These individuals are curious to know whether their claims are worth pursuing and whether their injuries are either permanent or likely to be short-lived.
It is unfortunate that many individuals mistakenly conclude that they won't need an attorney because the driver of the other vehicle struck the plaintiff's vehicle.
There are plenty of cases when a vehicle struck from the rear is found to be at fault.
I've seen cases in which a vehicle, while stopped at a red light, was struck head-on by another vehicle and the occupants of the vehicle stopped at the red light recovered zero dollars because the jury assigned liability to a "phantom driver.
" Due to the onslaught of cases filed, insurance carriers often allege that the driver of the vehicle struck from the rear abruptly accelerated from a stop and equally-abruptly came to a halt (viz.
, "jack-rabbit start").
Naturally, this may trigger a fraud investigation and individuals who do engage in such behavior may be subject to criminal prosecution.
Even if individuals obtain non-recourse either lawsuit funding or settlement loans in such instances, the funding must be repaid irrespective of the outcome of the case due to the fraudulent inducement that transpired when requesting the lawsuit loans.
If you are involved in a car wreck and experience a neck injury, you are encouraged to seek medical attention without delay.
Rarely is it advisable to settle a claim prior to seeing a medical provider if any injuries are sustained in an auto collision.
The potential for harm when tons of metal collide is substantial.
Both providers and patients are frequently placed in a no-win situation in such cases.
It is certainly prudent to balance cost-containment measures with best-practices.
However, it is unwise to place the payer's interests ahead of the patient's.
If neither an MRI nor a CT scan is obtained, the payer will assert that no substantial injury occurred, as is evidenced by the fact that no such imaging was obtained.
If either an MRI or a CT scan is obtained, the payer will allege that it was not medically necessary.
If either an MRI or a CT scan is obtained and substantial findings are noted, the payer will allege that such findings were preexisting.
Above all, if you sustain a neck injury as a result of a car wreck, seek competent medical attention.
This suggests a provider experienced in handling traumatically-induced injuries, as opposed to the family physician who handles aches and pains of non-traumatic origin.
Additionally, seek competent legal counsel.
The longer you delay in accomplishing the foregoing, the more you compromise the likelihood of a fair settlement of your claim.
Furthermore, neither lawsuit funding nor settlement loans are likely to be advanced to those who delay the foregoing.
For those who delay, the payer will allege an absence of substantial injury.
Furthermore, a delayed presentation to a healthcare provider allows the payer to assert that plaintiff is seeking attorney-directed care.
Those who fund lawsuit loans realize that such instances substantially compromise the value of a claim and will result in either minimal or no litigation funding.
It is essential that both competent medical providers and competent legal counsel are retained as quickly as possible following car wrecks involving neck injuries.
Without an attorney, neither lawsuit funding nor settlement loans are available.
Without competent medical providers, cases are compromised due to poor documentation, etc.
Although well-meaning, family physicians are often poor choices for providing the requisite care following car wrecks.
In fact, most are reticent to document the fact that their patients sustained injuries in a car wreck, due to the fact that most insurance policies exclude care and treatment of injuries arising from car wrecks.
Family physicians expect to get paid for services performed.
Justifiably so! Patients don't like to pay out-of-pocket for medical expenses, especially when they feel that someone else is responsible for those injuries.
This is understandable! However, most major medical insurance policies specifically exclude care and treatment of injuries arising from car wrecks.
When such omissions occur, the payer is elated! It is now very easy to assert that the plaintiff presented to a medical provider following the car wreck and neither the plaintiff nor the provider even mentions the car wreck.
The likelihood of a fair settlement in such cases is significantly diminished.
Neither lawsuit funding nor settlement loans are likely to be advanced in such scenarios.
The opinions articulated regarding this conundrum are not merely snatched from abstraction.
These observations are made following 20 years of claim reviews pertaining to thousands of patients.
Certainly, most physicians are honest and diligent in such matters.
However, my experience is such that such omissions are not a rare phenomenon.
Those who sustain neck injuries in car wrecks are urged to seek medical attention and legal counsel without delay.
Chances of obtaining fair-and-equitable settlements, as well as lawsuit funding and settlement loans are substantially enhanced when this simple advice is followed.