Mr. Grossman and his staff took good care me and my family. I highly recommend his services to anyone who has a significant injury from an accident.
-
E. McClure
Commercial Vehicle Accident Case
Dallas Accident Claims
Personal Injury Lawyer Mike Grossman Explains How The Car Accident Claims Process Works
Many Dallas car accident victims have asked our car accident attorneys for a basic explanation of how the car accident claims process is supposed to work.
In theory, if you are the victim in a car accident, you will supposedly be subjected to a clear and concise claims process by which your car will be repaired and you will be fairly compensated for your injuries. In theory, the claims process is supposed to work like this:
- Driver A causes a collision with Driver B.
- Driver B contacts Driver A’s insurance company.
- The insurance company sends an appraiser to assess the damage to Driver B’s vehicle.
- A rental car is provided while the investigation and subsequent repairs are ongoing.
- Driver B’s car is repaired or Driver B is given a check in the event of a total loss.
While this theoretical system seems to work reasonably well when dealing with issues of property damage, insurance adjusters rarely follow this protocol when an accident victim is injured. The main reason that it doesn't always work this way is because insurance companies have a vested interest in paying as little as possible to accident victims. As such, they put forth a concerted effort to deny claims outright, drag the process out for many weeks or months, or deliberately sabotage the claim in order to pay out as little money as possible and drastically reduce the value of the claim. This is very common in an injury claim.
When an accident victim is injured, insurance adjusters take a much different approach to the claims process than they do in a typical property-damage-only claim. The adjusters are generally combative and will usually rely on tricks and tactics in order to find a technicality by which to deny the claim or pay a greatly reduced amount.
But Why is That?
Why is it that they generally "play nice" when dealing with a damaged car, yet they are so difficult when dealing with an injury? The answer is actually quite simple. The State of Texas has set forth specific guidelines that an insurance company must follow when dealing with a matter of property damage. Your vehicle is real property with a very easily determined value. The state government specifically tells the insurance companies what they can and cannot do when handling property damage issues.
On the contrary, there are few guidelines regarding the claims process as it relates matters of medical expense and injury. The simple fact of the matter is that medical expenses are tremendously high in value and insurance companies are in the business of paying out as little as possible. Thus, they will use all manner of tricks and unscrupulous methods to find some reason to deny or reduce the value of your claim. Contrary to popular belief, the accident victim in a Texas car accident bears all of the burden of proving to the insurance adjuster that his or her claim is worth some amount of money. The insurance company has no obligation to pay you any amount of money. You as the accident victim must go through the proper steps to adequately prove up your damages in order to receive fair compensation. Insurance adjusters are all too happy to let you do this the wrong way so that you end up unintentionally giving them the very ammunition that they need to legitimately (albeit unfairly) deny your claim or pay you pennies on the dollar.
Again, the insurance adjusters have no obligation to pay you anything for your injuries. You, the accident victim, have the burden of proving the value of your claim.
Winning on Liability is NOT exactly Winning
In every personal injury claim, car accidents included, the plaintiff must show that the defendant owed the plaintiff a legal duty (generally this is simply the duty not to inflict harm upon the plaintiff), that the defendant breached this legal duty, and that the plaintiff suffered some loss and incurred damages (read: suffered an injury that can be quantified in financial terms).
Most people inaccurately think that being involved in an accident that is clearly "the other guy's fault" somehow translates to a clear victory. It doesn't work that way. Regardless whether or not you have a police report or witness statements that clearly show the other driver to be at fault, that only gets you partway to the finish line. When an insurance company accepts liability, what they are really saying is, "We admit our driver was to blame for the accident. Now it's your responsibility to prove to us that we should pay you some amount of money." Only, they never say the second part of that statement. Many accident victims inaccurately believe that the insurance company accepting liability means that they've won. Again, the accident victim must still prove that the adjuster owes them some quantity of money. THIS IS WHERE MOST PEOPLE UNINTENTIONALLY DAMAGE THEIR OWN CASE.
The way that our Dallas car accident attorneys help you by shielding you from the tricks and a tactics employed by the insurance adjusters, while simultaneously carrying your through the process in such a way that you won't damage your case. Over the past 20 years, our attorneys have determined the most effective strategies for adequately establishing a causal link between the accident and your injuries as well as the most effective means of proving up your damages. By hiring our experienced attorneys, you ensure that the full story of your injury claim is properly presented to the insurance adjuster such that they can't simply find a technicality by which to pay the bare minimum.
Why is auto damage dealt with differently than injuries sustained by auto accidents?
Are there state guidelines when dealing with auto injuries?
A delivery driver hired our firm to pursue a negligent trucking company following a collision with insecure cargo. Our client was driving his work vehicle when numerous large metal pipes fell from the back of a flatbed trailer onto the roadway. Our client took evasive action but was unable to avoid the debris, which resulted in a fairly severe accident. As a result, our client sustained lower back injuries including two herniated discs which required surgery to correct. The defendants conceded liability early on but would not make a reasonable settlement offer. As such, suit was filed and the case was ultimately successfully resolved through litigation.
$300,000.00
$120,000.00
$1,500.00
Our firm was hired by a young woman who was rear-ended by an 18-wheeler when she slowed for traffic in a construction zone. Initially, she attempted to represent herself and the insurance carrier offered roughly $1,000 to settle her case. She then contacted our firm and we filed suit soon after our initial investigation. The case was successfully resolved in litigation.
$187,500.00
$61,875.00
$2,500.00
Recovery for client who suffered soft tissue neck injuries in a car accident.
$40,000.00
$13,333.00
$50.00
Recovery for worker who fell from the back of a pickup truck and suffered a concussion.
$50,000.00
$20,000.00
$348.00
A loading dock worker suffered serious including numerous facial fractures and minor brain trauma when an 18-wheeler back into him, crushing him against the loading dock. The plaintiff's employer was a subscriber to Texas Workers' Compensation coverage, thus a claim was rightly filed against the third party trucking company whom the truck driver operating the reversing 18-wheeler worked for.
The plaintiffs asserted the position that the trucking company in question was liable on the basis of respondeat superior and negligent retention. The defendants argued that the plaintiff was the sole proximate cause of his injuries by virtue of the plaintiff putting himself in harms way. They maintained that the plaintiff simply walked behind the reversing tractor trailer as it pushed back toward the loading dock.
It was later determined through deposition testimony that the truck driver had indeed instructed the plaintiff to stand behind the trailer in order to determine the vehicle's proximity to the dock. Once this fact came to light, the defendants agreed to mediate whereby the case was satisfactorily settled.
$300,000.00
$120,000.00
$9,807.00
Recovery for client injured in a car accident in Dallas.
$100,000.00
$33,000.00
$100.00
(policy limits) Recovery for client who suffered sprains in the neck and back due to a rear-end car accident.
$75,000.00
$21,277.00
$680.00
Our client, a middle-aged woman, was injured when an 18-wheeler rear-ended her vehicle. As a consequence of the wreck, she sustained a back injury which required surgery to remedy. Naturally, the defendants denied liability and argued that the accident was unavoidable. Our attorneys filed suit. The defendant driver initially claimed that our client suddenly changed lanes in front of his tractor-trailer and then inexplicably slammed onto her brakes. When confronted with eye-witness testimony and other physical evidence that reflected an entirely different scenario, the truck driver ultimately recanted. The case was successfully resolved through litigation.
$350,000.00
$140,000.00
$8,188.00
Our attorneys were hired to investigate a fatal motor vehicle accident involving an 18-wheeler that claimed the lives of several men, the family of one in particular which our firm represented, felt that the official version of events as outlined in the police report was not an accurate portrayal of the facts and circumstances of the collision.
Our firm launched an investigation, the findings of which served as the basis for a subsequent lawsuit. We were able to determine that the defendant's accusations of contributory negligence on behalf of he driver of the vehicle did appear to be valid and plaintiffs conceded as much. However, the plaintiffs were adamant that the contributory negligence did not entirely overshadow the negligence on behalf of the defendant truck driver.
Through physical evidence and an admission of liability that our attorneys were able to importune from the defendant under oath, we were able to show that the defendant had indeed pulled into the path of the decedent's vehicle, which was of consequence irrespective of the decedent's own contributory negligence, and that icontact.com
$250,000.00
$82,500.00
$10,000.00
Recovery for the victim of a car accident.
$25,000.00
$8,250.00
$100.00