constitutional right to have the dispute decided in a court of law. Blue Cross’s enrollment form violated section 1363.1 because the arbitration provision was not prominently displayed immediately before the signature line. Despite these violations, the trial court initially concluded that section 1363.1 was preempted by the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) ( 9 U.S.C. § 1 et seq.) and granted Blue Cross’s petition to compel arbitration. Almost three years later, the trial court reconsidered its ruling based on our decision in Smith v. PacifiCare Behavioral Health of Cal., Inc. (2001) 93 Cal.App.4th 139 [ 113 Cal.Rptr.2d 140 ], cert. den. (2002) 537 U.S. 818 [ 154 L.Ed.2d 23 , 123 S.Ct. 92 ] (Smith), and…