Insurance companies have no one method for determining the extent of a claimant’s pain and suffering. At the present time, they normally select one of 3 different methods.
Choice of methods that is available to insurers.
• Multiply the actual damages by a number that is between 1 and 5.
• Assign a quantity to the charge per day, until the victim has attained to the MMI.
• Use a computer program, in order to calculate pain and suffering.
Possible reasons for modifications to the figure put-forward by the policy holder.
• It could be that the injured policy holder has developed a scar.
• It could be that the injured policy holder has developed a permanent impairment.
• It could be that joint stiffness has been added to the list of medical problems that face the policy holder.
Common feature in possible modifications of the figure proposed to the policy holder by the insurance company.
Each of those gets made well-after the victim/plaintiff has entered a post-recovery stage. At that point, the victim has only begun to become conscious of the changes in his or her body. Each of those could be associated with the accident-caused injury. Yet that must be proven, if the affected victim hopes to win a fair compensation.
Each modification addresses a recognized injury in a specific victim. Unless someone notes evidence of an injury, no effort will be made to consider the possible harm to a child/teenager, a youth that was in the hit vehicle.
Now, it might seem logical that a doctor could note evidence that a given patient had developed the symptoms associated with a specific condition. Yet some symptoms can be mild, and some can seem to arise for no apparent reason.
For instance, a parent might fail to mention to a pediatrician that a son or daughter was in a car that became involved in an accident. In such a situation, the pediatrician might have no reason to link a series of headaches or a dizzy spell to a former accident.
In that case, the unrecognized injury would be allowed to worsen. Then the victim might need to undergo some sort of invasive procedure, in order to correct the new problem. A young victim might be forced to plan for a future that is filled with uncertainties.
There is no good way to base a sound decision on the questionable findings in a medical report from a victim that has not yet achieved to MMI. That is why a good Personal Injury Lawyer in Oakville does not allow a client to accept an early settlement, even one laid-out by the client’s own insurance company. Such a move invites the chance that the victim might one day suffer with worsening symptoms.