Whether it's for injuries, property damage, etc., I'm blown away how litigious a society we live in. many only hear about the large verdicts plaintiffs get and never the small or even defense verdicts of $0. The last three trials I've beeen involved (yes, on the defense side) netted the plaintiffs a combined $618.50. I spent nearly $100,000 defending them and would do it again. Two of them left offers on the table and one is paying some of our costs. Do people understand that can happen? Adjustors handle and settle many more claims than any single attorney does in the same period. Many adjustors settle more claims in three months than some attorneys do in a year.
Insurance is not a lottery. You get what your owed; no more/no less. Attorneys serve a good purpose and are appropriate in some cases but try and work out your differences with the insurance company first before running to one. There are 'bum' insurance adjustors out there but most are reasonable and they cost nothing.
2006-12-16 10:23:15 · 9 answers · asked by RYAN 2 in Cars & Transportation ➔ Insurance & Registration
I don't get that either. People are under the impression that getting an attorney gets them more money from the insurance company, and that's just not true. And insurance companies are not afraid of attorneys (if anything they make it easier to handle the claim because attorneys understand how insurance claims work and they don't call every day about little stuff) so if someone threatens an attorney it is not that effective. Claims pend longer when an attorney gets involved because of all the gathering of paperwork and the process they go through. People who could have settled three months ago because they finished their treatment have to wait a few more months sometimes to get a settlement when they are represented. Attorneys can be helpful in certain situations but just to settle your claim when there is no real dispute- I don't get it either, but after all these years in claims I have seen no shift in the number of those who do or don't get an attorney.
2006-12-16 23:10:02 · answer #1 · answered by Chris 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Advising someone to consult with an attorney is NOT telling them to sue. Fact is, none of the advice here constitutes legal advice -- even if posted by an attorney. So, when I say that someone should consult with an attorney, that's what I would do if I were in their situation.
Some insurance companies are quick to settle a reasonable claim by an injured party -- USAA is a good example. But not all are and it forces the injured party into the situation where they have to sue to get fair compensation.
It's easy to say, "You get what you're owed, no more, no less" but it sometimes takes a jury to determine what is reasonable.
I've been in the situation where the insurance company was pretty quick to cover the medical bills but balked at making up lost wages and a moderate request for pain & suffering. Their rationale? I couldn't work because I was in the hospital! Faced with that type of intransigence, I told my attorney to go for the jugular. They did make a settlement offer a few months later that we accepted -- about 3 times what I'd asked for initially PLUS my attorney's fees.
2006-12-16 19:53:08 · answer #2 · answered by Bostonian In MO 7 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Halleluah! Preach on. As a claims adjuster some people on here DISGUST me. Of course I dont want to give people an unreasonable amount of money for their injuries (NO- your whiplash is NOT worth 10,000!) But i also do not want to rip someone off if they suffered an injury that will be permenant.
What makes me laugh is the fact that i see people run off and get attorneys every day and then they end up having to settle for LESS then i was going to give them before the attorney was involved! (and THEN they have to give 1/3 of that less amount away!)
People think "sueing" and "lawyers" are the answer to everything and they are so uneducated its pretty repulsive
2006-12-16 18:56:46 · answer #3 · answered by la428282 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Well, i respectively disagree with your last assertion there (and some of your facts). The difference between attorneys and adjusters is that the adjusters work for the insurance company! And the lawyer works for you. And, I'm sure you made a quick $100,000 only to disparage it and encouraging people away from boon. Give me a break! Yes, people should try to work WITH their insurance company but not FOR when they need them. So hiring an attorney may not always be the best thing. But, you know, get one anyway.
2006-12-16 18:27:40 · answer #4 · answered by Another Garcia 5 · 0⤊ 2⤋
I agree completly, people pay insurance to take care of all of what comes along with any kind of accident, as I always tell my insurance company when something happens, the less I have to hear about the situationa and the quiker I get my closure the better. If your insurance company isn't doing their job than get a better insurance company don't worry who you will save 20 bucks with its who will do the right work.
2006-12-16 18:28:24 · answer #5 · answered by ptcruisher2001 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
They do it because on a forum like this, 99% of people don't know what they are talking about. They see other people right it and think it must be right. It's the same people posting the same answers no matter what the question is.
2006-12-17 01:06:40 · answer #6 · answered by jerry 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Because they believe they will get a windfall of money with an attorney,and mpst people are afraid to deal with insurance companies.
2006-12-16 18:30:13 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
I want to address the idiot that seems to think lawyers work for their clients. Bull$hit...
Lawyers work 100% for themselves 100% of the time. Their clients are nothing more than cockroaches to them, they would sell a baby's blood if they could get away with it. There is nothing lower on this planet than a trial lawyer.
2006-12-16 23:36:00 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Well all I can say is keep up the fight.
Good Luck!!!
2006-12-16 18:26:18 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋