SoftSettle Support manages Disputes in respect of value of the insured property

The Dispute Resolution Process

When you cannot reach an agreement about the value of the insured property, the value of the property saved, the nature and extent of the repairs or replacements required, or the amount of the loss or damage, those questions must be determined using the Dispute Resolution Process. The Dispute Resolution Process by means of Online Arbitration or Online Mediation are being integrated in the ODR portal using the platform MEDIATOR AFFAIR powered by SoftSettle Support.

The dispute resolution process must be used in settling the amount of a loss with your own insurer. Rather the insurance company is supposed to send you a statement determining that there is dispute in respect to the amount of a loss.

Alternatively, as an insured, you can initiate the dispute resolution process in respect to the amount of a loss at any time, through the following process by resorting to the concerned services of SoftSettle Support. SoftSettle Support facilitates online conferencing which could bring the insured and insurer confronting over video so that the following steps can be carried out without further delays.

  • You must file a proof of loss form with the insurer and make a written request to start the dispute resolution process. A proof of loss form is available from your adjuster by online.
  • Within seven days, you and your insurer must each appoint, at your own cost, someone to represent your interests. Neither party can represent themselves, nor can appoint employees.
  • There is no requirement to appoint an appraiser to represent you. You may appoint anyone of your own choosing, although it is highly recommended you appoint a representative with expertise in the subject matter being disputed.
  • If the two representatives cannot agree on the amount of the loss, they will appoint an umpire to assist in establishing the amount of the loss. If the representatives cannot agree on an umpire, they can seek the assistance of the selected ODR provider to provide an umpire/neutral to decide the case.
  • Selection of an umpire/neutral to decide the case
  • The umpire will issue a written decision based on information provided by the representatives.
  • The outcome of the dispute resolution process is final and binding for both the insured and the insurer on the issue of the amount of the loss.
  • It is important to note that the dispute resolution cannot be used to resolve contractual disagreements, such as whether there is coverage under the policy.  The interpretation of what is covered by your policy is a matter for the courts to decide or resort to online dispute resolution facilitated by the platform MEDIATOR AFFAIR integrated in

Soft Settle discharges this service as a special effort to help both claimant and insurance company to sort their differences over the determination of the loss. As such, the insurance company can make an analytical study which could lead to a perfect way of dealing the settlement


Combining IT with facilitative and evaluative techniques

Adv. Rajesh, Chief Coordinator, SoftSettle Support.

I was working with a Dubai Law Firm when I happened to meet one research associate working under Prof. David Larson, a leading ODR exponent working as the faculty and chief in ODR department, School of Law, Hamline University, St.Paul, USA. The research associate was very much enthusiastic about the online methods of dispute resolution and he told me what he has imparted under the guidance of Prof. Larson could be implemented in case I initiate an online resolution campaign in Gulf.

So far Mediation has excelled in the ADR process all over the world; it is less popular on the web. But as far as Online Mediation is concerned, it is a virtual face or reflection of a face to face Mediation; further the human element and personal authority of the mediator whom the parties trust are keys to the success of the process as in offline is almost identical in the online too but for the virtual game and to treat the computer as a kind of alternate third party referred to as the fourth party. The advantages of online mediation is extended to the asynchronous communication that allows time to reflect before reacting a proposal from the other side or from the mediator along with other advantages like non-physical confrontation with the opposite party  and above all considerable savings in cost, time and convenience

Thus the advantages behind the process of online mediation are definitely propelling such process or ODR to reach the heights and once and for all there will be new trend and revolution in respect of dispute resolution with all these benefits make the online mediation more flourishing.

As such as an ODR consultant I introduced the Online Dispute Resolution mainly focusing on the online mediation and negotiation apart from traditional Alternative Dispute Resolution in my law firm and I found so many clients from different commercial areas have started fancying about the online mediation and they started taking part in such process to get their issues resolved through online mediation.

Such reaction of the commercial folks and their favorable feed backs have inspired me so as to accept the offer from people at the helm of SoftSettle Support Private Limited to take the baton as the chief coordinator of their ODR segment focusing more on the software supported dispute resolution.

Technology – Fourth Party in Dispute Resolution, the Lawyer?

By Adam Sharon, Family Mediation Center, Boston

Online Dispute Resolution can broadly be defined as the use of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) techniques over the Internet. Small claims courts, with smaller dollar amounts and less complex issues are ideally situated to transition their operations online. I take this opportunity to discuss with you with regard to the implications of technology and impact of ODR on lawyers.

There are several benefits which make ODR especially attractive. These include cost savings, the speed of resolution, convenience, and individually tailored processes. In terms of money, ODR is most useful in cases where the attorneys’ fees would exceed the likely award amount. ODR is faster than a typical trial or even ADR because

technology can shorten the distances parties might otherwise need to travel. Further, ODR does not depend on clearing time on a mediator’s or a judge’s calendar. Using e-mail, discussion groups, and web sites, agreements can be written and amended when convenient. Further each dispute process can be tailored to fit the disputants’ individualized needs. One additional benefit is ODR’s potential for growth as a means of dispute resolution.

Despite signs that ODR is on the rise, there remain few financially viable ODR efforts in the commercial sector. ODR disputes are still mainly, although not exclusively, disputes involving business-to-consumer (“B2C”)e-commerce. More specifically, ODR is typically most effective in long-distance disputes involving technology issues. There are several reasons why ODR has not taken hold as a dispute resolution method for non-internet based disputes.

The easiest explanation for why ODR is not widely used is that the public at large and lawyers in particular may not be aware that such opportunities exist. It is quite strange that so far as the attorneys tend to be the gatekeepers of ADR processes used to be tend to be more resistant than the general public to embracing technological change.

A key question is whether the use of technical aids would deprive a party of fundamental procedural fairness. In procedural due process cases, courts first examine the private interest affected, then whether there is a risk of deprivation and the value of any additional or different procedural safeguards, and finally what the government’s interest would be in any substitute procedural requirements. With further developments in technology, videoconferencing and even holography are potential communications mechanisms which very closely mirror in-person communications. A general rule requiring technical equality would be inconsistent as there is no requirement that the parties be afforded equality of legal representation.

Providing an alternative system to resolve disputes that is online will boost not only the opportunity for cross border trade for companies within such countries, both as supplier and customer, but also improve and boost internal trade. A healthy internal trade can only help the development of cross border trade.

The point of ODR is somewhat lost if the aggrieved has to look for a lawyer to file a complaint, even for small value claims (small value claims have been the targeted area for most of the ODR websites around the world).  In an ideal scenario, the use of lawyer is to be minimized; but can this really happen in India? I don’t believe it can, so far the right mechanisms set up is not yet there.

.It is quite natural to assess the apprehension on the part of the lawyers to oppose the popularity of Online Dispute Resolutions, as the procedure is most simplified and outcome is fast and fair where they have been tuned their profession as to the prolonged process of court litigation and the result in the form of declaration of judgment are quite remote. These online activities in respect of finding out resolutions have come as a shock and they are not ready to accept the state of affairs at any cost. I am asking them to what extent they can abstain from the ODR procedures or advising their clients against the online dispute resolution mechanism. The fear is quite unwanted and unwarranted. The rationale in support of online or automating the legal activities  is simple so as to facilitate the public to access the justice at lower cost. Other advantage of ODR is evident in respect of the legal activities becoming more transparent to participants and faster to process.

Online attitude of the resolution process will benefit clients, who will have faster and less expensive access to legal support, and it will also benefit lawyers, who will be able to focus on the judgment-based and more nuanced services that clients cannot obtain from online process or platforms.  In respect of ODR using video conferencing and all, lawyers are never denied any opportunities by the clients so far as it involves lot of legal arguments in both online Arbitration and Online Mediation. Moreover the people of India and subcontinent are always inclined to such practice where they have to be represented by a learned counsel to deliver their concerns and grievances. In respect of Software-based systems too, they provide critically important supplements to traditional legal services, but there will always be legal functions that can only be effectively performed by humans.



ODR – More than Efficiency

Adv.Rajesh, Chief Coordinator, SoftSettle Support

Procedural efficiency eliminates the administrative complications

Dispute Resolution segment has been witnessing new technological capabilities which could take Dispute Resolution to some heights – to say beyond mere improvements in efficiency. The normal claims of ODR used to confine to saving costs, matters related with avoidance of travel, non-involvement in personal confrontation between parties. But ODR is something ahead and its reach is extended to such areas beyond our expectations and imaginations. Technology enables asynchronous, text based processes that can be more efficient in reaching workable agreements in short periods of time, without burdensome scheduling delays are quite uncommon in other types of dispute resolutions existing in the present world. It is true and established that online processes can also shorten time to decision by making information exchange between the parties and neutral much faster. Many agreements can be achieved through automated or algorithmic negotiation processes (deemed to termed as technology stimulated resolution or TSR) where the computer does much of what a human neutral would normally do to move the parties closer to the agreement. These features inspires the rival parties to negotiate honestly and in good faith, eventually getting into the fold of a judicious agreement or mutually acceptable resolution.
Technology can also significantly reduce the administrative complexities associated with filing procedure and ultimately document exchanges. Everything in the finger touch with signing up, filing a case for me, against me and such a new case can be initiated with a single click. The simplification of the Case Management could drive things in an order, where the information comes coordinated along with rules, language and clauses are preselected, leading the case over to respondent. As such the administrative efficiencies can save many weeks or months of back and forth communication in just a single step.
The Internet is a resource that gives us the possibility to extend what, where, and when we do things. In the beginning it was all about the simple exchange of information. Dispute resolution, however, is a process rather than a mere exchange. Parties do not merely want to exchange information but to evaluate this information either by themselves or, more commonly, with a neutral’s assistance.

Technology is another synonym of Soft Settle

The technology has the caliber of taking the grievances and transforming them over to solutions with the well placed algorithms to inspire the scenario. This attitude of the technology enthused Soft Settle to come out with some Artificial Intelligence (AI) options. Soft Settle is the multiparty e-Resolution System that reduces time, cost, and stress for decision-makers in all types of cases. Soft Settle’s Internet network connects parties located anywhere in the world by means of a neutral server that manages private information and keeps it confidential and secure. Using powerful fair and fast algorithms, Softsettle can quickly transform conflicting objectives into fair and efficient solutions.

Considering the technical inputs to simplify the process to accessing to justice, SoftSettle Support has built a platform Soft Settle where technology can interact with disputes with fast and fair criteria being integrated for an efficient mode of case management so as to reduce the cost and bring justice to the parties without any complications, hassles and leaving no room for tensions or stress for the parties what they are forced to experience during the court litigation and ADR
The digital platform Soft Settle helps people deal comprehensively with their legal problem and encourages a mediated settlement rather than recourse to lawyers and courts. Agreements reached through collaboration and respective generous interests of the parties tend to be more effective and proposes a harmonious bondage paving way for an accurate judicial reasoning and in every ways rather efficient than decision imposed by judges.
Technology must be utilized to better assist Indians and other Asians get fair and proper access to justice.
Soft Settle is on the mission to make the law accessible – with the Artificial Intelligence igniting the fire hence calls for technological legal tools. Soft Settle revolutionizes the legal assistance technology that suits the needs of ordinary people – and that extends to low-income and disadvantaged Indians and Asians.

The Platform (ODR) That Revolutionizes Judicial Process

Adv. Meerza Zaheer

In the quest for improving access to justice, online tools considered to be the cheaper procedure comparatively and hence the lawyers’ start feels uncomfortable about the online dispute resolution process.

Initially some e-commerce websites have started incorporating automated dispute resolution tool to settle e-commerce claims every year. This automation procedure in the ODR platform has been slowly getting accepted as a fine alternative which could even help people to have an access to justice without hiring lawyers or going to court. As such similar technologies get familiar with tackling most complicated issues like settling divorces, landlord-tenant disputes and other legal conflicts.
Employing online tools to settle routine legal disputes can improve access to justice for people who can’t afford to hire a lawyer, while freeing up court dockets for more complex cases. The platform uses algorithms to find solutions or points of agreement. The lawyers may be wary of such process coming up and becoming popular. But slowly they also understand that online platform as an efficient way to process simpler case, while more complicated matters still require their expertise. There is no room for any apprehensions to crop up among lawyers so far as the market for legal professionals would not get diminished; it is rather a matter of reshuffling.

Today, the term ODR is linked to a broad range of topics. The field of ODR has matured. Topics they covered ranged from reputation and trust issues for businesses to Intellectual Property and privacy issues and use of IT in Government. Indeed ODR is often seen as appropriate for low value, high volume cases. Automation and extreme simplification of processes is especially appealing for people with a small claim for whom the legal system is not an attractive option. ODR now directs its attitude in a different dimension and it fashions new designs in the resolution of divorce as well as other family issues. An ODR platform for family and divorce issues needs a different value proposition and design principles.

Fast, fair and efficient does not resonate with the divorce professionals working in mediation, in our courts or who otherwise help people at these difficult moments in their lives. The people who experience how emotions play an important role in coping with divorce. Who see the full complexity of getting to a divorce agreement that is built to last. That achieves the best for the children, the separating spouses and others involved. Or who see the pro se litigants file for a divorce in their court who go unrepresented because they either cannot afford a lawyer or want to stay in control of their process. Fast, fair and efficient seems an inappropriate proposition for relational disputes.

Let us acknowledge it: divorce is tough and the divorce process is complex and difficult. Technology in no way will be able to make it fast and efficient nor should it aspire to do such. But it can help people by providing structure for reflection, communication and solution-building. And by providing information, model solutions and support tools. The value proposition of ODR for relational disputes should rather be about an interest-based, empowering, fair and sustainable process and result: Divorce is tough. We will empower and support you throughout the process.

The value proposition of ODR has always been that it helps people to get fast, fair and efficient dispute resolution. Automation and extreme simplification of processes is especially appealing for people with a small claim for whom the legal system is not an attractive option.

That’s where robot divorce can play a part – helping families to avoid the expense and stress of having to go to court for a resolution.