AF recently facilitated its latest filer/responder workshops on March 24 and 26, with 340 member company representatives in attendance. The purpose of these workshops is to drive decision quality by:   

• Sharing information to improve filing and responding effectiveness.   
• Answering questions attendees have regarding filing and responding workflows and procedures.   

The following are key takeaways from the March workshops:   

Prior Payment Jurisdictional Exclusions (JE)

• Proof of payment is not required to be submitted in all cases.
• Lack of proof of payment must be raised as a JE.
• Lack of proof of payment alone does not remove jurisdiction.
• The JE must explain and support the reason that the responder believes no payment has been issued.
• No proof of payment is required from a self-insured that owns and repairs their own vehicles.  
• An exception to raising the JE is proof of payment in a double-dip situation.
• Rule 3-6 establishes that arbitration hearings are informal. The arbitrators do not adhere to strict rules of evidence. The arbitrator has discretion to rule on the weight of the evidence (except for evidence sharing requirements under Rule 2-1).

Prior Payment Supports

• Responding companies may need to provide supporting documentation for a payment to be credited against a filing company’s damage award.  
• Prior payments are not credited for damages not sought within a filing.

Valid PDI

• Under Rule 4-2, AF can only correct
  • Clerical errors
  • Jurisdictional errors
  • Under the definitions of these terms under the AF Rules
• Issues of fact or law are not correctable.
• Rule 3-9 allows for post decision policy defenses
  • Within 60 days of the decision, and
  • No less than 60 days prior to the statute of limitations expiring.
• Disagreeing with arbitrator interpretation of evidence is not a valid PDI.
• The determination as to whether an actual error was made is at AF’s sole discretion and is not subject to further review, appeal, or inquiry.
• AF may also find and correct clerical or jurisdictional errors without notice from the arbitrating companies within 30 calendar days after publication of the decision.

Refile Versus PDI

• Refiles are typically for two party losses when the filing has been ruled out of jurisdiction.
• PDIs are reserved for situations where a jurisdictional or clerical error has been made by the arbitrator or AF. 
• Nearly half of PDIs submitted are not valid.
• PDIs must be a clerical or jurisdictional error, as defined in the AF Rules, for the decision to be changed.
• Refile criteria are:
  • Only the recovering company may request a refile.
  • Two-party losses may be eligible for refiles.
  • The initial filing was out of jurisdiction, and circumstances have changed allowing jurisdiction to be restored.
  • A refile must be submitted at least 120 days before the statute of limitations expires.
  • Multi-party cases are not eligible.
  • Cases with a final and binding decisions are not eligible.
  • Cases where a liable party was not named in the hearing (Rule 1-4) are not eligible.
  • A responding company’s request for a refile cannot be granted.
  • AF retains sole discretion in determining whether a case qualifies for a refile request.

Filers/responders may find the Guide for Arbitrators useful for gaining insight on the following:

• What an arbitrator might consider when hearing a case
• Examples of evidence needed to receive credit for prior payments
• Explanation for what qualifies as an additional exposure
• Double-dip payment explanation 
• Shared/rebuttal evidence examples

We hope you'll join us for our next filer/responder workshop webinars, which are scheduled for May 19 and 21.