NEW YORK — If government regulators get their way, it's going to become a lot easier to sue your bank.

By and large, U.S. bank customers have signed away their right to sue their bank in court, often without being aware of it. Buried in the fine print of credit card agreements, bank accounts and insurance policies are what are known as binding, or mandatory, arbitration clauses. It means customers are generally required to take any disputes with a bank to a third-party mediator instead of going to court.

The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau proposed a rule Thursday that would ban arbitration clauses, which would affect the entire financial industry and the hundreds of millions of bank accounts, credit cards and other financial services Americans use.

The ban would apply only when consumers want to create or join a class-action lawsuit. Financial companies still will be able to force individuals to settle disputes through arbitration; but cases where a lone customer wants to sue his or her bank are far less common.

“Many banks and financial companies avoid accountability by putting arbitration clauses in their contracts that block groups of their customers from suing them (and) effectively denies groups of consumers the right to seek justice and relief for wrongdoing,” said CFPB Director Richard Cordray in prepared remarks.

The financial industry has argued that arbitration is a more efficient way for customers to resolve disputes with banks.

Opponents and critics say the proposal would benefit only class-action lawyers and lead to gigantic paydays.

Once the rules are published, the public will have the usual 90-day period to comment on the CFPB's proposal.