What is the difference between an insurance mediation and an insurance arbitration?

Insurance mediation and insurance arbitration are two methods of dispute resolution for insurance-related disputes. Both involve a neutral third party, typically a lawyer or mediator, to help the two parties involved reach an agreement. The major difference between the two is the degree of involvement. With mediation, the mediator serves as a facilitator and acts as a go-between for the parties involved. They provide a neutral platform for both sides to negotiate and come to an agreement. Mediation can be beneficial because it allows both parties to have control over the outcome of their dispute. With insurance arbitration, the arbitrator acts as a judge and makes a decision based on the evidence that is presented. Unlike mediation, arbitration is binding, meaning the arbitrator’s ruling is final and both parties must abide by the decision. In Florida, insurance mediation is generally the preferred method of dispute resolution, as it is less time consuming and less expensive than arbitration. Parties that cannot come to an agreement through mediation can then move to arbitration. Insurance mediation and arbitration have their own advantages and disadvantages, and it’s important to understand the differences before deciding which method to use for your dispute.

Related FAQs

What is the difference between an insurance mediation and an insurance arbitration?

Related FAQs

Related Blog Posts