DESPITE RECOMMENDATIONS TO ESTABLISH SMALL CLAIMS COURTS SEPARATE FROM OTHER COURTS, THE BRITISH GOVERNMENT DECIDED TO KEEP SMALL CLAIMS WITHIN THE COUNTY COURT SYSTEM, AND TO HAVE THEM HANDLED BY TWO METHODS: PRETRIAL REVIEW OR ARBITRATION. TWO VOLUNTARY ARBITRATION INSTITUTIONS, A MANCHESTER TRIBUNAL AND THE LONDON SMALL CLAIMS COURT (FORMERLY THE WESTMINSTER SMALL CLAIMS COURT) WERE ALSO SET UP IN 1971 AND 1973, TO PERMIT DISPUTE RESOLUTION BY AN INDEPENDENT ARBITRATOR, USUALLY A LAWYER. TO EVALUATE THE COUNTY COURTS' EFFECTIVENESS IN HANDLING SMALL CLAIMS, 30 COUNTY COURT REGISTRARS (ABOUT ONE FIFTH OF THE TOTAL) WERE INTERVIEWED. IN ADDITION, NEWSPAPER ACCOUNTS, OTHER WRITTEN REPORTS, AND INFORMAL CONTACTS WERE USED TO ASSESS LITIGANTS' ATTITUDES. REGISTRARS UNIFORMLY AGREED THAT THE COUNTY COURTS' USE OF PRETRIAL REVIEW WORKED WELL, IMPROVED THE COURTS' EFFICIENCY, AND RESOLVED MANY DISPUTES, BUT TENDED TO RAISE LITIGANTS' COSTS AND DID NOT ADEQUATELY PREPARE THE AVERAGE PERSON FOR THE LATER HEARING. REGISTRARS ALSO AGREED THAT ARBITRATION'S MAIN ADVANTAGES WERE INFORMALITY, ACCESSIBILITY, SPEED, AND LOW COSTS; DISADVANTAGES WERE THE TIME REQUIRED FOR ARBITRATION HEARINGS AND LACK OF APPEAL POSSIBILITIES. LITIGANTS' ATTITUDES WERE LARGELY POSITIVE, ALTHOUGH PRESS ACCOUNTS HAVE BEEN MIXED. ALTHOUGH THE NEW COUNTY COURT PROCEDURES HAVE MET WITH RELATVE SUCCESS, THE VOLUNTARY ARBITRATION PROGRAMS AND TRADE ASSOCIATION PLANS WILL PROBABLY NOT EXPAND OR ENDURE. NEVERTHELESS, COUNTY COURTS SHOULD ADOPT SOME OF THEIR FEATURES. TABLES, FOOTNOTES, INTERVIEW QUESTIONS, AND RULES FOR THE VOLUNTARY ARBITRATION PROGRAMS ARE INCLUDED. (CFW)