Podcast: technology can help self-represented debt defendants — but Utah ODR shows digital tools risk widening defaults if process design fails

Panelists on the March 22 Talk Justice episode debated technology’s promise and pitfalls in debt litigation. George Simons of SoloSuit said technology that helps people file an answer can dramatically reduce defaults — SoloSuit reported higher favorable outcomes once defendants file responses. "We try to even the battlefield for them," Simons said.

The hosts and guests contrasted consumer-facing tools such as SoloSuit with court-developed online dispute resolution (ODR) systems. Jason Tache cited a recent Markup article finding Utah’s ODR system produced higher default rates for certain plaintiffs, including payday lenders that used the platform to file cases; guests said poor notice and procedural mismatch were central problems. "It wasn't the experience of trying to negotiate with the other party online being a problem," Erica Rickard said. "It was a failure in the court documents to notify consumers about the fact that they had to go online in the first place."

Guests recommended guardrails for digital systems: ensure effective service/notice, require courts to verify addresses and deliver papers before moving to default, and treat technology as a means to change process rather than simply digitize existing flawed procedures. Simons proposed courts publish APIs so the public docket can be used by innovators building consumer-facing tools; Rickard urged redesigns that begin with user needs rather than merely adding a digital layer.