Share this post...
Share on FacebookTweet about this on TwitterShare on Google+Share on LinkedIn

Insurance companies will use any argument available to reduce the amount they have to pay to an injured person. The following are the most common arguments that insurance companies use. Some of these arguments may only be applicable to automobile accidents; however, many apply to any type of injury claim.

1. You were more at fault in causing the accident; therefore, you are not entitled to recover anything.
2. You were partially at fault in causing the accident; therefore, your damages should be reduced by a substantial percentage.
3. Your injuries were caused by something other than the accident in question.
4. You were not seriously injured in the accident.
5. You were seriously injured in the accident, but you should have gotten better sooner.
6. Your medical records show that your injuries pre-existed the accident.
7. You exaggerated your symptoms to your doctor.
8. You saw the doctor for too long.
9. You didn’t take an ambulance to the emergency room immediately after the accident; therefore, you were not seriously hurt.
10. You have pain now that you didn’t have at the emergency room; therefore, any current pain complaints are not related to the accident.
11. You now claim injuries that you did not complain of in your recorded statement taken shortly after the incident.
12. You failed to tell your doctor about past injuries to similar areas of your body.
13. You missed doctor or therapy appointments; therefore, you not really hurt.
14. You have a lawyer that never goes to trial; therefore, we know we can pay you less to make your case go away.
15. You waited too long to see a doctor after the incident.
16. You have a history of past injury claims.
17. You were referred to your current doctor by a lawyer.
18. You had a subsequent accident that caused your injuries.
19. You did not miss any time from work; therefore, you could not have been seriously injured.
20. Your doctor did not provide you with a written work excuse; therefore, you should have gone back to work immediately after the incident.
21. You had a poor work history prior to the incident; therefore, you likely would have missed work anyway.
22. Your prior tax returns do not match the claims you are now making about lost income.
23. You failed to file tax returns in the past.
24. The statute of limitations has expired (usually three years in Wisconsin).
25. You have no visible signs of injury.
26. You did not give a recorded statement to us; therefore, we cannot fully evaluate your case.
27. You did not notice the other car until impact or immediately before impact; therefore, you were inattentive and at fault.
28. You told the police or your doctor that the other car hit you from behind was going 50 m.p.h.; however, since most people could not have known the speed of someone behind them…you must be lying.
29. You were speeding; therefore, you must be at fault in causing the accident.
30. You stopped too fast in traffic, causing the other driver to rear-end you.
31. You were not wearing a seatbelt; therefore, you caused your own injuries. Note: Wisconsin law limits comparative negligence for failing to wear a seatbelt to 15%.
32. This type of car accident could not have caused the specific injuries you are claiming.
33. There was little damage to your vehicle; therefore, you could not have been too seriously hurt.
34. No police came to the scene; therefore, you could not have been seriously hurt.
35. No one else in your vehicle was injured; therefore, you should not have been injured.
36. There were no independent witnesses to the collision; therefore, it is our driver’s word against yours and our driver is not making a claim for injuries so he/she must be more credible.
37. You should have been able to avoid the collision.
38. Your ability to drive was impaired by alcohol, drugs, and/or medication.
39. Our driver lost control due to invisible “black ice” which created a sudden emergency situation for which he/she is not responsible.
40. You were on a cell phone at the time; therefore, the collision was your fault.

There are many other arguments in addition to those listed above. Insurance companies and their lawyers can get very creative in their defense of an injury claim. Most people find that an experienced personal injury lawyer is necessary to anticipate and overcome these arguments.

Follow Randy

Randy Rozek

Attorney and Owner of at Rozek Law Offices, SC
Randy has been helping to protect and rebuild the lives of his injured clients for nearly two decades. He is a nationally-recognized leader in the representation of brain injury survivors and he is regularly asked to speak to other lawyers around the country on brain injury related legal topics.
Follow Randy

Free E-Books

Download Free eBook