The Myths of Automobile Liability Insurance – Part II of III
May 17, 2010
In Part I, we discussed the role an automobile liability insurance company plays during the investigative stage of your claim. Now, we will discuss the settlement stage of your claim. Remember, in Part I, we established that the insurance company only has a duty to protect their driver. If the adjuster believes that the other driver has some legal exposure to your claim, then the adjuster may determine that the best way to protect their driver is to settle your claim with you. This would include paying for the damages to your car, providing a rental car, and attempting to settle any claim for personal injuries you may have. However, don’t be mistaken. Just because the insurance company appears to be accepting liability, they never truly “accept” liability. The insurance company may privately decide that the best way to handle your claim is to settle it, but it will not legally accept liability for the claim.
Once the insurance adjuster receives all the pertinent information, the adjuster may evalaute your claim and attempt to negotiate a settlement. The adjuster may consider many factors, including comparative fault in the accident, the severity of the accident, the severity of the injuries, the extent and cost of the medical treatment, the ability to work, as well as any future medical care that may be needed. An adjuster may believe that the accident wasn’t serious enough to justify the amount of medical treatment you received. The adjuster therefore, may refuse to consider some of your medical expenses in the evaluation. The adjuster may also believe that the accident was partially your fault or that you are exaggerating your injuries. This is why you need an experienced lawyer on your side.
The moral of the story is simple: Just because the other driver’s insurance company chooses to evaluate your case for settlement, does not mean that the company has any legal duty to treat you failry. As I stated earlier, the other driver’s insurance company has no legal duty to you. It’s only duty is to protect the liable driver from your claim. In this respect, the insurance company is free to settle your claim or it may choose to nothing at all. If you are unhappy with how your claim is being handled, your only option would be to file a lawsuit. That will be discussed in Part III.
The Myths of Automobile Liability Insurance – Part I of III
May 12, 2010
In the next three parts, I intend to illuminate the myths about how automobile liability insurance (or any other type of liability insurance for that matter) really operates in connection with a car accident claim. The first part will discuss the initial investigative stages of the claims process. The second part will cover the role a liability insurance company plays in the settlement process. The third part will discuss liability insurance in the trial process. I will use a simple car accident as the factual background.
You are stopped at a red light. Then suddenly, and without warning, you are struck from behind by another vehicle. You have just been rear-ended by a driver who was not paying attention. You exchange the necessary information with the other driver, including the driver’s personal information, vehicle description and insurance information. The next day you report the accident to the other driver’s insurance company. A series of events are now set in motion and you must understand where you stand in the process.
The Investigation Stage.
Once the claim is reported to the other driver’s insurance company, you can expect a call from an adjuster within a day or so. The adjuster will probably tell you that, in order to process the claim, they “must” obtain a “recorded statement” or “recorded interview.” Some adjusters may also request a written statement. What is this for? For two reasons. The first reason is to investigate the claim, which is fair enough. However, the second reason is for the insurance company to have a recording that can potentially be used against you in the future. You might be asking: ”Why would the insurance company want to do this?” “I thought the insurance company is supposed to help me.” This is the first of the many mistaken beliefs people have about the role of the other driver’s liability insurance. The other driver’s insurance company has no legal duty to you at all. It has no duty to treat you fairly in the investigation or evaluation of your claim. Rather, its sole duty is to protect and defend the other driver from your legal claim. The insurance company has complete discretion to choose to settle your claim, to totally ignore your claim, or it can choose to do something in between. The moral of the story is simple: Contact a lawyer as soon as possible. Additionally, NEVER give a written or recorded statement without consulting a lawyer. A lawyer will help you through the investigative stage of your case while preserving the integrity of your claim in the event a settlement cannot be reached.
Personal Injury Cases in Small Claims Court – Pros and Cons
May 3, 2010
I have helped many clients prosecute their car accident and personal injury cases in small claims court. ”Small Claims Court” is a part of the Justice of the Peace Court. Likewise, the Justice of the Peace presides over all small claims cases. The jurisdictional limit of small claims court was raised from $5,000 to $10,000. Since that time, I have found more and more clients asking me about small claims court as an option for their personal injury cases. Here are some of the “pros” and “cons” of small claims court.
Pros.
1. Informality. The Texas Rules of Civil Procedure and Rules of Evidence do not apply in small claims court. Therefore, the proceedings are very informal. Because the proceedings are so informal, the judge’s role is to develop the facts and make sure each party is given a fair opportunity to present their case. The parties may hire an attorney and are entitled to a jury trial. Nevertheless, the trial is still handled very informally.
2. Quick Trial. Normally, a small claims case is set for trial within 3 – 6 months after it is filed and the other party served with the court papers. This is a much shorter time period than the higher courts where it may take two (2) years or more for your case to be heard. Once your case is reached for trial, the case is normally completed within an hour. The case may take longer if it is tried before a jury. Once the case is completed, the judge (or jury) renders a decision at that time.
3. Inexpensive. The expenses associated with small claims court are relatively small. After paying the filing fee and constable fee, a party should not expect any other court costs unless they request subpoenas or a jury trial.
Cons.
1. Limited Jurisdiction. The most you can sue for in small claims court is $10,000. Even if your case is worth more, the judge has no jurisdiction to render a judgment for more that $10,000. (There are some exceptions to this rule, but they are too complicated to discuss here).
2. Unpredictability. Because small claims court is so informal, it can be very unpredictable. Sometimes the judge will catch you off guard by asking questions or bringing up issues you did not anticipate.
A judgment in small claims court is just as legally binding and enforceable as any other judgment. The judgment may be appealed to the County Court at Law, at which point the parties will have an opportunity to try the case again before the county court judge.