Could Online Mediation Really Work?

The MSN Money Blog is reporting today about a new website called VirtualCourthouse.com. The web site claims to provide

a marketplace of qualified professionals to service your case needs. Our service lets you resolve cases entirely online, lowering your costs and increasing your volume.

While I can see the benefit of online arbitration or neutral evaluation, I’m somewhat dubious about how online mediation would work. Before anyone suggests that my resistance stems from some sort of protectionist attitude, I am all for developing new ways to help parties resolve disputes. Again, I see how this could work very well for small claims arbitration. Especially, as the article states,

[cases that have only] two parties, involves a dispute over money (as opposed to other forms of relief) and is not emotionally charged, he said. Fender-bender lawsuits fit the bill; custody cases and nasty disputes between neighbors do not.

In that case, there is not much testimony to hear or documents to review. As the founder of the website states,

[if you have a] soft-tissue injury in a rear-end automobile accident [where the plaintiff] went to a chiropractor 15 times and incurred bills of $2,600. . . . It’s just an issue of how much is reasonable compensation for this individual.

But one of the key benefits of mediation is the face-to-face interaction with the participants. To listen to their positions, their interests, their needs. How is this accomplished online? Chat rooms? I handle these type of cases a few days a month in small claims court. I doubt that any of them could have been settled online.