Basic Facts About Negotiating a Personal Injury Case

The claimant has been injured in an accident. He or she should have some idea in mind of the amount desired, in the form of compensation.

Is the insurance company ready to offer that amount of money?

That is the question that has been implied by the author of the demand letter, which gets sent to the adjuster. Before answering that implied question, the adjuster usually highlights the weaknesses in the other side’s argument.

Smart claimants make a few changes in their presented argument and maybe a slight lowering of their demand. The adjuster opens negotiations by making an initial offer. The claimant-lawyer team sends a counteroffer. The exchange of offers and counteroffers continues until both sides have agreed on a certain figure.

If the adjuster had disputed the veracity of the claims in the demand letter, then he or she might mention that fact in the response.

The adjuster might have discovered that the defendant’s insurance policy

did not cover accidents like the one that had been reported. Some adjusters might question the allegations regarding who should be named at-fault for the accident. Other adjusters might raise questions about the extent of the claimant’s injuries or the nature of the treatment for those injuries.

How should claimants answer any adjuster’s questions?

An honest and reasonable answer is the best one to offer.

How would any claimant’s experience allow him or her to recognize the wisdom behind agreeing to any of the offers made during the negotiations?

Smart claimants retain a lawyer. Personal Injury Lawyer in Sydney can tell when the other side has proposed a reasonable bid during the course of the negotiations.

In what other ways could retention of an attorney prove helpful?

Lawyers help their clients to achieve a mix of both patience and persistence. Those experts in personal injury law caution their injured clients to delay negotiations until they have reached the level of maximum medical improvement (MMI). In other words, each of them advises patience.

So, how could an attorney’s guidance help a client to demonstrate persistence? That guidance could explain the difference between being assertive and being an annoying pest. Lawyers want their clients to be assertive. That is the attitude of a persistent individual.

A pest insists on making repeated calls to someone in the insurance company. An assertive and persistent person calls less often, but delivers a forceful message. It is the sort of message that conveys this thought: I may contact your supervisor.

Adjusters do not want any customer to be contacting their supervisor. That is why smart claimants seek an attorney that can help them to demonstrate persistence, while proceeding with patience, even as negotiations begin to approach their conclusion.

More to explorer