Dispute Resolution

Dispute Resolution, a work in progress:

Individual Freedom means; better, faster, cheaper, and more just Dispute Resolution using contracts and/or our selected, readable, understandable, systems of justice. This allows innovations and the constant improvements that competition and innovation create once freed. 

We do not agree to be liable for any actions of governments against you or your actions in seeking to establish your Individual Freedoms. 

You are warned that Freedom means risk.

Got government? Government means you have lost more than you know already. 

We are exploring Dispute Resolution Free Market Alternatives.  Before we launch, we will list acceptable choices that we like and agree to use.

In the event of any disagreement, we agree to resolve it using any mutually agreed on form of dispute resolution, excluding the courts provided by any state, or by default through binding arbitration through the American Arbitration Association.

Over time and by watching the factors of cost, speed, effectiveness and our own judgment as to the justice of the different alternatives, we may change.  In the event we make changes, all of our members, suppliers, affiliates or others we may have some form of contract with will be notified via email and postings on our site. 

It would be wise to check the alternatives periodically as emails do not always get seen for whatever reason.

At that time, you can decide whether or not to continue the relationship.

The David Kekich Alternatives:

1.  Each party in a dispute creates a dispute presentation and a proposed settlement of the dispute.

The jurors, judge, mediator, or one of more people we both respect, selects one or the other proposal in its entirety.*

* This is interesting because (perhaps) both parties have to seek a just settlement.  In a normal court of law, both parties seek a win/lose result within the boundaries of the legal system and whatever it may say that week.

The Kekich Way, if one party takes a ridiculous stance where the other is attempting to balance an injury, the ridiculous stance is likely tossed and the more balanced suggestion accepted. 

Obviously, this is not a perfect solution. A perfect solution may never occur.

Over time innovation both in contracting in advance and in dispute resolution when they occur will get better, cheaper, faster, and more just for everyone’s benefit. A little imperfection is necessary to test new ideas to discover what might work better. 

2.  Each party in a dispute creates a dispute presentation and a proposed settlement of the dispute.

The jurors select one or the other proposal in its entirety or if the jurors feel neither would reflect justice, the jurors might create their own solution. That is up to both parties and their trust the dispute resolution providers.  

In a freed market, more and more alternatives will develop.  Providers will learn from each other and improve every aspect or go out of business for lack of customers.

Let’s explore how to improve on the current court system, where each side hires a gladiator who attempts to slaughter the other in a win/lose battle.  Generally, the better gladiator with the most funding wins.

In a dispute with any government agency, the judge, the prosecutor, and public defenders receive their Power, Position, Paychecks, and Perks based on the continued Power of the State. This pack can be expected to always rule for the benefit of the state. 

If you have an attorney who works for you, s/he cannot do anything against the instructions of the judge without the risk of losing their bar card to practice their profession…

Your attorney cannot risk seeking justice for you when the judge is seeking to protect the power and privileges of the state. Attorneys can be forbidden access to the courts and practice of law. 

The state considers us slaves. In any dispute controlled by the state, the best we can get is an attorney who is a good negotiator to lessen any losses, fines, and sentencing if we are being railroaded by the state. 

If we add back in the cost of the attorney, it’s difficult to improve the outcome with the current system of injustice. 

The courts are incredibly expensive, slow and invasive.  Generally, if we end up in a court battle, everyone loses – except the legal system – even if the other side does not win.

Although an outcome may be decided, rarely will justice prevail.