Archive for the ‘Identity Theft’ Category
January 19th, 2009 | 
Author:
Q: Do I even need an attorney to represent me in my claim with the insurance company?
A: No you don’t. Some claims, and some injuries don’t even warrant an attorney’s involvment. But…many do. How will you know the true value 
of your injuries? How will you know whether the insurance adjuster who makes you a first offer is doing the right thing? How do you know whether the insurance adjuster is simply trying to save his company money by low-balling you and giving you a take-it-or-leave-it offer? How will you know what your options are if you choose not to accept the insurance company’s offer? What can you do to maximize the amount the insurance company offers you for your injuries? Do you need further medical care for your injuries in the future? Have you considered who will pay for future medical expenses for injuries caused in this particular accident?
What happens if you have a recurrence of your injury weeks, months or years from now? Will the insurance company re-open this case and agree to pay me more later? Why is the insurance adjuster so willing to settle my case now? Why did they just send me a check for my injuries? Should I cash it? What will happen if I cash this check? Can I go back to them for more if needed, or is this it?
The bottom line is that you may not need an attorney at all. If you have experience with insurance adjusters, and you know the true value and extent of your injuries, then you just might be better off negotiating directly with the adjuster. BUT, if you don’t…then I’d strongly recommend speaking with an injury attorney who has many years of experience dealing with these exact types of cases.
For example, if you needed eye surgery, you wouldn’t go see your family doctor for treatment. If you need brain surgery, you don’t rely on a skin doctor to treat your condition. Many attorneys have focused and limited their practice to just a few areas of the law. Lawyers in New York are not permitted to say they are “specialists” in any particular field of law. However, we are permitted to tell you how extensive our experience is in the areas of law that we do practice. We can also tell you how we have helped other similar clients, even though their experiences may not reflect what we can do for you. Again, beware of attorneys who claim they practice many different areas of law. It’s very difficult to be good at everything.
When it’s not recorded in ‘open court’, or when the injured victim dies before he receives the settlement check, and the terms of the settlement were never clearly laid out by either side.
Usually a settlement is reached among the attorneys or in Court with the assistance of the Judge. Where there is a verbal agreement between the attorneys as to the terms of the settlement, the victim’s lawyer will usually confirm those details in a written letter to the defense attorney. If a settlement is reached during trial, or at a pre-trial conference, the preferred method of settling the case is to ‘put the settlement on the record’. This means that a court reporter is called to the courtroom or Judge’s chambers, and the terms of the settlement are recorded and agreed to by all parties and later transcribed by the court reporter.
Why is this important you ask?
Because a settlement is not a settlement until and unless these rules are followed. Many attorneys are guided by principles of fairness and doing what’s right for their clients. However, let’s look at the following case where all sense of fairness was discarded.
A lawsuit was brought for a child who was injured at birth. At some point during the lawsuit an offer was made by the defense, and the offer was accepted by the child’s parents. In a child’s case, a Judge must always approve any settlement involving a child. Let’s also assume that the attorneys confirmed their intention to settle in writing subject to the approval of the Court.
This would be just fine if the Court had processed the paperwork quickly and a settlement check had been forwarded without delay. Unfortunately in this case, the Court delayed (unintentionally) processing the paperwork. Also, because the child was so severely injured his life expectancy was very limited. Between the time that the attorneys reached an agreement to settle the case and the time that the Court actually approved the settlement, the child died.
You would think that this story has a happy ending, but it doesn’t. The child’s lawyer notified the defense that the child died, and also sent the Courts’ approval of the settlement. Now here’s the worst part: the insurance company recognized a way out of having to pay this large settlement by claiming that there was never any proper settlement in the first place!
The insurance company refused to pay, claiming that since the child had died, the agreement that was reached at the time was no longer valid, and absent a Court order, they were not paying a dime!