Insurance companies have perfected various strategies for cutting to a minimum the amount of money that needs to be removed from a given company’s vault, in order to pay a claimant.
One strategy: require proof of the fact that the defendant was negligent
A defense attorney might try to show that the defendant did not have a duty to use care towards the claimant. That strategy offers the greatest chance for success, if it has been used in response to a charge from the user of a recreational facility.
In such a situation, the defense attorney might suggest that the claimant had accepted a known risk. Someone that has agreed to attempt a risky action has no grounds for claiming negligence on the part of those that have supervised performance of the same action, even if that act has caused development of an injury.
A claimant’s lawyer might struggle to fight an allegation about a claimant’s decision to sight the defendant’s negligence. The defense Personal Injury Lawyer in Bedford might counter that claim with evidence that the client/plaintiff had failed to mitigate the effects of his or her injury.
A second strategy: Seek to minimize effect of claimed injury
Sometimes the defense team hires an expert, in hopes of showing that the plaintiff’s injury was really not that bad. Of course, the plaintiff’s attorney could hire someone that had the ability to present his or her expert view on the same injury.
When evidence permits, the defense might seek to prove that some or all of the plaintiff’s injuries had existed before the accident’s occurrence.
Alternately, it could argue that the existence of the pre-existing condition had necessitated the plaintiff’s utilization of some type of protective device.
A third strategy: This relies on utilization of the approach taken by the plaintiff/claimant
In a case that has resulted from a car accident, the defendant’s lawyer might claim that the plaintiff has failed to obtain a copy of a police report. That could make it look like the plaintiff was trying to hide some evidence that would have the ability to bolster the strength of the defendant’s argument.
This is another time when the defendant’s legal team might allege that the plaintiff failed to seek medical attention as soon as possible. As a result, there would be no proof of the fact that the same plaintiff had worked to mitigate the effects of the sustained injuries.
At times, plaintiffs have delayed submission of a personal injury claim, and have failed to meet the deadline, which has been imposed by the statute of limitations. If a court were to become aware of that failure, then it could refuse to hold a hearing on the plaintiff’s case.