1-800-931-7036
Who can point a finger at what is typical? Who can define the meaning of normal? The legal system asks that members of the public, and those taking part in a personal injury case try to display reasonable behavior, which means making a reasonable demand.
There are many different types of personal injury cases.
That makes it impossible to suggest one point as the typical starting point in the process that is followed by the claimant. Injury Lawyer in Hamilton knows that the insurance companies look at previous cases, in order to gain a sense for the most appropriate starting point. After examining those previous cases, an insurance company studies a given case, searching for any unique circumstances.
During the negotiations, the offers from each side change.
Those changes reflect one side’s ability to unearth new facts. Those get added to the facts that existed at the starting point. Some facts can determine the outcome of a personal injury case. If a defendant does not have many assets, the insurance company feels no reason to offer a large settlement.
One unchanging fact
One fact does not change, regardless of the type of personal injury case in which a plaintiff seeks compensation for injuries. That same fact goes unchanged; even as new facts enter the picture. The legal system has been designed to make the plaintiff whole again. If the case proceeds to trial, a jury will seek to make the plaintiff whole again.
Issues over which the 2 sides might disagree, regardless of the starting point:
The issue of whether or not the injured victim might be faced with other medical expenses in the future. Those future expenses would be related to the accident-caused injury. In order to resolve that issue, it helps to have the opinion of a medical expert.
Another contentious issue could be the one concerning the future earning potential for the victim. Does evidence suggest that the victim’s ability to earn a living has been impaired, due to the presence of the accident-cased injury?
The decisions made, following a debate on one or both of those issues could have a large effect on the outcome of a personal injury case. The huge effect on that outcome could be expected, regardless of the case’s initial starting point.
The legal system does not expect the plaintiff to select an ideal starting point. Even the insurance industry provides the plaintiff with leeway, in selecting a starting point. After all, the adjuster is supposed to offer some sort of guidance to the plaintiff, after receiving the demand letter.
The legal system would not arrange for such guidance, if it felt that the plaintiff ought to know the ideal starting point. That observation applies to all plaintiffs.