Resources / Study / Innovation for Court ADR

Just Court ADR

The blog of Resolution Systems Institute

Posts Tagged ‘mediation program’

Canada’s First Online Tribunal Getting Ready to Launch

Just Court ADR, April 10th, 2015

In 2012, British Columbia passed the Civil Resolution Tribunal Act, which established a new aspect of BC’s justice system that will provide online dispute resolution services for strata (condominium) and small claims cases. The Civil Resolution Tribunal (CRT) will be Canada’s first online tribunal and is expected to launch later this year. The CRT will take disputants through a series of online tools designed to help resolve the dispute as effectively and efficiently as possible. For example, disputants first will be led through resources designed to provide information and diagnose the problem. The next phase involves part-to-party negotiation through the online system. For parties that are unable to negotiate a settlement on their own, the next phase offers case management and facilitated dispute resolution. Parties still unable to come to an agreement may move to adjudication, where they will be able to ask the tribunal to issue a decision. Because the CRT’s dispute resolution services will be available online, users will be able to access them from home or from a mobile device, 24 hours a day. To further facilitate access to justice, the CRT will allow “helpers” to aid disputants who do not read English or need assistance with technology. The language access already provided by the court will be made available, and the CRT will also employee multilingual staff, when possible, and make telephone interpretation available.

Last month, Bill 19, the Civil Resolution Tribunal Amendment Act, was introduced in the legislature. The amended act would require most strata and many small claims cases to be diverted to the CRT, expanding its authority. (more…)

A Foreclosure Mediation Hybrid in Hawaii

Just Court ADR, May 13th, 2011

After months of protests from borrowers in The Aloha State, the state legislature’s Mortgage Foreclosure Task Force ushered Hawaii into the ranks of the nearly thirty other states that offer some type of mediation or conciliation program to address foreclosures. But unlike other states, Hawaii has created a program that offers mediation only outside the courts.

Many states offer both judicial (must be approved by the court) and non-judicial (only required to give notice of the sheriff’s sale) foreclosures, though most banks choose, or are required to use, a primary method. In Hawaii, where a foreclosure must be filed is dictated by a clause in the mortgage itself. Banks can include a “power of sale” clause that permits the banks to bypass the courts and sell the property directly if there is a deficiency. This takes about 3 months and about 80% of banks choose this method. If the bank does not include such a clause, it must conduct a judicial foreclosure, which can take up to 13 months. Though Hawaii’s two-year-old pilot foreclosure mediation program was connected directly to the court foreclosure process, Hawaii opted for the state-wide program to exist outside the courts entirely.

Gov. Neil Abercrombie signed into law Senate Bill 651, creating the Mortgage Foreclosure Dispute Resolution Program (the “Program”). The Program, which will begin October 1, is predicted to assist 2,000 of the 6,000 borrowers in foreclosure this year. It will be run by Hawaii’s Department of Commerce and Consumer Affairs Office of Administrative Hearings. Interestingly, despite the Program not being connected to the court foreclosure process, §667-C (b) requires the State Judiciary’s Center for Alternative Dispute Resolution to assist with everything from “performance oversight” of personnel to monthly status report generation.

Any borrower who has lived in the residential property for at least 200 days and whose bank files a non-judicial foreclosure with the Bureau of Conveyances may request to use the Program. The face-to-face negotiation, facilitated by a “neutral,” is then set up by the Consumer Affairs Office. The bank then must participate in the dispute resolution process, under threat of up to $1500 in sanctions. The foreclosure process is stayed until the parties reach resolution or come to no agreement.

Most strikingly, Senate Bill 651 allows borrowers to switch from a non-judicial to a judicial foreclosure, which borrower advocates usually see as a better forum. However, if borrowers switch, they lose the right to access the Mortgage Foreclosure Dispute Resolution Program. Instead, they may have access to the negatively-reviewed court pilot foreclosure mediation program available in some areas, which has resulted in fewer than 5 homes saved.

The hard choice for borrowers – either access to a more just foreclosure system in the courts or access to mediation – seems unfair, especially when the court administrators themselves are the ones warning that court foreclosure mediation would be messy. No one should have to choose between mediation’s benefits and justice.

Verified by ExactMetrics