I'm working on a case today where my client hired me eight months post crash. In these scenarios I can't fix past damage. For example, normally I can attempt to minimize my clients owed medical bills by putting them through health insurance if the provider takes health insurance.
Hospital bills are usually the issue here. One visit can cost $8,000.00. And Personal Injury Protection (PIP) usually covers the first $10,000.00. If the hospital bill is submitted to PIP it is usually paid in full leaving $2,000.00 for future treatment. However, if you put that $8,000.00 bill through health insurance it averages out to $2,000.00 and PIP can be directed to pay that leaving you with $8,000.00 instead of $2,000.00. If you have $8,000 for future treatment its going to make your payback on total medicals a lot lower and thus your recovery bigger (generally speaking).
The average person doesn't know any of that because they don't do this every single day so when a client comes to me eight months post crash and owes money to providers that eats into his or her recovery.
Another issue is insurance companies trying to pretend they are your friend. My experience has been the adjusters aren't asking you questions to help you. They are asking questions to try to create problems as far as liability and damages are concerned so when a client provides a recorded statement to a carrier it isn't the best of ideas (generally speaking). They also want health records releases. I worked on a case where my client had a lumbar (low back) spine injury 10 years ago, but no problems up until a crash with cervical (neck). The adjuster wanted to make a big deal about the injury ten years ago. Is that really acting in good faith? From my perspective it is not, but they have a job to do in saving the insurance company money so they are going to take positions that are not substantiated. Finally, the most offensive thing I see is pop out adjusters offering people between $1,000.00 and $1,500.00 right after a crash. There is NO WAY a person can intelligently determine the extent of their injuries right after a crash. I've seen an insurance company offer $1,000.00 to a guy with a torn rotator cuff. That should be illegal.
Advertising Material. Ranting Lawyer. www.louisville-injury-lawyer.com
Showing posts with label Dettman and Associates. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Dettman and Associates. Show all posts
Friday, September 21, 2018
Friday, August 3, 2018
Dear Insurance Company, Pay the Deductible and Avoid the Personal Injury Lawyer
A former employee called me last week and told me her father was in a car crash and needed my help. He had been rear ended by an uninsured driver and wasn't sure what to do. After speaking to him I learned that he was mostly just pissed at his own insurance company for making him pay a $100.00 deductible on his property damage. He understandably wanted to stick it to the uninsured driver as well. Luckily, my client has uninsured coverage and can make a claim. However, I don't think he would be making a claim if his insurance company just paid for his deductible. I'd say at least 40% of what I do it related to insurance companies making stupid decisions. I'm sure if some MBA evaluated this he would tell State Farm to pay the $100.00 deductible and hope this thing will go away. Instead, I'm making an uninsured claim that won't resolve for less than several thousand dollars. The insurance company will front that money and then attempt to collect it from the uninsured driver. Catch is uninsured people don't have money so they will spend a lot of time chasing their tail. I'm not sad about it, but its an inefficiency in our system.
Opinion and Advertising Material for Brian Dettman www.louisville-injury-lawyer.com
Opinion and Advertising Material for Brian Dettman www.louisville-injury-lawyer.com
Tuesday, July 31, 2018
Insurance Offer Three Days Post Crash
An Allstate Lawyer took my clients deposition last week. My client was asked about who communicated with her after the crash. Turns out that an Allstate adjuster called my client a couple of days post crash and offered her $500 for her injuries in exchange for closing out her claim. My client has an injury that is going to last a lifetime. The notion that an Allstate Adjuster would call her up a few days post crash and try to resolve her claim is offensive to me. Here is a person involved in a big crash with serious injuries and Allstate is doing its best to screw the injured person over by resolving it quickly and for less than what the case is worth.
Lets pretend for a minute that my client is in a financial bind and $500 sounds pretty good. They accept. From that minute forward they are prevented from further compensation to pay medical bills. What if my client needed a surgery and didn't have health insurance? I can see a scenario where the client goes bankrupt on account of the medical expenses. And all of this because of an Allstate "pop out" adjuster.
There are rules in place that prevent lawyers from communicating with injured persons post crash. There should be a similar rule for insurance companies. I might be ok with a rule that allows Allstate to pay 500 bucks up front but preserves the right of the injured party to re-open the claim at any point within the statute of limitations, but allowing unfettered communication to an unrepresented party by a sophisticated insurance company is absurd.
Nobody ever hears about this stuff and it happens on a daily basis.
Lawyer Rant & Advertising Material by Brian Dettman www.louisville-injury-lawyer.com
Lets pretend for a minute that my client is in a financial bind and $500 sounds pretty good. They accept. From that minute forward they are prevented from further compensation to pay medical bills. What if my client needed a surgery and didn't have health insurance? I can see a scenario where the client goes bankrupt on account of the medical expenses. And all of this because of an Allstate "pop out" adjuster.
There are rules in place that prevent lawyers from communicating with injured persons post crash. There should be a similar rule for insurance companies. I might be ok with a rule that allows Allstate to pay 500 bucks up front but preserves the right of the injured party to re-open the claim at any point within the statute of limitations, but allowing unfettered communication to an unrepresented party by a sophisticated insurance company is absurd.
Nobody ever hears about this stuff and it happens on a daily basis.
Lawyer Rant & Advertising Material by Brian Dettman www.louisville-injury-lawyer.com
Wednesday, April 18, 2018
The Defendant Has Insurance
I'm prepping for two upcoming trials.
In 99% of the cases I have the defendant is insured and the lawyer representing the defendant was hired by the insurance company. In the other 1% of cases the defendant has money.
The first, case I'm working on is a dental battery. The lawyers from the other side, in an effort to be paid by the insurance company, are trying to change it into a malpractice case (insurance companies don't pay lawyers for solely battery claims as they are usually excluded from coverage). I've continued to tell them this is a battery case and I get why they are trying to argue otherwise $$$ :) The defendant in this case has assets and this case is the exception to the rule.
The second case I'm working on is a "he said he said" car crash case. My client and the defendant both say that the other guy ran the red light. What I find interesting about this case is the defendant did not go to the hospital post crash despite the fact the EMS personnel was telling him to go. I don't think he went because I think he passed out at the wheel in a diabetic attack, he has had that happen before. The defendant did go to the hospital later that day. I think he didn't go initally because he didn't want records reflecting what happened. He says his kids were scared that their dad would die so he went home with them. That doesn't make sense. Your kids would want you to go to the hospital. My client fractured his spine in this case. He has recovered as well as one could, but that is a terrible injury to go through and he still suffers. I remember meeting him for the first time in his full upper body back brace. He was wincing the whole time I spoke with him. The defendant driver is insured which is the norm. The jury won't get to hear anything about the insurance company, but they are on the hook to pay, not the defendant driver. I wish I had some explanation for this but the rules don't allow me to bring it up.
Advertising Material, but mostly thoughts, for www.louisville-injury-lawyer.com and Brian Dettman
In 99% of the cases I have the defendant is insured and the lawyer representing the defendant was hired by the insurance company. In the other 1% of cases the defendant has money.
The first, case I'm working on is a dental battery. The lawyers from the other side, in an effort to be paid by the insurance company, are trying to change it into a malpractice case (insurance companies don't pay lawyers for solely battery claims as they are usually excluded from coverage). I've continued to tell them this is a battery case and I get why they are trying to argue otherwise $$$ :) The defendant in this case has assets and this case is the exception to the rule.
The second case I'm working on is a "he said he said" car crash case. My client and the defendant both say that the other guy ran the red light. What I find interesting about this case is the defendant did not go to the hospital post crash despite the fact the EMS personnel was telling him to go. I don't think he went because I think he passed out at the wheel in a diabetic attack, he has had that happen before. The defendant did go to the hospital later that day. I think he didn't go initally because he didn't want records reflecting what happened. He says his kids were scared that their dad would die so he went home with them. That doesn't make sense. Your kids would want you to go to the hospital. My client fractured his spine in this case. He has recovered as well as one could, but that is a terrible injury to go through and he still suffers. I remember meeting him for the first time in his full upper body back brace. He was wincing the whole time I spoke with him. The defendant driver is insured which is the norm. The jury won't get to hear anything about the insurance company, but they are on the hook to pay, not the defendant driver. I wish I had some explanation for this but the rules don't allow me to bring it up.
Advertising Material, but mostly thoughts, for www.louisville-injury-lawyer.com and Brian Dettman
Friday, February 9, 2018
The first case I just resolved. My clients were on the third floor of an apartment complex. The fire escape was padlocked. Prior to the fire, my client told the landlord to fix the locked escape and his response was move out if you want. You know where this is going, fire happens, client is forced to jump from third floor, severely injures herself. Another client in that incident made it to the locked fire escape and dropped two stories instead of three wherein she fractured her foot. Another law firm had the case before me and dropped it because they couldn't get info from the fire department. I made a limited request for pictures of the fire escape and LMFD provided it which gave me enough information to move forward.
This new case involves a sophisticated property management company failing to respond to my clients repeated requests that the fire alarms be fixed. They ignored it and guess what? A fire. My client didn't have enough time to respond to the fire and fractured her ankle trying to escape. Functioning alarms would have given her enough time to escape. What is really surprising to me is that the property management company failed to call me back to discuss so now they are getting sued. If you own property, hurt someone, and expect a Plaintiff's lawyer to just let it go that is probably a bad look.
Follow up: I sent the property management company a Complaint (Lawsuit) and they called me back the same day. C'MON Man!
www.louisville-injury-lawyer.com Advertising Material.
Thursday, November 16, 2017
The Myth of Auto Insurance "Loyalty." Ongoing USAA Lawsuit.
UPDATE: USAA paid my client a fair sum to resolve his case.
One of my current clients has been with USAA Insurance for years. He is former military and a twenty year veteran in the Louisville Fire Department so USAA seemed like a good idea for him when he signed up. Fast forward to when he actually needs to use his coverage....
While riding a bike in the bike lane in downtown Louisville he was hit by an at fault driver who was insured by Allstate. My client was an avid triathlete and was in great physical shape before the crash. He underwent conservative therapy in an effort to get back on track. He also attempted to continue to do the one thing he loved, triathlons, but eventually reached the point where his pain was too much and he underwent a cervical fusion surgery. Surgery was not something my client wanted because he is now limited in basically everything he does, including triathlons.
I can relate to this client because I'm equally stubborn. I play ice hockey many times a week. If someone crashed into me and I was getting treatment/recovering I'd continue to play hockey. My play would deteriorate, but unless someone told me I'd 100% kill myself playing I'd continue to skate. Same deal with my client, he continued doing triathlons. His speed significantly deteriorated and there were races he could not finish due to pain. Keep in mind he had no issues with his neck before he was hit by a car.
We initially received an offer from the at fault driver that was insufficient so I filed suit. They told us this was a "soft tissue" case because my client waited too long to go get a surgery. We were also told that the other driver had a different set of facts. I deposed their driver and she folded under pressure. I then demanded her policy limits and her insurance company paid. Unfortunately, her policy limits were insufficient to cover my clients damages. When a defendant does not have sufficient coverage the next thing we look to is called Under-Insured Motorist Coverage ("UM" Coverage).
My client purchased UM through USAA. The purpose of this coverage is to step in the shoes of the at-fault driver should he/she have insufficient coverage. This type of coverage is specifically bought and my client purchased it with the hope that when/if he needed it that his insurance company wouldn't put him thorough the ringer. Part of this hope was based on the commercials USAA runs about people being members for life and them having great service.
I demanded my clients UM policy limits. I was told that my client needed to get his head out of the clouds. I replied that in addition to my client's significant injury he was a bit perturbed his own insurance company was making him jump through hoops and basically calling him a liar. I told a USAA representative my client had paid premiums for years to USAA and the USAA representative told me that each and every year that premium expires so my client gets no credit for being a loyal member. According to the law that is a correct statement of fact and I hope this USAA rep is just doing his job. However, the way USAA advertises "members for life" and loyalty I find their position to be untruthful. Don't pretend to be a loyalty based company if loyalty isn't worth anything.
We are set for trial in March. Interestingly, the Allstate Lawyer will be defending USAA's money
Advertising Material for www.louisville-injury-lawyer.com and Brian R. Dettman
One of my current clients has been with USAA Insurance for years. He is former military and a twenty year veteran in the Louisville Fire Department so USAA seemed like a good idea for him when he signed up. Fast forward to when he actually needs to use his coverage....
While riding a bike in the bike lane in downtown Louisville he was hit by an at fault driver who was insured by Allstate. My client was an avid triathlete and was in great physical shape before the crash. He underwent conservative therapy in an effort to get back on track. He also attempted to continue to do the one thing he loved, triathlons, but eventually reached the point where his pain was too much and he underwent a cervical fusion surgery. Surgery was not something my client wanted because he is now limited in basically everything he does, including triathlons.
I can relate to this client because I'm equally stubborn. I play ice hockey many times a week. If someone crashed into me and I was getting treatment/recovering I'd continue to play hockey. My play would deteriorate, but unless someone told me I'd 100% kill myself playing I'd continue to skate. Same deal with my client, he continued doing triathlons. His speed significantly deteriorated and there were races he could not finish due to pain. Keep in mind he had no issues with his neck before he was hit by a car.
We initially received an offer from the at fault driver that was insufficient so I filed suit. They told us this was a "soft tissue" case because my client waited too long to go get a surgery. We were also told that the other driver had a different set of facts. I deposed their driver and she folded under pressure. I then demanded her policy limits and her insurance company paid. Unfortunately, her policy limits were insufficient to cover my clients damages. When a defendant does not have sufficient coverage the next thing we look to is called Under-Insured Motorist Coverage ("UM" Coverage).
My client purchased UM through USAA. The purpose of this coverage is to step in the shoes of the at-fault driver should he/she have insufficient coverage. This type of coverage is specifically bought and my client purchased it with the hope that when/if he needed it that his insurance company wouldn't put him thorough the ringer. Part of this hope was based on the commercials USAA runs about people being members for life and them having great service.
I demanded my clients UM policy limits. I was told that my client needed to get his head out of the clouds. I replied that in addition to my client's significant injury he was a bit perturbed his own insurance company was making him jump through hoops and basically calling him a liar. I told a USAA representative my client had paid premiums for years to USAA and the USAA representative told me that each and every year that premium expires so my client gets no credit for being a loyal member. According to the law that is a correct statement of fact and I hope this USAA rep is just doing his job. However, the way USAA advertises "members for life" and loyalty I find their position to be untruthful. Don't pretend to be a loyalty based company if loyalty isn't worth anything.
We are set for trial in March. Interestingly, the Allstate Lawyer will be defending USAA's money
Advertising Material for www.louisville-injury-lawyer.com and Brian R. Dettman
Wednesday, September 6, 2017
Mediation Low Medicals
I went to a mediation yesterday with a client I really like and a mediator that usually gets cases resolved.
My client was rear ended on I-264 in his F-150 by and F-150 and catapulted into an F-150. You read that right. Three F-150's involved in the same crash. This is Louisville. The Defendant driver had just received a text from his wife and was looking down. My client has four children and a wife. He doesn't have the option of not working for a living. As a result, he only had 8.1K in total medical expenses because he didn't have time to go back and forth to doctors...despite the fact he was hurt.
I find that if my clients have "high" medical expenses the other side will argue they "over treated." If the medical expenses are "low" I hear "they weren't that hurt." Doesn't make sense from my perspective, but those are the arguments. My client also had to work to make a living so I expected and received "if he is that hurt how can he work." The response is obvious"people have to make a living to feed their families."
This particular case had a defense attorney that I liked working with. She gets that we don't all have to be at each others throats and can sometimes get more done for all of our clients by working together to resolve the case. Two hours into the mediation we had reached a standstill. The defense lawyer found a way around the standstill and I was impressed.
The insurance company originally offered him 4.5K. I thought they mixed up their files. I filed a lawsuit and they came up to 9K. Yesterday the case resolved after a year of litigation for 24K. Client was happy so I'm happy.
Advertising Material for www.louisville-injury-lawyer.com
Brian Dettman
My client was rear ended on I-264 in his F-150 by and F-150 and catapulted into an F-150. You read that right. Three F-150's involved in the same crash. This is Louisville. The Defendant driver had just received a text from his wife and was looking down. My client has four children and a wife. He doesn't have the option of not working for a living. As a result, he only had 8.1K in total medical expenses because he didn't have time to go back and forth to doctors...despite the fact he was hurt.
I find that if my clients have "high" medical expenses the other side will argue they "over treated." If the medical expenses are "low" I hear "they weren't that hurt." Doesn't make sense from my perspective, but those are the arguments. My client also had to work to make a living so I expected and received "if he is that hurt how can he work." The response is obvious"people have to make a living to feed their families."
This particular case had a defense attorney that I liked working with. She gets that we don't all have to be at each others throats and can sometimes get more done for all of our clients by working together to resolve the case. Two hours into the mediation we had reached a standstill. The defense lawyer found a way around the standstill and I was impressed.
The insurance company originally offered him 4.5K. I thought they mixed up their files. I filed a lawsuit and they came up to 9K. Yesterday the case resolved after a year of litigation for 24K. Client was happy so I'm happy.
Advertising Material for www.louisville-injury-lawyer.com
Brian Dettman
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)