Guidelines For Client Operational Staff

KB article ID:5100

Prevent eligibility of must-appear cases (Contractual)

Mark charges on new cases as must-appear where appropriate to prevent electronic plea.  Sometimes it is necessary for an otherwise may-appear charge be indicated as a must-appear due to certain circumstances (e.g. two or more citations resulting from the same incident)

If someone asks why their case isn't eligible for e-plea

Contact GAL if the case is still ineligible after checking all these issues.

If someone asks why their case isn't eligible for e-pay

Contact GAL if the case is still ineligible after checking all these issues.

FTA cases

If defendant does not pay or appear...

Docketing issues relating to e-pay

Remove cases with last-minute payments from the docket

Filing Receipts

How Judici interacts with the court and what happens if something goes wrong in the middle

Typical card payment technologies, even simple swipers, process the payments continuously and collect a batch of them to be settled (finalized) later, often at the end of the day.  This means that any payment system can wind up with "orphan" payments for which the money never changes hands.  For example: if a Clerk using a swiper enters a payment into JIMS, and it doesn't settle because the card is reported stolen between the time of the payment and batch settlement, the payment entered by the Clerk will also be an orphan.  But unlike a simple card swiper, Judici E-Pay is tightly integrated with the court's case management system.  So to understand what happens if the court or Judici loses its internet connection or has some other error, you have to understand the back and forth between Judici and the court. 

Judici actually runs the transaction in multiple steps, which can also cause orphans in the rare situation in which some part of the process cannot be completed due to an error (e.g. a loss of connection or other error).  Judici actually operates a lot like gas stations. They run a “pre-authorization” transaction to make sure you have enough money to pay for the gas. Then, once you finish pumping your gas, they void the pre-authorized transaction and run a new one for the actual amount.

Judici does something similar:

If for some reason Judici and court staff fail to realize that there is an orphan before the pre-authorization expires, Judici has the right to resubmit the transaction.  As noted here, this is allowed when the specific product or service which the individual purchased hasn't yet been delivered.  For example, can't charge you for a back-ordered item until it is shipped.  But they want to continue to have a hold on the funds it will take to pay for it, so they can re-do that authorization every time it expires... until such time as the product actually ships.

Reversing Payments(chargebacks)

The Judici E-Pay/E-Plea portion of our Judici Refund Policy limits the need for refunds. But reversals of payments (though not necessarily the associated pleas) will still happen (due to mistakes, etc.)Chargebacks can have implications for the Judici side and the JIMS side:

The Judici side

 When a customer issues a chargeback:

If the chargeback is not reversed:

If the chargeback is reversed:

Customer contacts Judici support for a refund

Judici will contact the court for direction as to whether to issue a credit.

The Judici E-Pay/E-Plea portion of our Judici Refund Policy clearly indicates that refunds will not be made. But reversals of payments (though not necessarily the associated pleas) will still happen (due to errors, etc.)There are two sides to a reversal, one in JIMS and the other with the processor:

Reversing a payment in JIMS

Pleas (even electronic ones) are usually reversed by a motion to vacate and a court appearance. The AOIC indicated to GAL in September 2008 (FB6586) that failure of a payment transaction should NOT automatically affect the disposition and sentence. And refunds (whether through Judici Support or a chargeback requested by cardholder from their card company) will be treated the same way, because ANY payment reversal can happen after a disposition has been reported through ADR. So backing out a plea when a refund is issued or when the authorized payment fails to settle for some reason actually starts with reversing the payment.

Case 0: E-Pay payment on an existing A/R

Court refunds to the payor as per its normal practices

Case 1: Traffic cases where payment was fully settled

This happens when payor convinces Judici support staff or the credit card company to do a refund. The Court may already have an applicable procedure, as when payment is made using a bad check. If not, the Court should:

Case 2: If the payment failed to settle, normally due to a technical problem

The court isn't involved with this.

Regularly-scheduled tasks

Look for unsettled orphaned transactions

To run the Unsettled Transaction Report:

Disburse Service Fees to Service Provider (Contractual)

As of the conversion to the new processor in late-2015, the Service Provider's fees are disbursed directly to the Service Provider by the card processor, so the court is no longer tasked with disbursement.