The insurance company starts the pre-settlement negotiations with an offer. Ideally, the exchange of demands and offers leads to a settlement. When the insurance comes forward with a reasonable offer, the claimant enjoys a better chance for obtaining a fair deal/settlement. Claimants that learn the basic facts about settling have the best chance for reaching an acceptable deal with the adjuster.
Why does it make sense to settle, instead of pursuing a lawsuit?
Whenever claimants become plaintiffs, there is no guarantee that any one of them could witness a desired outcome from the scheduled trial.
Strategies that increase a claimant’s chances for enjoying a desirable outcome, following negotiations
Sending a demand letter to the insurance adjuster and explaining in letter what happened at the time of the accident. You need to describe in same piece of correspondence the nature and extent of the reported injuries.
Personal injury lawyer in Cambridge will be presenting in the letter any favorable evidence. He/she will need to close with demand, stating the amount of money sought in the form of compensation.
Consider having retained lawyer help with letter’s composition. Lawyers understand how to present a demand that leaves room for negotiations. If there were no room for negotiations, the opposing parties might struggle to keep the claims process moving forward.
Recognize benefits that could be enjoyed by victim/claimant that has hired an attorney.
—Attorney could provide guidance if negotiations were to arrive at a stalemate.
—Attorney could arrange for the scheduling of a mediation session.
—An attorney’s experience could aid with framing response to a possible allegation from the insurance company.
Describing a possible allegation, and an attorney’s ability to deal with such a challenge
During efforts aimed at reaching a negotiated settlement, the insurance company might allege that the victim has contributed to some of the accident-causing factors. That would mean that the same victim should accept an allegation of shared blame.
Lawyers realize that any such claim/allegation should be backed by credible evidence. Hence, the adjuster could be asked to present the required evidence.
A lawyer’s challenge and argument might push an insurance company to alter its contentions, regarding the nature and extent of the contributions from the 2 opposing parties.
If a lawyer’s actions had managed to convince an adjuster that the plaintiff would have a strong argument in court, then the adjuster might decide to go along with an effort at settling the dispute. Why might that be especially significant?
The suggested chain of events would prove especially important, if a car accident had taken place in a state that adhered to the principle of contributory fault. That particular principle denies any compensation to anyone that has contributed in any way, no matter how small, to the factors that caused the injury-linked incident.
