subject: Plaintiff Seriosly Hurt In Accident With Suv However Insurance Comapny Makes Low Ball Offer [print this page] There is a benefit in reviewing car accident cases in which insurance companies chose to make offers well under the amount ultimately achieved by the victim at trial. These cases illustrate the factors which may come into consideration in the offer and the issues that may influence the final result.
In this situation an individual driving an SUV was involved in an accident with bicyclist. As per the victim, the driver was coming in the opposite direction when, without warning, he made a U-turn right in front of him forcing the bicyclist to go over the SUVs hood. The victim tore a cartilage in his wrist during the accident. This caused him problems at work where he was a mechanic for a high-end motor vehicle dealer. And a doctor testified that the bicyclist's wrist will probably subsequently have to be fused and that this will probably end his career as a mechanic. This would lead to a loss of earning capacity.
During its investigation into the circumstances of the accident the law firm that represented the plaintiff discovered that , at the time of the accident, the driver was test-driving the SUV on behalf of his employer. The objective of the test drive was to put together an advertising review of the vehicle.
A portion of this sum ($250,000) was for economic damages and part ($300,000) was for the non-economic damages such as pain and suffering and the nature of the injury.
Both sides knew the particulars of this lawsuit prior to trial. The testimony of the doctor was not a surprise. However, each side saw the matter from a distinct perspective and as a result arrived at a very different conclusion as to the proper settlement value. The insurance company adjuster and defense attorney no doubt saw the case as one that involved an injury from which there was a full recovery. They most likely discounted the bicyclists assertion that he had problems from the injury when he returned to work. And they probably felt that the physician's testimony was either too speculative or too far removed from the present.
But the law firm that helped the bicyclist positioned the case so that it was not about an injury that resolved but about an injury that would do even more significant damage in the future. The injury may not have required surgery immediately but it caused sufficient damage to the wrist that it would require in all likelihood, not only surgery but a fusion. And this would almost certainly put an end to the plaintiff's career as a mechanic of high-end cars. By letting the jury consider the total effect of the injury the law firm was able to achieve a verdict over 18 times the amount offered by the insurer.
by: Joseph Hernandez
welcome to Insurances.net (https://www.insurances.net)
