The Harper Law Blog
The Harper Law Blog offers news, announcements, thoughts and articles on life, law and our practice areas of emphasis.
False Assumption - 7. The pain has generally gone away
Posted Tuesday, July 24, 2007 by Ed Harper.
The pain has generally gone away, so I do not really need to follow my health care provider’s instructions. Once you seek health care, it is very important that you follow the instructions of your physician. Occasionally, a client will stop the treatment regimen (i.e. physical therapy, exercise, medication) recommended by their. This creates questions as to the follow-through of the patient and their willingness to assist in their own recovery.
An injured person must act reasonably to “mitigate” their own damages/injuries. To mitigate means, in part, to follow the instructions of the health care provider(s) so that your injuries are lessened and/or the duration of care is shortened.
I am certainly not suggesting that anyone keep treating for an extended period of time without any benefit! In fact, it is very possible for an injured person to treat for too long with a certain type of health care, even to the point of damaging the eventual outcome of their claim. We often seen massage therapy or chiropractic care go on for an extended period of time without much improvement in the symptoms. The insurance companies will use this to de-value the claim, indicating that the patient should have sought different types of treatment rather than continue indefinitely in one or two types of care that do not appear to be significantly aiding in the recovery. Thus, each individual must gauge whether the health care method recommended and/or chosen is actually helping assist in the recovery process. An injured person must “act reasonably”, i.e. to do what others in a similar situation would do. At Harper Law, we are happy to provide insight to an injured person needing answers concerning health care following a collision.
False Assumption - 6. The insurance company for the other driver will believe me
Posted Tuesday, July 24, 2007 by Ed Harper.
The insurance company for the other driver will believe me when I tell them how much it hurts.
Being examined by a health care provider shortly after a collision allows you to obtain some beneficial relief. At the same time, the injured person obtains the necessary proof or evidence that will help validate the claim. A judge will only allow testimony for injuries that are “more likely than not” caused by a certain event. Also, the health care has to be “reasonable and necessary.”
Allowing too much time to lapse between the collision and your first examination creates questions as to what exactly caused the injury. There is no hard and fast rule for how much time is too long. However, the sooner you receive an opinion from a health care provider which links the injury to the collision, the better. Therefore, obtain a medical opinion from a qualified health care provider, before allowing too much time to go by following the collision, in order to properly document your claim.
Time is on the side of the insurance company, and don’t think that the insurance company will believe you when you tell them how much the injury bothered you, even though you didn’t seek treatment. You must have verification from a health care professional to document your injuries to the insurance company in order to obtain a reasonable and fair settlement.
For example, let’s say you have a bicycle accident where you are struck by a car. The car hits your leg, and you lose control of the bike, crashing into a tree. The bike is destroyed, and you obtain the insurance information from the other driver. You feel pain in your leg, specifically your knee, for about two (2) weeks, but choose not to do anything about it. The side of your knee hurts, and it is painful to walk. Finally, a friend suggests you go see your doctor.
However, before doing so, you fall while in the Costco parking lot pushing your cart. In this fall, you land on the very same knee, and your pain gets worse. Eventually, after about a week, the knee feels the same as it did before the Costco incident. Finally, you go to the doctor because it has been three (3) weeks since you were struck by the car while riding your bike. You learn that you will need surgery for your knee which you believe was injured in the car vs. bike collision. How can you prove that the auto collision, and not the Costco injury, was the source of your knee problem? You may be able to make a case that the pain was caused by the collision, or at least that a good percentage of the pain was related to the collision. But your case has now become substantially more difficult because of the lack of medical documentation establishing the injuries from the outset. Bottom line ~ Get medical attention as soon as possible following the collision so you have the proof when you need it.
False Assumption - 5. My injuries are not that bad
Posted Saturday, July 21, 2007 by Ed Harper.
My injuries are not that bad and will probably just go away with time.
Do not assume that pain will just go away. In my experience as a personal injury attorney for more than 16 years, if your condition has not improved substantially in about one (1) week, you should definitely seek medical attention. There are many different modalities of care, all of which have a different focus.
Here are some examples of the types of care which are often helpful:
Acupuncture
Acupressure
Anti-inflammatories
Aqua therapy
Biofeedback
Chiropractic
Counseling
Heat
Ice
Injections
Massage therapy
Meditation
Muscle relaxants
Neurology
Neuropsychology
Orthopedics
Osteopath
Physical Therapy
Pilates
Prayer
Surgery
TENS unit
Traction
Yoga
False Assumption - 4. I had prior injuries
Posted Saturday, July 21, 2007 by Ed Harper.
I had prior injuries, but the insurance company will believe the injuries have no bearing on this claim. Pre-existing injuries to the same area of the body are likely to become an issue in almost every personal injury claim. If the prior injury was to the neck, and the new injury is also in the neck region, you can be sure the bodily injury adjuster will attempt to blame the present injury on the old condition.
What you can do when suffering from a personal injury is to obtain your prior medical records before the insurance adjuster is allowed to review these records. Knowing whether your doctor and/or health care provider discharged you previously is important information to know before you sign an authorization allowing an insurance company representative open access to your health care records.
At Harper Law PLLC, we allow first party adjusters to have medical authorizations for medical records pertinent to the present claim. A third party adjuster should never be given an authorization. We provide the third party adjuster with the medical records and bills after we have a chance to review and fully examine them.
Pre-existing conditions will surely be a topic of discussion, whether in negotiations or trial. However, if your condition has existed without appreciable symptoms for an extended period of time, a judge may prevent the other side from arguing that this is the same injury. The old injury may even be excluded from the purview of the jury if you were not having symptoms at the time of the new accident.
False Assumption - 3. The property damage estimate is accurate because a professional adjuster looked at my car
Posted Saturday, July 21, 2007 by Ed Harper.
The property damage estimate is accurate because a professional adjuster looked at my car.
Property damage is the proof of two or more vehicles colliding. Having an accurate recording of the damage to the cars may have a bearing on how seriously the insurance company takes your claim. The insurance estimate is merely the document which the adjuster provides to their company in order to pay for the damage.
The property damage adjuster is an experienced evaluator who often works for the adversarial insurance company. His or her job is to get your claim resolved in a manner that helps the insurance company by saving them money. The adjuster may even try to steer you to a repair shop of their choosing. This is done to ensure the work is performed for as little money as possible. The repair shop benefits by having repeat business from the insurance company.
Additionally, the property damage adjuster may only provide a visual inspection of your vehicle. To obtain the estimate, the bumper may not even be taken off, and the adjuster may not even look inside your trunk. Both of these are areas where property damage often occurs but goes un-repaired.
Over the last 10 or 15 years, vehicles have been constructed in such as manner as to minimize the damage to the vehicles structure. The idea of a 10 mile per hour bumper is to reduce the structural damage to the vehicle. It does not assist in reducing the forces exerted on the occupants. The biomechanical forces exerted on your body in a rear end collision are not measurable by the amount of the property damage. Insurance companies pigeonhole certain claims as low-impact collisions, and they place a limit on how much they pay on these claims.
At Harper Law PLLC, we often recommend that our clients obtain a second opinion, even if the property damage has been repaired. This second opinion allows the injured person to have an independent view of the property damage. This allows us to prove the force of the collision was greater in severity than what the insurance adjuster wants you to believe.
‹‹ Newer Entries | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | Older Entries ››
We Are Here to Help
Although our office does not handle all types of cases, we hope you will contact us regarding any legal issues you may encounter. We will answer your questions, or refer you to another quality and trustworthy attorney if we are unable to assist you.
