Personal injury (PI) lawsuits aim to compensate people who have been injured due to the negligence of others.
However, finding the right compensation can be very difficult. Insurance companies use claims adjusters to reduce claims, and they often use a variety of strategies to do so.
It is recommended that victims hire personal injury attorneys to represent them. By doing so, they can protect their rights and ensure that they receive fair compensation for their injuries by being aware of these strategies.
The following are some of the most common tactics used by insurance adjusters.
Image Source
Misleading or Deceptive Statements
Making misleading or deceptive claims is one of the first tactics an insurance adjuster may use. An adjuster may contact the claimant after the accident and suggest that it would be a good idea to accept a lower settlement offer. They may try to create a false sense of urgency by giving the claimant the impression that this is the only offer being considered or that it is only available for a short time.
Adjusters may underestimate the extent of the injury or the cost of treatment by saying that the plaintiff’s injuries are not as severe as they appear or that they do not require ongoing care. For example, they may say that the injury is “minor” and will go away quickly, which may cause the plaintiff to accept an inadequate offer in an attempt to settle the case for less. These words are intended to weaken the plaintiff’s faith in his case and persuade him to pay less.
Delaying Tactics
Insurance adjusters know that claimants may choose a lower premium due to financial constraints. Delaying the application process is a popular strategy to achieve this. By seeking unnecessary examinations from multiple doctors, obtaining invalid medical records, or requesting excessive documentation, adjusters may extend the negotiations.
Not answering phone calls or emails can also lead to delays, making it challenging for plaintiffs to get the information they need to proceed with their case. The likelihood that a claimant will encounter financial problems and eventually settle out of desperation increases the longer the process is extended. Unfortunately, claimants often accept low offers just to ease their anxiety and uncertainty.
Low Initial Offer
In the first stage of the claims process, insurance adjusters make a low settlement offer. This strategy, called “lowballing,” tries to persuade the plaintiff to accept an offer that is far less than what he deserves for his injuries. The offer usually represents a fraction of the actual value of the claim, although at first it may sound tempting, especially if you are willing to pay.
Insurance companies make a low offer early because they know that many consumers do not fully understand the extent of their injuries or the long-term costs of treatment. A claimant may accept an offer without learning that he is entitled to more money if he is not diligent. You can prevent this type of exploitation by having a personal injury attorney on your side.
Objection to Liability
The insurance company can challenge the insured party the case in most cases. Adjusters try to argue that the plaintiff was partially or completely at fault, even if it appears that their client was at fault for the accident. The adjusters try to reduce the compensation they have to pay by reducing the liability seen by the insurance company.
An adjuster may argue, for example, that the plaintiff contributed to the injury by failing to follow proper safety rules or that he was speeding at the time of the collision. In addition to reducing the liability of the insurance company, this strategy may encourage the claimant to accept a lower settlement by giving him the impression that he has some responsibility.
Asking Severity of Injury
In order to reduce compensation, insurance adjusters may question the claimant’s statements of serious injury. They may hire medical professionals who will challenge the injury diagnosis, course of treatment, or long-term outcomes. Some tortfeasors may even argue that the plaintiff’s injuries could have been prevented with reasonable care or that they were pre-existing.
Adjusters may use cases where medical reports appear contradictory or ambiguous to assert that the injury is not as severe as stated. To reduce the cost of medical expenses, they may also argue that the plaintiff’s treatment plan is excessive or unnecessary. For example, an adjuster may question whether physical therapy is really necessary if a claimant is required to have it, resulting in compensation that falls short of paying the full cost of long-term care.
Social Media Surveillance and Monitoring
Adjusters may hire private investigators to keep track of a claimant’s day-to-day activities after a claim has been filed. They will argue that the plaintiff is exaggerating his injury or recovery by using any surveillance footage or supporting documents.
For example, it can be used to dispute the injured person’s claims if he is seen walking or doing other things that do not appear to be related to his alleged injury.
In order to find evidence of actions that mean the claimant’s injuries are not as severe as claimed, adjusters can also look at their social media accounts. It could be argued that the claimant’s disability is not as disabling as they claim it to be if social media posts show him engaging in seemingly normal activities.
Compelling Complainants to Provide Written Statements
Pressuring claimants to provide written or recorded statements about their accident and injuries is another common strategy used by insurance adjusters. Editors can use these seemingly harmless words to sway the story to their advantage. The adjuster may ask leading questions or encourage a situation where the complainant feels pressured to provide information that contradicts his position.
Once a comment is made, the moderator can use it to change the facts. The adjuster can dispute the validity of the claim if the claimant’s statement contradicts their original description of the incident or their alleged injury. This may result in a reduced refund or, in some cases, the claim being denied altogether.
Discourage Hiring an Attorney
Insurance adjusters try to discourage claimants from hiring legal counsel asserting that it is not necessary or would cause delays in the process. They may suggest that the plaintiff can control the case himself and keep a significant portion of the settlement funds. Adjusters may encourage claimants to settle quickly by making the process seem easy, especially if the initial offer is “generous.”
They fail to inform litigants that legal representation is essential in handling the complexities of a PI case. An attorney can protect the claimant from these fraudulent practices, ensure that they are properly compensated, and prevent the insurance company from using their profits. If a lawyer is involved, insurance companies are more likely to make a better settlement offer.
Source link