Legal Question in Personal Injury in California
Insurance company disputing injuries based upon minimal property damage
Received compression fracture in a rear end accident. Insurance company has only offered $500.00 because the property damage was minimal. The vehicle which was struck was fitted with bumper impactors. The impactors had to be replaced as they were completely 'blown'. So, the impactors did the job for which they were designed...but isn't just to minmize property damage? The other driver upon exiting the car exlaimed "are you allright, I hit you so hard?" My argument is that the force of the impact, still had a maximum effect on the persons in the car, even tho' the impactors minimized the property damage. Am I being unreasonable?
3 Answers from Attorneys
Re: Insurance company disputing injuries based upon minimal property damage
Based on the information your provided I think you have a valid argument. Was a scene investigator able to determine the speed of the vehicle that hit you? If so this helps your theory. Just because the property damage was minimal does not automatically mean that you were not hurt. Obviously these bumpers did do their job and prevented your vehicle from being damaged but the impact was still severe enough to cause injuries. A $500 settlement is unreasonable based on the facts you gave. I would need additional facts regarding your medical bills and the doctors diagnosis before I could give you an idea of what kind of settlement you should be asking for. If you would like to speak with me I do offer a free, no obligation consultation. I can help you determine what a fair settlement is and tell you whether or not I think the insurance company would settle for this amount without you having to file a lawsuit. You can reach my office toll free at 877-546-9918. I look forward to speaking with you. I do not recommend settling this case without first speaking with an attorney.
Sincerely,
John Hayes, Esq.
Re: Insurance company disputing injuries based upon minimal property damage
Your argument is very sound but will require expert proof. If you have a serious injury then you should retain an attorney and you must file any lawsuit for your injuries within one year of the accident. Please contact my office if you want further information.
Re: Insurance company disputing injuries based upon minimal property damage
I note that your question to LawGuru.com has been directed to me as I specialize in Personal Injury law.
Are you being unreasonable? NO, but you are finding out that while cars and trucks are designed better and better every year, the human body still remans the same. You are also facing an uphill battle since the entire insurance industry has had great success in distorting this problem to the general public and to juries. The insurance industry will spend thousands of dollars on various types of experts to testify that "you could not have been hurt in this accident." And, they have had great success in getting juries to award little or nothing to accident victims in your situation.
A more detailed evaluation of your particular case would need to be done to determine if it is worthwhile to hire an attorney or take the matter to Small Claims court.
If the accident occurred in Orange County or the other driver lives in this area, I would be glad to discuss your case in more detail. My phone number is 714) 963-5123 and I wish you the best of luck.
Sincerely,
SAM M. EAGLE, ATTORNEY AT LAW
10101 SLATER AVENUE, #218
FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CA 92708
TELEPHONE: (714) 963-5123
FACSIMILE: (714) 964-9993
E-MAIL: [email protected]
Related Questions & Answers
Looking for something else?
10,200 active attorneys ready to answer your legal questions today.
Featured Attorneys
Earn additional revenue and grow your business.
