Breach Settlement Claims Dispute and Appeals UI in Figma

Quick answer

Breach settlement claims dispute and appeals UI gives victims a structured path when claims are denied or payments fail—without mixing legal court appeals with informal admin reconsideration. Design a denial detail page with plain-language reason codes, administrative reconsideration wizard for new evidence, appeal deadline enforcement, and court appeal registration (interest capture only unless legal requires full filing). Connect to claim status, privacy request queue, file upload, and regulatory archive. Start from the Figma guides hub and pair with forms, inline alerts, and Dev Mode handoff.

Who this is for

Product designers building post-denial experiences that respect court-supervised timelines—not open-ended support tickets.
Settlement administrators and legal teams who need audit-ready reconsideration logs separate from informal privacy requests.
Support and call center leads who must route “my claim was denied” calls without promising outcomes the UI cannot deliver.

Denial detail and reason transparency

ClaimDeniedDetail — CLM-992-88421 · Denied 2027-05-02 · Settlement SET-992
├── Header: Your claim could not be approved · Reference CLM-992-88421
├── Plain-language reason (from legal-approved code list):
│   ├── Code: ELIG-002 · "We could not verify you were in the affected class period"
│   ├── What this means: Account records did not match notice criteria IND-441
│   └── What this does NOT mean: Accusation of fraud · Permanent ban from future programs
├── What you can do next (ordered by deadline):
│   ├── [ Request reconsideration ] — Submit new proof · Deadline: 2027-06-02
│   ├── [ File court appeal ] — Preserve rights per notice · Link court instructions PDF
│   └── [ Contact administrator ] — Clarify reason only · No outcome guarantee
├── Documents: Denial letter PDF · Original notice SN-992-v1 · FAQ link
├── Privacy path: Data dispute about eligibility records → [privacy queue](/designing-privacy-request-queue-and-case-management-ui-in-figma/) (separate from settlement appeal)
└── Footer: No legal advice · Settlement administrator contact · [Notice FAQ](/designing-breach-faq-and-notice-landing-page-ui-in-figma/)

Element	Purpose
Reason code mapping	Internal codes → victim-readable copy; never expose reviewer free-text
Deadline prominence	Missing reconsideration window is top support driver
Separate privacy path	GDPR rectification ≠ settlement eligibility appeal
No legal advice banner	Standard on every denial surface

Verdict: Denial UI must never feel punitive—clear next steps reduce escalations to media relations and regulators.

Administrative reconsideration wizard

ReconsiderationWizard — CLM-992-88421 · Appeal type: Administrative · Step 2 of 4
├── Step 1: Review denial reason ✓ · Acknowledged ELIG-002 explanation
├── Step 2: Submit new or corrected evidence (current):
│   ├── Guided prompts based on denial code:
│   │   ├── ELIG-002: Upload account statement, welcome email, or billing record from class period
│   │   ├── PROOF-001: Additional documentation for enhanced tier fraud loss
│   │   └── DUP-003: Explain relationship if same household filed multiple claims
│   ├── [File upload](/designing-file-upload-and-drag-drop-ui-in-figma/) · Max 5 files · PDF/JPG · Virus scan states
│   ├── Optional written statement · 500 char limit · No legal arguments required
│   └── Attestation: "Information provided is true to the best of my knowledge"
├── Step 3: Confirm contact information · Email and mailing address for decision letter
├── Step 4: Submit reconsideration:
│   ├── Reconsideration ID RCN-992-88421 · Status: Submitted
│   ├── Expected decision window: 45 days · No payment until final
│   └── Confirmation email · Printable receipt
└── Progress: [Stepper UI](/designing-progress-indicators-and-steppers-in-figma/) · One active RCN-* per CLM-* at a time

Block duplicate reconsideration while RCN-* is pending—show status link instead of new submission.

Reconsideration status tracker

ReconsiderationTracker — RCN-992-88421 · CLM-992-88421 · Submitted 2027-05-15 · Status: Under review
├── Status stepper: Submitted → Under review → Upheld denial / Overturned → Claim reinstated or closed
├── Current detail:
│   ├── "A different reviewer is evaluating your new documentation"
│   ├── Expected update: Within 45 days of submission
│   └── Original denial reason ELIG-002 remains until overturned
├── Outcomes:
│   ├── Overturned → CLM-* moves to Approved · Handoff to [payment disbursement](/designing-breach-settlement-payment-disbursement-and-payout-tracking-ui-in-figma/)
│   ├── Upheld → Final denial · Court appeal path only if within notice window
│   └── Partial → Enhanced tier denied, standard approved (if settlement allows split remedies)
├── User actions:
│   ├── Upload additional docs if administrator requested (REQ-MORE state)
│   └── Contact administrator · Pre-fill RCN-* reference
└── Call center parity: Agent shows same RCN-* status enum · Cannot override in UI

Use inline alerts for REQ-MORE state—“Action needed: upload document by DATE.”

Court appeal registration (victim-facing)

Full court appeals usually happen outside the settlement portal. UI role is registration and document handoff:

CourtAppealRegistration — Settlement SET-992 · CLM-992-88421 · Final denial upheld
├── Entry: Only after RCN-* upheld OR direct denial if reconsideration waived per notice
├── Hard stop check: Court appeal deadline 2027-08-15 · Countdown banner
├── What this form does:
│   ├── Records intent to appeal · Does NOT file with court on user's behalf
│   └── Provides court filing instructions PDF from [regulatory archive](/designing-regulatory-authority-correspondence-and-breach-filing-archive-ui-in-figma/)
├── Capture: Name, CLM-*, email, mailing address, acknowledgment of court process
├── Confirmation: Appeal interest ID APL-992-1204 · Mail packet option for users without email
├── Link external: Court docket · Settlement administrator objection archive
└── No outcome tracking in product UI unless legal requires post-filing status webhook

Verdict: Do not build a full litigation workspace unless counsel specifies—interest registration + document repository covers most class-action appeal UX.

Administrator appeal review queue (internal)

AppealReviewQueue — Settlement SET-992 · 89 pending RCN-* · 12 REQ-MORE
├── Filters: Denial code · Submitted date · Reviewer assignment · Fraud flag
├── Row: RCN-* · CLM-* · Original denial · New doc count · Days open
├── Review panel:
│   ├── Side-by-side: Original claim proof vs reconsideration upload
│   ├── Denial code ELIG-002 · Reviewer checklist per code
│   ├── Actions: Overturn · Uphold · Request more · Escalate to legal
│   ├── Required comment for audit · No silent overrides
│   └── CLM-* status sync on decision · Notification template trigger
├── SLA dashboard: Median days to decision · Overdue RCN-* · Batch assign
└── Audit log: rcn_id · reviewer_id · decision · prior_denial_code · document_hashes[]

Share RCN- and CLM- IDs** across victim portal, admin queue, and call center scripts.

Dispute type comparison

Dispute type	Portal handles	Escalates to
Administrative reconsideration	RCN-* wizard, proof upload	Settlement administrator
Payment failure retry	PAY-* retry flow	Payment processor
Privacy data correction	Privacy queue	DPO / privacy team
Court appeal	APL-* interest registration	Court filing (external)
Fraud accusation	Do not expose in victim UI	Internal fraud team only

Design entry routing on denial page so users pick the correct path—misrouted privacy tickets slow settlement teams.

Comparison: disputes vs adjacent surfaces

Surface	Focus	This UI adds
Settlement claims	Initial filing	Post-denial recovery paths
Payment disbursement	Approved payouts	Disputes about amount after approval (rare—legal gate)
Privacy request queue	GDPR/CCPA rights	Separate from settlement eligibility
Eligibility portal	Pre-claim check	Does not replace denial appeal
Regulatory archive	Authority filings	Court appeal instruction PDFs

Handoff checklist (Dev Mode)

ClaimDeniedDetail — claim_id (CLM-), denial_reason_code, denial_date, reconsideration_deadline, court_appeal_deadline, notice_version (SN-).
ReconsiderationWizard — rcn_id (RCN-*), claim_id, denial_code, step_index, document_ids[], attestation_text_id, submitted_at.
ReconsiderationStatus — rcn_id, claim_id, status_enum, status_history[], decision_date, outcome_enum, reviewer_id (internal only).
CourtAppealRegistration — apl_id (APL-*), claim_id, settlement_id, registration_date, court_instructions_doc_id.
AppealReviewPanel — rcn_id, reviewer_id, action_enum, comment, document_comparison_refs[], notification_template_id.
DisputeRouting — entry_point, dispute_type_enum, blocked_reason, redirect_target_url.

Common mistakes

Mistake	Why it hurts	Fix
Merge privacy rectification with settlement appeal	Wrong team, wrong SLA	Separate CTAs and ticket types
Show internal reviewer notes to victims	Legal exposure, confusion	Reason codes only
Allow unlimited reconsideration submissions	Queue flooding	One active RCN-* per CLM-*
Promise appeal outcomes in UI copy	UPL risk	”Administrator will review” language
Missing reconsideration deadline	Users lose rights silently	Countdown on denial page
Build full court filing form without legal spec	Non-compliant filings	Interest registration + PDF instructions
Different denial status on phone vs portal	Support chaos	Shared CLM-* / RCN-* enums
No REQ-MORE upload path	Abandoned appeals	Action-needed alert with deadline

Recommended workflow

Legal delivers denial reason code list and reconsideration rules before wireframes.
Design denial detail first—wizard and admin queue inherit reason-code branching.
Separate RCN- from privacy tickets* at routing layer—not just different copy.
Build admin review panel as internal variant of reconsideration evidence viewer.
Sync RCN- lookup* with call center scripts before first denial batch mail.
Archive RCN- decisions* to compliance exports per settlement administrator requirements.

FAQ

Can users appeal if they already opted out?

No—opt-out (OPT-*) excludes them from the settlement class. Denial appeal paths apply only to claim filers.

What if reconsideration is overturned after payment batch?

Trigger exception payment in disbursement console—do not auto-rebatch without finance sign-off.

Should denied users re-file a new CLM-*?

Block duplicate CLM-* for same settlement—force RCN-* path unless legal allows amended claim as new ID.

How do we handle hostile or threatening submissions?

Admin-only fraud flag—no victim-visible “you are flagged” state. Route to internal queue; call center scripts for de-escalation.

Mobile reconsideration support?

Mobile-first proof upload—denial emails open on phones. Use file upload patterns with camera capture option.

Next steps

Design breach settlement notice and victim compensation claims UI in Figma — initial claims that may enter denial flow
Design breach settlement payment disbursement and payout tracking UI in Figma — payout after reconsideration overturn
Design privacy request queue and case management UI in Figma — data disputes separate from settlement appeals
Design breach FAQ and notice landing page UI in Figma — public copy for denial and appeal timelines
Design breach call center and agent script UI in Figma — RCN-* and denial reason lookup for agents

Designing breach settlement claims dispute and appeals UI in Figma: denial reasons, evidence resubmission, and court appeal tracking