eBay - A model of dispute resolution for our jaded legal system

eBay is known to be one of the great technology companies of recent times but what I find interesting about the eBay phenomena is how it is introducing dispute resolution to the world.   

eBay uses the company, SquareTrade as  its  preferred third party dispute resolution provider.

I would be grateful if you would read the procedure below which eBay heavily encourages users to adopt in the event of a dispute and compare it to the way that disputes are resolved within your own legal system, which in my case is that of England & Wales. 

STEP 1: File a Case  - On the SquareTrade website, a buyer or seller clicks "File a Case" and fills out a short online form designed to identify the problem and its possible resolutions. This process takes less than 5 minutes.

STEP 2: SquareTrade notifies the other party - SquareTrade contacts the other party via an automatically generated email and provides instruction on responding to the case. The case and all related responses appear on a password-protected case page on the SquareTrade website.

STEP 3: The parties discuss their issues directly in Direct Negotiation  - Once each party is aware of the issues, they first try to reach an agreement using SquareTrade's Direct Negotiation tool. This initial phase of the service is a completely automated web-based communications tool and is currently free of charge to all users. Using SquareTrade's secure Case Page, the parties try to reach an agreement by communicating directly with each other.

The other option is to have a SquareTrade Mediator  guide the process-  If the parties cannot resolve the case through Direct Negotiation, they can request the assistance of the mediator in developing a fair, mutually agreeable solution. The mediator's role is to facilitate positive, solution-oriented discussion between the parties. He or she does not act as a judge or arbitrator. 

STEP 4: The case will be apparently  resolved - The parties may either reach a Settlement Agreement independently during Direct Negotiation, or with the assistance of a SquareTrade Mediator. Problems are typically resolved in 10 to 14 days and the cost is for the party who files the case will be charged $20 to involve a SquareTrade Mediator.

My views on this:

1 The eBay process is heavily geared towards mediation or resolving disputes directly. If you look at the English legal system there is no compulsory requirement geared towards the mediation process despite all the emphasis coming from the Courts about how important mediation is.

2 It is user-friendly. Individuals are encouraged to resolve disputes themselves without recourse to lawyers. My experience of the English legal system is that even matters which are low cost and uncomplicated, it is often difficult for a lay person to navigate the Court system. The process is often(unnecessarily) shrouded in legal lease.

3 It is inexpensive. It is free to file a claim and $20 dollars to use a mediator! Please compare to the Court fees we have to pay to start a claim. If you need to instruct a lawyer which frankly most people still need,the cost can be  £150 plus Vat an hour or even more.

4 It uses cutting edge technology. Whilst there is growing use of online forms, you could hardly equate the English court system with being efficient and utilising leading technology.

5 It is speedy. Compare a 10 to 14 day to resolving a dispute to the way our Court system works.  Again, it is unfair to make direct comparisons as the eBay process does not factor in for complex trials but the chance to resolve a dispute with 14 days is not really on the agenda for the English legal system.      

Comments

[Paul Watson]

This is fine, but is no good for criminals. In the UK the 10+10 day time slot is just far too slow and allows fraudulent sellers plenty of time to cover their tracks

[Justin Patten]

Dear Michael, I am really sorry but I am an independent mediator in the UK and not connected with SquareTeade. I suggest you contact Square Trade directly and you can see how they can help you.

Best wishes,

Justin

[D. Michael Martin]

I am considering signing up for this service. I would really like to know what services you offer if there is no mutual agreement. For instance, I wrote quite afctual information when I wrote neg FB for a buyer who recently purchased 16 lots of multi items on ebay. She refused to pay. I felt that I had an obligation to write the truth. I do not want to negotiate with her. Is there any thing square trade can do in this case? Thanks, D. Michael Martin

[David (name withheld to avoid embarrassing other parties)]

Well said! Things could be a lot different if the system was weighted towards mediation.

I was once involved in a construction dispute: our case seemed clear cut to us and our solicitor, but it turned out we could not convince the barrister.

Before costs got out of control, the solicitor decided to try a meeting "at the locus" (I think that is Latin for site meeting.)

After meeting face-to-face, everyone decided that getting out of this with the least possible loss was more important than emotions. So, we found a way to 'put things right' that was much cheaper than compensation, or demolition. It was still quite costly, even though no court case was ever filed - the builder still had to pay at least a four-figure sum in solicitors' fees.

It was a long process, I got the impression that the lawyers had little experience in mediation, or even saw it as part of their job (at first), and I dread what to think would have happened if the barrister had been more keen to take it to High Court.