Pain and Suffering Claim

by Guest » Tue Nov 20, 2012 05:23 pm
Guest

Another car ran a stop sign causing me to t-bone them. The police report put full blame for the accident on the other driver. The accident totaled both vehicles and the air bag caused several of my ribs to be dislocated. It took a little over 3 months of chiropractic care for my ribs to be healed properly (they would extremely painfully have to be put back in place at times). The insurance company has made me an offer that covers the medical bills ($4,100), lost wages ($1,200) and pain and suffering ($2,000). I let the insurance company know I would review the offer and I am trying to decide whether the pain and suffering was adequate. At times the injury was painful and while most of the time I work at a desk, the times I was in the field could be difficult.

I've done some research online and have found that this type of injury may be worth anywhere from $13,000 to $21,000 including specials but I am not confident in these estimates. I am wondering what everyone else thinks regarding this claim. Since the insurance company offered me $7,300 should I decline and make a counter offer or should I decline and see what they come back with? Also, is the $13,000 to $21,000 a reasonable place to start negotiations?

Total Comments: 6

Posted: Wed Nov 21, 2012 12:35 pm Post Subject: Pain and Suffering Claim

Contact an insurance agent and opt for such an insurance policy that you can comfortably afford.

Posted: Sat Nov 24, 2012 12:27 am Post Subject:

Contact an insurance agent and opt for such an insurance policy that you can comfortably afford.


This is about the most worthless piece of advice adamsarthur87, a self-described "financial writer" with no insurance background has given so far. It bears no relation to the question.

The insurance company has made me an offer that covers the medical bills ($4,100), lost wages ($1,200) and pain and suffering ($2,000)


Your medical expenses and lost wages are known as "special" or "specific" damages -- something with an actual price tag. They total $5300. There is no scale of what any injury is worth as far as "general" damages (pain and suffering, loss of consortium, loss of love and affection, etc) are concerned.

$2000 sounds unreasonably low. $5,000 to $7,500 is perhaps a better point at which to settle. To get there on your own, you may have to negotiate down from a higher starting point, so ask for $10,000 and see what they offer. Continue the give and take until you're happy or they blow you off, at which point you can consider suing the at-fault driver.

Posted: Tue Nov 27, 2012 08:29 am Post Subject: go fast

I will suggest to you extremely that you go for a car accident lawyer and ask his/her help in this regard. They are the experts in this field. With some proper assessment and guidance you will get a complete compensation that you deserve. Don't delay more and get some advice.

Posted: Tue Nov 27, 2012 01:02 pm Post Subject:

go for a car accident lawyer and ask his/her help in this regard. They are the experts in this field. With some proper assessment and guidance you will get a complete compensation that you deserve


The voice of inexperience.

First, there is no such thing as a "car accident lawyer". They are "personal injury attorneys" -- they handle more than just auto accident claims.

Second, when you enlist the services of an attorney, to will NOT get the "complete compensation you deserve."

Why not? Because your attorney will skim 30% to 40% (or more) off the top. And if your auto insurer or health insurer is entitled to subrogation of your claim, that, too, will come off after the attorney gets the first fruits. In many cases the injured person ends up with less than anyone else.

That's why you will not get the "complete compensation you deserve".

Can attorneys be useful? Of course. But not before you've done all you can on your own to resolve the matter amicably with the insurance company. When you are confronted with a stone wall, then you can consider hiring an attorney to take up your cause.

The attorney should be a LAST RESORT, not the first weapon of choice.

Posted: Tue Nov 27, 2012 01:23 pm Post Subject:

@MaxHerr, yeah ofcourse you know it better than anyone it seems.
"The voice of inexperience ", unlike you I wasn't born experienced, I am still learning, I saw one of my friend got all the benefits hiring a lawyer that's the reason I suggested it and some people are just waiting for the chance to brag.

Anyways thanks for your info. "It" was an eye opener.

Posted: Tue Nov 27, 2012 01:56 pm Post Subject:

and some people are just waiting for the chance to brag.


What is this supposed to mean?

I'm not disputing that your "friend" did not benefit in some way from hiring an attorney. The facts of his case are not the same as the OP's here. And you probably don't know all the "facts" of your "friend's" matter either. I certainly don't.

What I do know is that the OP in this thread has a small-value loss. He will NOT benefit by going to an attorney without attempting first to resolve the claim on his own.

At this point, he and the insurance company are still talking to one another. Once you involve an attorney, the insurance company cannot talk to you -- it can only talk to your attorney. Read all the other posts here where people are completely frustrated because they can't get any information or answers from their attorneys, and their claims are unresolved after months of waiting.

Hiring an attorney at this stage of the OP's claim is foolish, but attorneys will take any case that comes their way for the 30% to 40% they get just for settling a claim . . . without telling the individual that they could do the same or better on their own.

Each case is different, but it all starts with an attempt to get the claim resolved amicably. Attorneys would have you believe that insurance companies NEVER treat claimants fairly, when, in reality, the overwhelming majority of claims are handled properly, timely, and fairly. If that were not so, insurance companies would have gone out of business decades ago.

People come to this forum seeking sound advice and help with their insurance situations. Giving advice such as you did may be well-intentioned, but it's not good advice, because it is based on observation and not on knowledge. Unfortunately, your observation is more limited than your knowledge. That's not a knock on you, it's just a fact.

Before I came into this industry, I had one such observation with a completely different outcome. My father was critically injured in a traffic collision in 1973, spent four months in the hospital and several more months in a hospital bed at home after that -- didn't return to work for almost one year. He took some bad advice and hired an attorney right away.

The attorney filed a $1,000,000 lawsuit against the other party. Failing to put his ducks in a row, the attorney caved in on the day of trial (three years later) when a "surprise witness" miraculously appeared for the defense. The attorney settled the case for $50,000, taking almost $18,000 off the top. Then my father's employer came looking for restitution of its workers' comp wage claim -- $30,000. And the health insurance company came looking for its $35,000. Well, there obviously wasn't enough money to satisfy everyone (except the attorney, whose share comes off the top). The attorney took more than anyone else. The remaining $32,000 was split three ways, with my father getting about $15,000.

So I, too, saw what attorneys can do for folks. And now, with much greater knowledge, I know what folks can do for themselves and what they need attorneys to do for them. And I help both individuals and attorneys with their insurance matters.

Add your comment

Image CAPTCHA
Enter the characters shown in the image.