Categories
Current Projects Dispute Resolution

Roompact: Contracting & Conflict Resolution software for roommates

Open Law Lab - Roompact 1

The New York Times profiled the start-up Roompact yesterday, framing it as a roommate dispute tool.  It also is a legal product — it’s a platform for two parties to come together and create a contract about the terms on which they’ll be roommates, and then flag potential violations & failures after the agreement is signed.  In this case, the university administration can intervene and try to lead a dispute resolution process through the platform.

Roompact has an interesting mix of the dispute resolution functions that have been popping up online over the past decade — and also conflict prevention tech.  It advertises an algorithm that will help a person find a person whom they’re less likely to come into conflict with, and then tries to allow for collaborative contracting and early responses to problems with the agreement that bubble up.

Open Law Lab - Roompact 2

It would be interesting to see other Dispute Resolution platforms aimed not at roommates, but in families, the workplace, or commercial transactions.  This model incorporates a full user flow rather than a simple dispute resolution function:

  1. finding an appropriate party to make a deal with,
  2. collaborating with her to create a custom, mutually satisfying agreement,
  3. solidifying & preserving that legal agreement,
  4. allowing for low-level complaints about deviations from that agreement, or other problems in the relationship,
  5. early-stage intervention to resolve these low-level problems,
  6. later-stage dispute resolutions if the problems spin into larger ones that threaten to sabotage the agreement

A platform with such a wider flow of services — focusing on earlier stages in a pair’s relationship as well as the later ones, when the problems have devolved into ‘disputes’ to be resolved — could be a new direction for the dispute resolution legal products to evolve towards.  Or it could be a service design for traditional courts to consider as they bring their mediation efforts online.

Here’s the New York Times article about Roompact:

via Today’s Students Don’t Have to Suffer if They Hate Their Roommates – NYTimes.com.

Over the last few years, many colleges and universities have adopted online roommate matching programs that help incoming students look for and select their own first-year roommates. Like dating sites, the roommate analytics systems can match people based on preferences like music volume, sociability and even tolerance for snoring.

But schools are not offering first-year students roommate personalization engines merely to ease their transition to college life, as I noted in my article for Sunday Business this week. These educational institutions are trying to reduce an expensive problem: roommate conflicts so severe that they can prompt students to transfer or drop out before their sophomore year.

Rona Skinner, the director of business strategies for student auxiliary services at Rochester Institute of Technology in Rochester, N.Y., for instance, said she had seen roommates develop conflicts over issues like overnight guests and even whether their dorm room windows should be kept open or closed.

To try to preclude those types of problems, the university uses StarRez, a comprehensive online housing management program that includes a roommate self-selection option for students.

“In today’s market, we have to be competitive inside and outside the academic arena,” Ms. Skinner said. “If we can give students a happy experience with a roommate, they are likely to be retained, not just at the school, but in on-campus housing.”

A start-up, Roompact, is trying to tackle college roommate conflicts directly.

The company has developed online roommate agreements that incoming college students can use to agree on parameters for dorm room cleanliness, security, property sharing and other issues. Then Roompact sends each student a text message on a weekly or twice-monthly basis asking for a rating of how the roommate relationship is going.

The Roompact system also allows university staff members to track the roommate relationship in each dorm room and notifies them when a problem seems to be developing.

“Today, a residence hall director who is in charge of a whole building might find out there’s a problem after a student has already been fighting with a roommate for two months,” said Matt Unger, the chief executive of Roompact. “We want to detect conflict earlier, notify folks in residential life and help with conflict resolution.”

This fall, the University of Hartford in West Hartford, Conn., plans to introduce Roompact for its incoming class, which includes about 1,200 residential students.

The university already had its own strategy in place to try to mitigate roommate conflict. It used paper-based roommate agreements for students and assigned university staff members, like residence counselors, to regularly check in with each student.

While that oversight will continue, Shawn McQuillan, the university’s associate director for residential life, said he hoped features like the regular text messages from Roompact seeking updates will encourage students to better communicate their roommate situations to the university.

“With students becoming more high-tech, it was like pulling teeth to try to get them to fill out the paper forms,” Mr. McQuillan said. “For students who don’t communicate much with us directly, we’re hoping they are going to be more honest with the text messages.”

 

Categories
Current Projects Integration into Community

Project Nanny Van: a legal service design

Open Law Lab - Project Nanny Van

Project Nanny Van is an excellent new example of creative legal service design.  Dan Jackson from Northeastern Law’s NuLawLab clued me in about it. The NuLawLab & its law students have been working with Rev Tank & Marisa Jahn in creating this mobile van that comes to locations where nannies might be congregating, and provides them with resources about their legal rights — as well as other resources to empower them.

The van is staffed with people with knowledge of workers’ rights & the local laws, as well as resources and tips to help the nannies act on their rights.

Open Law Lab - Project Nanny Van3

It’s aimed also at other stakeholders, including employers — giving resources to help them ensure they’re legally compliant & also following best practices.

Open Law Lab - Project Nanny Van 5

The van has traveled across the country since it started operations in Spring 2014, with trips to different states that have laws that protect domestic workers’ rights.

Open Law Lab - Project Nanny Van 8

Here is a write-up from the New York Times’ City Room. via New York Today: The Nanny Van – NYTimes.com.

An artist named Marisa Jahn bought a 1976 Chevy van on Craigslist last year for a couple of thousand dollars.

Today, it will begin touring the East Coast.

It’s the Nanny Van.

Project Nanny Van aims to teach domestic workers about their rights.

There are an estimated 200,000 domestic workers — nannies and house cleaners — working in the New York City metropolitan region.

Under a New York State law passed in 2010, these workers have rights and protections that few of them know about, said Ms. Jahn, who uses art to advocate for low-wage workers.

“Most of them work in isolation,” she said.

The van will be stationed outside parks, libraries and elsewhere in the city starting next week: Flushing, Queens, is their first stop.

It will distribute literature “with superhero Pop Art graphics with local flavor — one character wears a head wrap from Trinidad and Tobago,” Ms. Jahn said.

And a phone number.

Calling (347) WORK-500, domestic workers can listen to more than a dozen episodes about issues in domestic work, recorded by domestic workers, in English and Spanish.

Already, 300 to 1,200 people call the line each month.

In one of Ms. Jahn’s favorite episodes, “there are two lungs, talking to the domestic worker,” she said.

One lung says, in a deep voice, “You’ve got to stop using that harsh oven cleaner.”

The workers’ reaction?

“They think it’s hilarious,” she said.

Here is some more of their awesome graphic designs about their project.

Open Law Lab - Project Nanny Van 2Open Law Lab - Project Nanny Van 4Open Law Lab - Project Nanny Van 7Open Law Lab - Project Nanny Van 10

Categories
Ideabook Work Product Tool

Legal Design Ideas: Crowdsourcd Parking Ticket Map

Legal Design Idea - Parking Ticket Map

One branch of Legal Design Ideas I’m working on is using crowdsourced information to improve transparency of how legal regulations are implemented & processes are carried out.

An idea in this branch is a Parking Ticket Map — that could use a crowdsourced map like Ushahidi, or other reporting platforms. Individual users can report when & exactly where they’ve received parking tickets or traffic tickets.

How it would work

Ideally, the resulting map would be populated with advice on each parking space in a region — telling potential parkers what common problems with the parking space are. Peer advice can help ensure that the parker would be able to comply with all of the laws that apply to her when she’s parking.  The map can also be a public resource, showing trends in enforcement & making it clear how government authorities are behaving.

The crowdsourced map could be integrated into other services, like Google Maps, or parking availability apps, that have already mapped parking spaces with some exactness. the information about

Why this idea?

This originates out of problems we’ve heard in user research, in which the parking signage does not communicate all the rules that actually apply to a parking space.  There are some common problems that people make mistakes with, and that cost hundreds of dollars.

This might be about the special rules that apply to a parking space — like when it is sufficiently on a slant that the parker must have their wheels turned toward the curb. Or it might be when there is a danger in that space — like where registration stickers are commonly stolen & then the parker will be ticketed for out-of-date stickers.

This could also be useful in tracking trends, biases, and overpolicing.

 

Categories
Advocates Current Projects

Pangea Legal Services, lowbono immigration support

Pangea Legal Services is a San Francisco collective of lawyers who are working to support immigrants with legal support — through a low-bono and pro-bono model that provides services on a sliding scale of fees.

Open Law Lab - Pangea Legal Services for immigrants with sliding scale fees

 

It works on asylum cases, deportations, DACA and U-visa applications, among other services. It also does policy work on behalf of immigrants.

Pangea’s ultimate goal is to be larger non-profit that provides legal services for fees that fit potential clients’ budgets — to bring greater access to legal support to immigrants.

Its self-description:

Vision

We envision a world where the fundamental right to move is respected and appreciated by all.  Our view is that all human beings are entitled to respect, documents, and a process through which to move, settle and resettle in the world.

Mission

The mission of Pangea Legal Services is to stand with immigrant communities and to provide services through direct legal representation, especially in the area of deportation defense.  In addition to direct legal services, we are committed to advocating on behalf of our community through policy advocacy, education, and legal empowerment efforts.

Organizationally, we aim to create a non-profit that is scalable through a sliding scale fee structure and can grow in immigrant communities around the United States.

 

Categories
Advocates Current Projects

Immigrant Justice Corps legal incubator

Immigrant Justice Corps is a fellowship program (or legal incubator) to train people to serve as legal assistants for immigrants in the US. Its application is currently open for a new round of fellows — with applications due in just over a week.  Both JDs and non-JDs can apply to serve immigrants through the Corps

Open Law Lab - Immigrant Justice Corps legal incubator

It offers two kinds of fellowships, Justice Fellows and Community Fellows. Justice fellows are placed with legal service groups and work with their host to represent complex cases. Community fellows are placed in organizations in community groups and conduct outreach & represent community members on more basic cases.

It accepts 15 Community Fellows annually, from a pool of non-JDs, including people with just a college degree.  It offers an unset number of Justice Fellows to recent law graduates and law clerks. This year there are 25 Justice Fellows.

Its self-description:

The Immigrant Justice Corps (IJC) is the country’s first fellowship program dedicated to meeting the need for high-quality legal assistance for immigrants seeking citizenship and fighting deportation.

Inspired by Chief Judge Robert Katzmann of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, the IJC brings together the country’s most talented advocates, connects them to New York City’s best legal and community institutions, leverages the latest technologies, and fosters a culture of creative thinking that will produce new strategies to reduce the justice gap for immigrant families, ensuring that immigration status is no longer a barrier to social and economic opportunity.

Extension of the Community Fellowship application deadline:
The IJC is pleased to announce that the deadline for submitting applications for the Community Fellowship has been extended to May 15. Apply today!

 

 

Categories
Ideabook Triage and Diagnosis

Expungement.io App for youth

A group out of Chicago, the Mikva Juvenile Justice Council, is making an app to help young people understand & go through an Expungement legal process. The Knight Foundation is funding the project through its Prototype fund. The project aims “To create a prototype version of Expunge.io, a mobile app designed to aid juvenile offenders in navigating the legal process.”

via JJC Recommends App for Expungement.

Mikva’s Juvenile Justice Council met with the Cook County Board President, Toni Preckwinkle, to present their recommendation on creating an app for juveniles to get more information on the expungement process. The group has been working all through the summer to address the question of “what tools, policies, and practices do youth need to successfully transition from corrections to community?”

Through online research, site visits and talks with pioneers in the field, Mikva youth found that out of 25,000 arrests made in 2012, there were only 70 requests for expungement (expungement refers to the process of sealing prior convictions or arrests). Given this information, and the dearth of accessible information about the process, the Council suggested creating an Expungement App. This tool will serve to educate young detainees and parents about the process and help them find appropriate lawyers and classes.

The group is very excited about this project. “This will help make the expungement process more convenient for teens; teens can easily start the process from their phones,” they said.

 

Categories
Current Projects Procedural Guide

Court Hearing SMS Reminder systems in Qatar and Australia

Two years ago, there started some talk about US courts using SMS and other phone-based communication to issue reminders for court hearings to people. It seems several other countries have already launched such pilots.

Court Hearing SMS - Qatar

The Qatari government’s Supreme Judiciary Council has one such program live, at Court Hearing SMS Reminder – Hukoomi – Qatar E-government. Any litigant can register online & in three steps, the Court will let them “receive text message reminders on selected court hearing dates and times.”

The steps the citizen needs to follow:

  1. Sign Up Online
  2. Enter ID number
  3. Enter mobile phone number
  4. Click the registration button

Qatar’s SMS reminder service is free and apparently beyond just a pilot stage.

Court Hearing SMS - Australia

Australia also has an SMS Reminder system, in Pilot phase. The Magistrates’ Court of Victoria runs the pilot in the Criminal Diversion Program. There is no way to register for the system online — like Qatar allows.  The Australian Court provides these details on its pilot:

In order to increase compliance with Criminal Diversion Plans, an SMS Reminder Pilot has been established statewide and administered from the Melbourne Magistrates’ Court. Offenders who have not finalised their Criminal Diversion Plans within a month or a week of their stated completion date, will receive reminders via SMS to do so.

The aim of the pilot is to increase compliance of offenders, reduce paper usage by the court, and in doing so, reduce the cost of administering the Criminal Diversion Program. The SMS Reminder Pilot commenced on Monday 2 July 2012 and has so far indicated a strong early result with respect to the aims of the pilot.

For more information, please contact your local Criminal Diversion Coordinator, available at all headquarter Magistrates’ Courts within Victoria.

Another court in Australia, the Adelaide Magistrates Court, also is issuing phone-based reminders to offenders and accused in criminal proceedings. Tessa Akerman in The Advertiser wrote an interview with one of the judges involved.

ACCUSED criminals can expect text messages reminding them to appear in court, as the state’s magistrates courts embrace the use of technology.

Judge Elizabeth Bolton, the state’s Chief Magistrate, told The Advertiser that people needed to realise the world had changed and we needed to “make the most of, within our resources, using those technological solutions”.

“We’ve still got some things in the pipeline from the process redesign project we did a year or two ago. I’m hopeful we will get around to the SMS project that might help people who, as many do, forget or don’t read their papers correctly, whatever it is, just as a reminder as you do from your hairdresser, your dentist,” she said.

But it would have to wait “a little bit” because computer resources were needed to complete the fines transition process, due to start in February.

Judge Bolton said shrinking budgets and changing needs were behind the court’s increasing take-up of technology.

“I think it’s incumbent on all of us to realise we are living in an age where there is much more technological facility than previously and if people habitually put all their stuff in their mobile phone rather than … write it on a piece of paper or have a calendar … then we just have to realise that’s how their minds operate.”

 

Categories
Current Projects Dispute Resolution

Online Court Project from the University of Michigan

I’ve started scouting out different courtroom based service & system designs.  Here is one, that my colleague Briane alerted to me: the Online Court Project based out of the University of Michigan.  It features new ideas to integrate tech and automation into court processes.

 

Led by U-M Law School professor J.J. Prescott, this Global Challenges project seeks to revolutionize how the public interacts with courts. Its technology-driven approach has the potential to create an entirely new case resolution process, one that improves performance and accessibility along numerous dimensions and makes courts better suited for the information age.

Background

Judicial systems exist to provide a way for societies to organize themselves around the rule of law. In order to accomplish this goal, courts need to be (1) accessible; (2) fair; and (3) cost-effective. Unfortunately, due to their reliance on antiquated, non-technological processes, courts in the United States have seen little improvement on these three measures in recent decades.

With respect to access to justice, American courts are notoriously difficult to understand and use, especially for people without attorneys. In significant part, this confusion results from the fact that courts are structured almost entirely around face-to-face, one-on-one interactions with judges and court personnel, which is comparable to providing banking services without ATM’s.

Even the simplest negotiation points in the process require litigants to physically go to court, a process that is time-consuming, opaque, and intimidating. Consequently, millions of people, who have relatively minor issues that require negotiation with the judge or prosecutor, are either inconvenienced or simply avoid interacting with the system. The magnitude of this problem is demonstrated by the approximately 30 million warrants currently outstanding for failure to appear for show cause hearings.

Likewise, the courts’ reliance on snapshot decision-making leads to sub-optimal decisions. One-on-one process simply does not provide judges and court personnel with adequate time to collect and analyze information about litigants. As a result, decisions are often based on little more than general impressions about litigants, opening the door for numerous undesirable outcomes, including:

  • Decisions influenced by subconscious biases.
  • Perceived arbitrariness, such as when misdemeanor defendants with substantively identical cases receive wildly different sanctions.
  • Due process failures, such litigants with unpaid fines being imprisoned due to incorrect assessments of their ability to pay.

Finally, already cash-strapped states and municipalities are crippled by fixed-cost legal infrastructure. Not only are current processes non-technological, they scale poorly; costs are high on a per transaction basis, and remain high even as volume increases, essentially imposing a tax on growth.

What is required is a scalable, web-based alternative to the one-on- one decision making process.

Project Goals

This project will harness emerging insights into how judges do their jobs to build an algorithm-based portal to allow litigants to engage in largely automated negotiations with courts online.

The project’s algorithmic approach is designed to replicate the outcomes generated by the traditional one-on-one consultative process, but with enormous transaction costs savings. This approach works by providing judges with a way to specify in advance what information is required to make a decision about a litigant’s case, and providing litigants with the ability to submit that information to the court over the internet.

Judges apply rules to factual information to generate decisions; these rules can either be clear-cut application of law or what are sometimes referred to as “decisions heuristics,” the individual rules of thumb that judges use to make repetitive decisions quickly. While some thought-leaders in the judicial community have encouraged judges to formalize decision heuristics for consistency purposes, this project goes one step further to achieve a truly novel result: by programming these rules into software, many of the high-volume transactions that currently require the in-person interaction can be handled online. The technology will have two basic components: (1) a dashboard interface where judges can enter decision rules based on the facts they view important; (2) a forward-facing portal where litigants can submit information and requests using a multiple-choice framework similar to TurboTax.

While this method can theoretically automate a significant amount of the work courts are asked to do, in Phase 1 we will create the system for one to three courthouses, designed to process resolutions for a limited subset of transactions, such as unpaid fines and minor misdemeanor charges.

Success in Phase 1 will involve identifying suitable courthouses for pilot deployment, assisting judges in mapping the decision rules they use to make repetitive decisions, building the technology so that it integrates with the court’s data systems, and then assisting the court in encouraging litigant adoption. Assuming Phase 1 is successful, Phase 2 will focus on expanding the types of transactions delegated to the software, and more importantly, scale-up to an entire county or even the entire state.

If successful, this project will result in the creation of an entirely new type of court, one well-suited to the information age. In addition to efficiency gains, the shift away from snapshot, one-on-one decision making will open the door for a more “data-driven” justice system. Finally, in addition to being scalable throughout the United States the technology has potentially strong applications for the developing world, where a lack of effective legal infrastructure acts as a major deterrent to foreign investment.

Project Team:

James. J. Prescott: Principal Investigator

Benjamin Gubernick: Project Research Director.

MJ Cartwright: Pilot Program Director

Court Innovations, Inc.: A U-M startup founded by Professor Prescott and Mr. Gubernick.

 

Categories
Current Projects Work Product Tool

Tools for Citizens to keep themselves Private and Secure

The recent UX Sprint for Security & Privacy Tools in San Francisco featured a great list of projects that work to empower citizens. Most center on:

  • How can we enable citizens to communicate free of government surveillance? and
  • How can we help people report on & document atrocities and abuses?

Here is a list of the projects, with links to fuller documentation — as inspiration in what’s possible in empowering citizens and protecting them from government monitoring.

Guardian Project:
The Guardian Project creates easy-to-use open source apps, mobile OS security enhancements, and customized mobile devices for people around the world to help them communicate more freely, and protect themselves from intrusion and monitoring.

 

commotionCommotion Wireless:
Commotion is an open-source communication toolkit that uses mobile phones, computers, and other wireless devices such as routers to make it possible for communities to set up decentralized mesh networks and share local services. Deployed already in a handful of U.S. cities and internationally, it is a key tool for internet freedom, providing alternatives where surveillance and censorship compromise traditional infrastructure.

 

 

StoryMakerMartus
Martus is a secure and open-source human rights documentation system used by human rights initiatives to document and preserve evidence and testimonies of human rights violations.

 

 

 

StoryMaker
StoryMakerStoryMaker
is an open source app for making and publishing multimedia stories with any Android phone or device, as safely and securely as possible. It provides an interactive storytelling training guide, walkthroughs, and templates for users to follow as they plan their story and capture media. The app then helps assemble the content into a finished format that can be shared directly with social media or anywhere– no computer editing station required, even for video!

 

 

 

lanternLantern
Lantern is a network of people working together to defeat internet censorship around the world. Install and share Lantern, our new peer-to-peer censorship circumvention software, to give or get access to people in places where access is censored

 

 

 

the serval projectThe Serval Project:
Serval is a telecommunications system comprised of at least two mobile phones that are able to work outside of regular mobile phone tower range due thanks to the Serval App and Serval Mesh.

 

 

guardianChatSecure:
ChatSecure is a free and open source encrypted chat client for iPhone and Android that supports OTR encryption over XMPP. ChatSecure was originally available for only iOS devices, but is now also available on Android via The Guardian Project’s similar app, formerly named Gibberbot.

 

 

Open Whisper Systems:
Whisper Systems produces simple and easy-to-use tools for secure mobile communication and secure mobile storage. Their products include RedPhone and TextSecure, which allow encrypted VoIP phone and text (SMS) communication between users

 

 

 

People’s Intelligence
guardianPeople’s Intelligence is an award winning idea that makes use of USSD, SMS and voice to establish a conversation with victims and witnesses of mass atrocities. The envisaged tool helps victims and witnesses to better document and verify their stories and provides them as well as relevant organisations with actionable information, thereby facilitating early warning and targeted assistance. It supports analysis and allows networking between affected communities, relevant organisations and experts through the use of ubiquitous technologies.

 

 

 


Mailvelope:

mailvelopeChMailvelope allows individuals to encrypt and decrypt email in their favorite webmail provider following the OpenPGP standard. This includes, among others, Gmail, Yahoo, Outlook.com, and GMX. It integrates directly into the webmail user interface; its elements are non-intrusive and easy to use in a user’s regular workflow.

 

 

 

Categories
Advocates Current Projects

Fixed: Parking Ticket advocacy

Fixed – The easiest way to fix a parking ticket.

Fixed is an app that lets you hand off your parking ticket to the company, for them to fight it for you on your behalf. You pay them nothing if you lose the contest and have to pay the fine. You have to pay them 25% of your prospective fine if they win the ticket for you.

Here is a sampling of their apps’ interactions

It’s outsourcing a small bit of legal advocacy — so you don’t have to deal with traffic and parking court. The interactions couldn’t be simpler: you just take a photo of the ticket, make a few selections, and then you get notified of your advocate, your chances of beating the ticket, and other details about the process.

This is a possible model for other Legal Advocacy – Outsourcing products & services. Its’ cleanliness and simplicity make it seem quite promising.

For more details on the company and its business model, here is a CNN article by Heather Kelly about Fixed:


Few things enrage normally calm people like finding a parking ticket tucked under the windshield wiper of their car.

Parking tickets can be infuriating, especially when they seem undeserved. (Officer, there’s no sign saying I can’t park here!). But most people don’t want to invest the time and energy to would take to dispute them.

Now there’s a new iPhone app, Fixed, that will fight parking tickets for you. The app, expected to launch next week, will do the heavy lifting of contesting a ticket: suggesting reasons it might be invalid, gathering supporting evidence and submitting the proper appeals paperwork.

If the driver beats the ticket, they pay Fixed 25% of what the citation would have cost. If they can’t get out of the ticket, Fixed doesn’t charge them anything.

In this way, Fixed hopes to add navigating bureaucracy to the list of urban tasks and nuisances — catching a cab, ordering food, finding a place to crash — made easier by popular tech startups.

Fixed hopes to capitalize on people’s feelings of injustice over unfair parking tickets.

“When you mention parking tickets to people it engenders such an emotional reaction … because so many people think they’ve received an unfair parking ticket,” said Fixed co-founder David Hegarty, who came up with the idea after getting six parking tickets in one day. Much of this anger is directed at local governments, which many people see as using parking tickets to fill budget gaps.

That emotional response, as well as a desire to not shell out $100 for blocking a couple inches of someone’s driveway, could make Fixed a hit. But its success will depend on how good the service is at navigating parking laws, which are often a confusing hodgepodge of local and state ordinances.

Here’s how Fixed works: When someone gets a ticket, they snap a photo of it on their iPhone and enter the violation code. The Fixed app will tell them what percentage of those types of tickets are usually overturned and then show a list of possible reasons it could be found invalid. For example, a street cleaning sign might be obscured by a leafy tree, or a parking meter could be broken.

If the motorist thinks they have a case, the app will prompt them to capture any additional photographic evidence with their phone and then digitally sign a letter.

Fixed has contracted with a team of legal researchers fluent in local traffic laws who will review each case before printing out the letter and submitting it via snail mail to the city. Over time, Fixed hopes to learn more about what methods and which errors have the highest success rates when contesting tickets. That information will be used to make the system more automated.

“It will always be reviewed by human eyes before it’s sent, but I’m pretty confident that we can get to the point where 80% of tickets are 95% automated,” said Hegarty.

Fixed is expected to launch in the Apple App store next week, although its service will only be available in San Francisco at first. The startup has been testing its service with a small group of 1,000 people, mostly friends and friends of friends, and there’s already a waiting list of 25,000 people wanting to sign up.

Hegarty and with Fixed’s other two co-founders, David Sanghera and DJ Burdick, hope to expand into the top 100 U.S. cities over the next 18 months.

San Francisco is fertile ground for motorists who can effortlessly rack up hundreds of dollars in parking tickets. As in many cities, parking in San Francisco is an exercise in frustration, with a limited number of spaces on the street and parking garages charging top dollar.

The company hasn’t had any official talks with the city. But Hegarty hopes his service is not seen as adversarial. Rather, he thinks Fixed could help people pay their legitimate parking tickets in a more timely manner.

“We do not have concerns if people want to use a third-party service, but there is no secret to overturning a citation if it has been issued erroneously. If someone feels that their citation was written in error, they might want to consider protesting themselves, for free,” said Paul Rose, a spokesperson for San Francisco’s transportation agency.

San Francisco issues about 1.5 million parking tickets every year, typically for $45 to $115 each (there are also some significantly pricier violations, such as having an expired plate or abandoning a car on a highway). The fines add up to about $95 million a year, according to Hegarty.

Of those 1.5 million citations, only five percent are actually contested. And of that small amount, only 30% are actually overturned, according to Rose. There are three rounds of appeals — two by mail and a court hearing.

Fixed will only handle the first two appeals for the time being.

The number of overall citations in San Francisco has fallen in recent years as the city has rolled out its own technological tools, such as pay-by-phone and meters that take credit cards, in an effort to make payment easier.

“We’d much rather have people pay the meter than pay a fine,” said Rose.

Fixed’s business model isn’t completely new. There are companies that handle driving and parking violations for large corporations such as FedEx and UPS. In New York City, commercial delivery companies account for 20% to 30% of the city’s 10 million parking tickets every year, according to Crain’s New York Business.

The difference is that Fixed is making this service available to individuals. Hegarty can see eventually expanding into speeding tickets and other small financial annoyances, such as cable company fees. He thinks Fixed could help in any area where the fee amount is small enough not to protest in person, but still big enough to make someone angry.

“That’s our sweet spot,” he said.