With foreclosure dispute resolution programs proliferating around the country, the natural question to ask is, “Do they work?” That’s what former RSI staff member Heather Scheiwe Kulp and I set out to determine. The answer, as discussed in our article, “Foreclosure Dispute Resolution Programs: Do They Work?” (Probate and Property, November/December 2013), is that some do and some don’t. Some are achieving what they set out to achieve, at least to some extent. Others aren’t. What the programs want to achieve varies, though with much overlap. Goals include keeping homeowners in their homes, helping homeowners and lenders come to mutually agreeable resolution, improving judicial efficiency, and so on. (more…)
Posts Tagged ‘court programs’
What Works in Foreclosure Dispute Resolution?
Jennifer Shack, November 13th, 2013Illinois Supreme Court Increases Reporting Requirements for Family Mediation
Jennifer Shack, September 24th, 2013Anyone who knows RSI knows that we’re all about data. We believe that courts need good data about their programs in order to make good decisions about them. That’s why we were thrilled when the Illinois Supreme Court Committee on Child Custody Issues asked for our help in developing a mediator report and participant survey that will be used statewide for family mediation. We’re even more thrilled that those forms have been adopted and will be required by the Supreme Court. This is part of the Court’s amendments to Rule 905, which went into effect September 1.
The rule, which governs child custody and visitation mediation, now requires that every judicial circuit file a quarterly report with the Administrative Office of the Illinois Courts that includes “the number of custody, visitation and removal cases referred to mediation; the outcome of such a referral; number of cases referred on a pro bono basis; and the percentage of cases where the parties expressed satisfaction or dissatisfaction with the process.” The information will be used for what we love best at RSI – review of the mediation program statewide.
A more substantive change in the rule expands mandatory mediation to include a custodial parent’s request to remove a child to another state. It also requires the courts to make a “good faith” effort to provide an interpreter when a non-English speaking parent is involved in mediation and to provide a pro bono attorney when applicable.
State Resource Spotlight, Part 2
Just Court ADR, June 4th, 2013Last week I discussed three excellent court ADR websites from around the country. This week, here are three more outstanding sites.
Each of the sites in this series offers resources that make it unique. From a pledge for businesses to commit to ADR, to a parties’ guide to selecting a mediator, many of these features can be useful far beyond the boundaries of their own state. (more…)
State Resource Spotlight
Just Court ADR, May 28th, 2013As I review court ADR websites across the country for our CourtADR.org resources, I’m truly impressed by the number of inventive, extensive and helpful offerings I’ve found. Many sites offer ADR information and resources that would be useful beyond their own boundaries. Over the next few weeks I plan to spotlight several of these resources. Here are the first three. (more…)
