Decision Quality Review: Insights for Filers and Responders

Image of blocks with speech bubbles on them connected by linesThis year, AF implemented a new quarterly quality assessment process. The process is intended to measure the overall quality produced by our membership and to provide AF feedback on our efforts to partner with our membership to improve quality. 

The assessment:
  • Includes 400 randomly selected decisions.
  • Evaluates the filing, response, decision, and any administrative actions by AF (i.e., phone support, decision pre-publication review, post-decision inquiry handling).
  • Encompasses questions to identify specific performance drivers and actionable insights for filers, responders, and arbitrators.
The Q1 2021 Review has been completed. The review provided insights that will help improve member quality. Below are the insights identified for filers and responders.

To learn more, attend our 30-minute, live-facilitated webinar. View dates/times

Overall Filing Actionable Insights
  • Make concise arguments about liability; avoid using templates.
  • Do not include damage rebuttals in the liability arguments section.
  • Damage rebuttals/revisits should contain specific counter arguments to the responder’s damage challenges; avoid templates.    
  • Attach evidence to the appropriate section (liability, damages, etc.).
  • Ensure the correct evidence type is selected when attached.
Overall Responding Actionable Insights
  • Admit liability when liability is truly not disputed. Solely arguing that the filer must prove liability, while not offering an alternative liability theory or evidence, makes a negative impression on arbitrators and often affects the decision on the damage dispute.
  • Discontinue use of template arguments regarding company policy/practices when disputing damages.
  • Be direct regarding the specific damages in dispute.
  • Bulleted reductions with explanations and dollar amounts are more likely to be considered and accepted; this applies when multiple items are disputed within a damage type, i.e., multiple parts are disputed.


Article published in: June 2021 E-Bulletin