Arbitration/Appraisal Clause Hearing

Arbitration – Appraisal Clause Hearings

Since 1988, Lance Coren’s Insurance Arbitration Service has been a leading neutral administrator of arbitration, mediation and other forms of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) worldwide. An unbiased administrator of ADR services, Mr. Coren’s only mission is to provide superior dispute resolution services to parties seeking an alternative to litigation in the automotive area.

Among his full range of services, Mr. Coren provides ADR administrative support to:

Lance S. Coren, C.A.A., C.M.A. is affiliated with a number of Alternative Dispute Resolution entities. Mr. Coren is compensated on a case-by-case basis only for doing the work associated with administering mediations, arbitrations and other ADR proceedings.

Binding arbitration is the practice of settling legal disputes with a neutral arbitrator rather than going to court. Many consumer contracts, including most auto insurance contracts, require binding arbitration as a provision of the policy agreement. Some critics say it wrongly denies consumers access to courts if they are wronged, but supporters say it avoids costly litigation and usually brings a swift end to the dispute of value for an automobile.

The Insurance Arbitration/Appraisal Clause Hearing language included in all insurance physical damage auto policies within the United States, is the main basis for the additional outlet for the rendering of settlements for insurance value disputes.

The applicability of the Insurance Policy Rules presupposes an agreement to that effect between the insured and the insurance carrier. Such agreement to arbitrate could either be included in a contract or insurance policy in the form of an arbitration clause, or laid down in a separate agreement, concluded once the dispute has arisen.

Most Arbitration Clauses offer flexibility by incorporating both the Rules for Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) and the Rules for Expedited Arbitrations under the language of the auto physical damage policy.

If the parties have not agreed otherwise, the latter will apply unless the “ADR” body, taking into account the complexity of the case, the amount in dispute and other circumstances, determines that the other ADR rules shall apply.

In addition to offering his accumulated experience in administering international arbitrations, Lance S. Coren will only accept an arbitrator/umpire appointment for his experience and expertise in the auto insurance field.

INSURANCE ARBITRATION APPLICABLE RULES

Unless the parties have agreed otherwise, the arbitration proceedings shall be conducted in the following manner. The normal Alternative Dispute Resolution rules shall apply unless the ADR body, taking into account the complexity of the case, the amount in dispute and other circumstances, determines that different rules for the hearing shall apply. In the latter case, the ADR body shall also decide whether the arbitral tribunal shall be composed of one or more arbitrators.

Automobile Physical Damage & Value Arbitration

Lance S. Coren’s Automobile Arbitration services are designed to resolve intercompany subrogation disputes amongst insurers, self-insureds, large retention commercial insureds and the general public involving automobile physical damage and valuation for motor vehicles of any type.

Arbitrator Certification

Lance S. Coren has fulfilled the minimum ADR body requirements to act as a Certified Special Umpire/Arbitrator in automotive physical damage and value disputes.

The requirements to become a Certified Special Automotive Arbitrator are:

1.) Minimum of 8 years auto damage and value claims experience.

2.) Minimum of 7 continuing education units correlated to automotive value   and/or damage appraisal.

Lance Coren’s Arbitration Services are to provide an innovative solution to third party administration services. Within any organization the effective use of resources are paramount to the successful handling of disputed matters pertaining to insurance disputes. With the ever-increasing application of the Alternative Dispute Resolution bodies, the ability of an organization to bring disputes concerning vehicle value and damages to a prompt and equitable conclusion are paramount.

There is a simple choice when keeping auto value and damage arbitration costs to a minimum: Consider the technological approach with Lance Coren, an expert in the Alternative Dispute Resolution arena for over ten (10) years.

Lance Coren will discuss with you the outline of the matter in question to assess whether mediation is the most applicable way forward. Remember that resorting to mediation does not affect your rights.  Mediation may not be the correct route, but you will have to consider it within the new civil procedure rule. A court will support a stay while settlement by mediation is attempted. You may want to suggest mediation as the appropriate settlement technique for the particular dispute to the opposing side.

 Phase 1 Of The Arbitration Process.

The pre-hearing phase covers pre-mediation work. Mr. Coren will deal with mediation contracts and procedures. All arrangements can be undertaken, including his physical appointment, venue and program. Deposits are payable. There will be discussions on the following points;

  1. Agreements are reached for day, date, time and venue together with cost payment. Mr. Coren’s mediator's fees are also pre-payable. Mr. Coren takes over the management with your agreement.
  2. A short contract is issued providing the legal framework for the mediation and will require signature before the mediation commences
  3. A synopsis, usually not exceeding a few pages, of the dispute is submitted by each party to the Mr. Coren, the mediator. Reference is made to important points or expert’s reports

4.  Preliminary contacts, usually by telephone will be made by Mr. Coren with both parties to introduce himself and clarify any questions concerning procedures for the hearing.

Phase 2 Of The Arbitration Process.

This phase covers the mediation itself. Mr. Coren can supervise the venue arrangements.

1.  Mr. Coren will open the mediation and briefly run over the ground rules.


2.  Each party makes an opening presentation (party or their administrator), which briefly sets out their perception of the matter and issues involved.

3.  There will follow a short period of questioning to clarify matters with the arbitrator, Mr. Coren.


4.  In the final portion of the session Mr. Coren will be seeking to understand the party’s views and presented evidence in detail. This will effectively mold the pattern for the summation of the disputed value.

 
5.  A final summation of evidence and procedure takes place, to re-assert all points in dispute.
 

6.  The settlement agreement is reduced to writing (award) for execution as appropriate, by the arbitrator/umpire Mr. Coren and the party’s appointed representatives. Normally, the signature of at least one of the parties to the hearing and the arbitrator/umpire will create a binding settlement award.  

As with mediation, Mr. Coren’s services remain competitive in the knowledge that the motivation is resolution of the dispute.  Please telephone Mr. Coren for further assistance.

Code of Arbitration Procedure

Various courts have held that the Code of Procedure provides "the full range of remedies available under controlling law", that through the Code of Procedure "all legal remedies and injunctive relief are available to the parties", and that because of the Code "any relief available in a judicial forum would also be available in arbitration."

Lance Coren’s Code of Procedure is updated to comply with forward movements in the law and to ensure fairness. The Code of Procedure precisely and simply outlines the process, schedules, and fees for every arbitration, and requires that awards conform to applicable law.

Since most parties want the opportunity to receive the same awards in arbitration that they could receive in court, Mr. Coren is empowered under the Code of Procedure, to award all remedies allowed by the law.

Consumer ADR  

The American Bar Association estimates that as many as 100 million Americans are shut out of the legal system due to the high cost of justice. In a 1999 survey, the National Center for State Courts found that only 32% of Americans believed they could afford to bring a case in court, and only 20% believed court cases were decided in a timely manner. According to the National Center for State Courts, 87% of those surveyed thought attorneys’ fees added “a lot” to the cost of a legal suit.  

On the other hand, many commentators and courts, including the United States Supreme Court, have found that arbitration is much less costly than litigation.  

All of the available data show that consumers fare at least as well in arbitration as they do in the court system. And researchers have found that individual parties receive more of what they ask for in arbitration versus the lawsuit system.  

Arbitration does not limit a party’s right to seek redress but simply shifts the resolution of the dispute from the court system to an arbitration forum.  

Arbitration, with its lower fees and more rapid case resolution, is therefore an ideal avenue for providing justice to Americans who cannot easily access the court system due to cost and delays.