Utah online dispute resolution system benefits lenders not litigants
An online dispute resolution (ODR) system used by Utah benefits large payday lenders instead of making the courts more accessible to low-income litigants, according to a media investigation . The Markup found that t he rate of default judgments has risen since the implementation of the system - resulting in more cases being decided in favour of one party because the other party did not respond, often due to difficulties in navigating the system . It also found that m any users, like Thompson, missed critical notifications about the requirement to register for the ODR system due to poorly designed summons paperwork. This included long, case-sensitive URLs and buried information, which led to many litigants not engaging with the system. Payday lenders were identified as the primary beneficiaries of the system. The streamlined process for filing and resolving claims made it easier for lenders to secure judgements against debtors, often low-income individuals who struggle to navigate the platform. In addition, t he investigation found that " the move to online dispute resolution has had severe consequences for many of the Utahans it was supposed to help and that the state’s courts have been slow to implement potential fixes. " System 🤖 Utah online dispute resolution Operator: West Valley City Justice Court; Orem City Justice Court Developer: Utah Administrative Office of the Courts Country: USA Sector: Govt - justice Purpose: Resolve disputes Technology: Issue: Fairness Investigations, assessments, audits 🧐 The Markup (2022). Payday Lenders Are Big Winners in Utah’s Chatroom Justice Program The MarkUp (2022). Can Chatrooms Replace Coutrooms? The Markup (2022) Utah ODR data and methodology
- Date it happened
- 2022-03-01
- Organisation involved
- West Valley City Justice Court; Orem City Justice Court
- Product, system or model
- Utah Online Dispute Resolution (ODR)
This incident was imported from AIAAIC and is used under CC BY-SA 4.0. Our additions to it — the structured fields, the translation, the checks against other reports — are published under the same licence.
This is a record of what was reported, not a finding that anyone broke the law. If it names your organisation and you believe it is wrong, the corrections process is free and open to everyone.