Dispute Resolution Policy
OnSyra · Version 1.0 · DRAFT — requires counsel review
Money is held in escrow from award, so a dispute is decided before funds move, not chased afterwards. That is the point of the escrow design.
The ladder
1. Talk (0–48 hours)
Every engagement has a message thread. Most disputes are a misunderstanding about scope. Raise it here first — the platform requires it before a formal dispute, because it resolves the majority of cases.
2. Request correction (Client)
If the work is incomplete or wrong, the Client requests correction with specific reasons during the review window. The Provider gets a fair opportunity to return and put it right. A rework request is not a dispute.
3. Formal dispute
Either party opens a dispute on the engagement. From that moment:
- The disputed amount stays held. Neither side can move it.
- Both parties submit their account and evidence within 5 business days.
- All the work evidence — photos, GPS check-in and check-out, time logs, signatures, tasks, message history, the frozen work contract — is available to the reviewer automatically. Neither party has to preserve it.
4. LCS review
An LCS reviewer who is not involved in either account decides within 10 business days of the evidence deadline.
The reviewer may: release the full amount to the Provider; return it to the Client; split it; or order rework with a revised deadline.
The decision is written and states its reasons. Both parties receive it.
5. Appeal
Either party may appeal within 10 business days, on the grounds that evidence was overlooked or the decision misapplied this policy. A different, more senior reviewer decides. That decision is final within the platform.
6. Outside the platform
Nothing here prevents either party pursuing legal remedies. Small-claims court in particular remains available and is often the proportionate route.
How evidence is weighed
Roughly in this order, because this is what tends to be reliable:
- The frozen work contract — what was actually agreed at award
- Objective platform evidence — GPS check-in/out, timestamps, time logs
- Work evidence — before/progress/after photos, signatures, completed tasks
- Contemporaneous messages — what was said at the time
- Written accounts — what each side says afterwards
Evidence created at the time outweighs an explanation offered later. This is why the platform pushes hard for photos, check-ins and signatures: they protect whoever is telling the truth.
Common outcomes
| Situation | Usual outcome |
|---|---|
| Work done as specified; Client simply unhappy | Released to Provider |
| Work incomplete, no valid reason | Returned to Client, or split by proportion completed |
| Scope changed verbally, never written to the order | Usually split — the lesson is to put changes on the order |
| Provider attended, blocked by site access | Released, often in part — attendance is evidenced by GPS |
| Provider never attended, no notice | Returned to Client; reliability score affected |
| Client will not approve and will not dispute | Auto-approves at the end of the review window; Provider paid |
| Safety refusal, hazard documented | Released for time attended; no reliability penalty |
Timeframes
| Step | Limit |
|---|---|
| Raise in-thread first | 48 hours before a formal dispute |
| Open a dispute | Within 30 days of submission for review |
| Submit evidence | 5 business days |
| LCS decision | 10 business days |
| Appeal | 10 business days |
Fairness commitments
- Reviewers have no stake in the outcome and are not compensated by result.
- Neither party's spend or tenure is a factor. A large Client does not win because it is large.
- Reviewers see both submissions, not one side's framing.
- Decisions state reasons, so a pattern of bad decisions is visible.
- Repeated bad-faith disputes are themselves a breach of the Acceptable Use Policy, on either side.
Contact: disputes@onsyra.com