Early in my career (10+ years ago), I used to get extemely mad about this common myth.  I would often see that good, honest and trustworthy people who were somehow harmed by another person’s negligence, were then royally scr***d again by the insurance company when it came time to resolve the claim.  In fact, most of my clients tell me that they are extemely surprised how hard and nasty the insurance company will fight to defeat legitimate accident injury claims.  And when I say a legitimate claim, I’m talking about an accident that was clearly caused by someone else and where the injuries are fairly serious (surgery, broken bones, brain injury, etc.).

It is partly because of this common misperception among the public about accident claims that I chose to start the Seattle Accident Attorney blog and write about my experience as an attorney who represents people who have been seriously harmed by another.

Here is a perfect example of how unreasonable an insurance company can act.  It involves a case that I’m working on right now.  I represent a 55-year-old woman who was injured in a rear-end accident about 4 years ago.  To maintain confidentiality, I will call this woman “Jane.”  Jane is a very nice hard-working woman.  She’s been married for nearly 20 years and has two grown children.  This client is what I would call my “typical” client.  That is, Jane is an honest, hard-working citizen who was injured through no fault of her own.

Jane’s injuries started out as a typical “whiplash” injury.  The insurance industry likes to call this type of injury a “soft tissue” injury to suggest that the injury is extremely minor and insignificant because it only involves the “soft tissues.”  In my experience, the insurance companies fight “whiplash” injuries very hard.  They hire all kinds of medical experts to state that these injuries usually heal within 4 to 6 weeks, so any treatment or problems beyond this time frame is not related to the accident.

In any event, Jane’s whiplash injury progressively got worse over the years.  She received all kinds of different treatment to help resolve her pain and make a full recovery.  This included numerous family doctor consultations, physical therapy, massage therapy, xrays, injections, medications, MRI scans, and consultations with many different specialists about what was causing her symptoms.

It was not until more than one year following the accident that a cervical MRI was ordered.  The scan showed some “disc abnormalities.”  More physical therapy and medications were ordered.  Then another MRI was ordered a few years later when Jane’s symptoms were getting worse and the injury was severely impacting her daily activities.  This second MRI showed a “C4-5 disc angulation” or what may also be referred to as a “disc collapse” in the middle of her cervical spine.  Jane consulted with 3 different surgeons who all stated that she needed immediate surgery or risk paralysis.  The disc collapse also caused her cervical spine to curve in the opposite direction, which is called Kyphosis.  The doctors told Jane that she needed a complicated procedure where they fuse three vertebrae together and insert a cage and titanium plates to stabilize her spine so the abnormal curvature could be reversed and that her spinal cord would not be damaged.

All of Jane’s doctors (at least 8 different doctors), including her surgeon at Harborview Medical Center, have stated that the problem was initially caused by the auto accident years earlier.  The C4-5 disc collapsed started out minor and then as time progressed it got worse to the point that Jane’s spinal cord became precariously close to being permanently damaged.

Jane’s medical bills are approximately $230,000, which includes the surgery and facility bill of $190,000.  Fortunately, the other driver was an insurance agent for State Farm and had $2.1 Million in auto coverage through her employer.  Now, you would probably think that State Farm would do the right thing and offer a reasonable amount of compensation to take care of Jane’s past and future medical bills plus include some amount to compensate her for having a painful permanent and dangerous spine injury.  Not.

Instead State Farm went fishing into Jane’s prior medical history.  Jane, in her early 50’s, obviously had some prior injuries and doctor visits over the years.  State Farm found out that Jane injured her neck at work while lifting boxes about 3 years before the accident.  Even though Jane’s doctors determined that the injury was a “minor strain” that fully resolved within 6-8 mos., State Farm found this injury highly significant. 

State Farm also discovered that Jane injured her low back at work moving furniture about a year before the accident.  Even though Jane’s doctor stated under oath that this low back injury had nothing to do with her neck, State Farm found it significant that Jane’s massage therapist following this injury stated that she had “neck tightness” along with low back pain.  Jane’s last massage therapy for her low back injury ended more than 6 mos. before the auto accident.  But State Farm didn’t care.  It hired a well-known defense medical expert (he’s admitted to earning more than $3 Million over the past 15+ years working for insurance companies and against injured victims) to state that Jane’s auto accident injury was mild, should have resolved within 8 weeks, and that her current problem and resulting surgery was all entirely due to Jane’s pre-existing cervical spine condition.  It did not matter to State Farm that this expert was the only expert out of 8+ reputable doctors who held these opinions.

Jane and I participated in mediation last week with State Farm in an effort to resolve the case short of a jury trial.  You would think that State Farm might offer an amount that most would think was close to being reasonable?  Nope.  State Farm’s final offer was $50,000.  Not even enought to cover 25% of Jane’s medical bills to date.  Add to this fact that Jane has now incurred over $20,000 in litigation costs (doesn’t include attorney fees), and you can see that Jane’s only real option is to go to trial.

The insurance industry wants the public to believe that most trials involving injuries are necessary because the victims and their lawyers unreasonably demand millions of dollars to settle.  I just don’t see that in my line of work.  In fact, it is usually the other way around.  The insurance company offers such an unreasonably low settlement that the victim is left with only one real option: try the case in court and let a jury decide.  Jane’s case is a perfect example of this.

Today a large semi-truck rear-ended a shuttle van that was carrying several disabled passengers.  The accident happened on Highway 512 in the Lakewood area of Pierce County.

Some of the passengers in the shuttle van were transported to a nearby hospital for possible neck and back injuries.  A spokesman for the Washington State Patrol said the injuries were minor.  Yet I’ve heard that before from police officers in other accidents and it turned out to be false.  The WSP spokesman should have said the injuries were not life-threatening.

The driver of the semi-truck rig was cited for speeding too fast for conditions.  This is a common citation in rear-end accident cases.  But did you know that the fact that a driver has been cited by a police officer is inadmissible to a subsequent civil proceeding to determine liability for the accident?  Yes, it’s true.  A Washington state statute states that a police traffic report is inadmissible in a later civil trial.  Washington case law also states that the fact someone has been cited cannot be  used in a later civil trial either.  Most people are surprised to learn these facts, which are actually very well-known legal principles in personal injury law litigation.

Neck and back injuries are by far the most common type of personal injury cases involving auto accidents.  Common diagnoses include neck or back strain/sprain injuries, facet joint injuries, ligament and muscle tears, and herniated disc injuries.  Even what appears to be a minor neck or back injury at first blush can actually turn out to be a costly, debilitating and chronic condition. 

I’ve had clients who mistakenly avoid getting medical attention for several days and their condition turns worse.  Then the insurance company will either deny or reject the claim and argue that the person did not seek immediate treatment, hence no serious injury occurred.  This happens more often than you may think. And that’s why I wrote my book, “The Ten Biggest Mistakes That Can Wreck Your Washington Accident Case.”  Go to www.WashingtonAccidentBook.com to learn more.

I can tell you that roll-over collisions can cause the most severe and debilitating injuries.  I’ve handled dozens of these types of accidents.  The injuries are usually severe and long-lasting given the collision forces generated in the crash.  Roll-over accidents are notorious for causing spine injuries, to include fractured spine or vertebrae, disc injuries, facet joint problems, and strain/sprain injuries.

Hopefully the Seattle Police Department will take care of this by carefully investigating the cause of the collision.

Interestingly, the article suggests that the number of uninsured motorists is closely tied to the unemployment rate.  That shouldn’t be surprising since most people who lose their job will try to save money by cutting out certain expenses that they believe is expendable.  Auto insurance appears to be one of those unnecessary expenses, which may be true if the alternative is not paying your rent and/or buying enough food.

I previously wrote in the March 2008 volume of the Davis Law Group Newsletter that people should buy as much uninsured motorist (UM) as they can afford.  Now that the recession is here, I’m including a partial reprint of that article:

Uninsured motorist or Underinsured Motorist (UM/UIM) coverage is extremely important.  I have handled a lot of cases in my office involving accidents that were caused by an uninsured motorist or by someone who has the minimum amount of coverage that is legally required-just $25,000.  Yet it is the uninsured or underinsured motorist who is responsible for causing a much higher percentage of the accidents that occur on our roadways each year. 

The law only requires that a driver have at least $25,000 in liability insurance.  Yet, most of us know that a $25,000 policy does not go very far, particularly with the high cost of medicine today.   That’s why you should purchase as much UM/UIM coverage that you can afford.

Here’s a true story to illustrate just how important UM/UIM coverage is.  About a year ago, a woman called me about an accident she had several months earlier (I’ll call her Janet).  Janet was rear-ended by another motorist who was uninsured.  The other driver was 25 years old, job-less, and had neglected to buy any insurance on his 1990 Honda.  The collision was fairly significant, causing more than $8,000 damage to Janet’s Ford Taurus.  Janet received a significant neck injury that ultimately required surgery to repair the herniated disc in her cervical spine.  She had complications following surgery and another procedure was performed.  When she contacted me, Janet’s medical bills were more than $80,000.  And they were continuing to accrue because she was still getting treatment and medication for her ongoing symptoms.  Fortunately Janet had health insurance through her employer.  But her health insurance carrier only paid about 70% of her bills.  What was more unfortunate however, was

that five (5) years earlier Janet decided to reject UM/UIM coverage so she could save an extra $100 per year.  That decision proved tragic.  

Janet’s decision to reject UM/UIM meant that she really had no recourse against the other driver.  Oh sure, she could have sued him.  But litigating and going to trial is very expensive.  Even if she secured a judgment against this young man, he was essentially judgment-proof.  He had no assets and a low paying job.  She never would have been able to collect anything from that young man.  If Janet had adequate UM/UIM coverage under her own auto policy, she could have secured compensation from her own carrier.  But Janet had rejected UM/UIM coverage years ago to save money and she never thought to renew it after her financial position improved.  Instead, she had to pay thousands of dollars for her own medical treatment. 

In the end, Janet had to pay more than $20,000 out of her own pocket for an accident she didn’t cause.  An unjust result to say the least.

When surgery is not recommended for many months or years following the accident, this gives the insurance company some room to argue that the surgery is unrelated to the accident in question.  How is this possible?  Well, there are a number of doctors, including surgeons, who routinely evaluate injured victims at the request of insurance companies.  Some of these doctors make a lot of money doing this.  I know of one Seattle neurologist who has made more than $2.5 Million testifying as an insruance company medical expert over the last 15 years.

Often times the doctor hired by the insurance company will look for anything in the patient’s medical history where it can be argued that the need for surgery was due to a pre-existing medical condition, like an old injury, a past back surgery, or some other event.  One time a defense doctor tried to blame my injured client’s surgery on an incident where she bent over to pick up her laundry which caused a severe aggravation of her already existing back pain.  It did not matter that my client had ongoing and severe back pain since the date of the accident two months earlier.

Often times the insurance company doctor will try to blame a car accident victim’s back pain complaints on a pre-existing “degenerative” condition, despite the fact that the person never had back pain complaints before the auto accident.  What is a degenerative spine condition?  It is mostly a normal occurrence that is somewhat dependent on the aging process.  As we age, our spines deteriorate to a certain extent.  The discs dry out and lose their shock-absorbing qualities.  The spinal joints become enlarged and/or develop osteophytes with normal wear and tear.  Most of us encounter these changes without experiencing any symptoms of pain and discomfort.  Some of us may experience symptoms but they usually go away with time.  But this “degenerative” condition allows the insurance company doctor to argue, sometimes quite convincingly, that the person’s ongoing or chronic symptoms are due to this pre-existing condition and not the car accident.

When a person experiences chronic neck or back problems following a car accident (defined as pain lasting longer than 3 months), it is usually a good idea to hire counsel to represent your interests.  Not every chronic back pain case leads to surgery, but many do.  I have represented several dozen car accident victims who developed chronic neck or back pain and then underwent surgery one or two years later.  In these cases, it is extremely important that you have an attorney who knows the medicine and can effectively cross-examine the insurance company doctor to reveal holes in that doctor’s opinions. 

It has taken me several years of reviewing medical journals, talking to doctors, attending medical seminars, and taking numerous depositions of insurance company doctors to learn the medicine of spine trauma and the treatment that is usually prescribed and recommended for these types of injuries.  Because of this, I know when an insurance company doctor is being “intellectually dishonest” when it comes to examining and offering opinions about my injured client.  Because spine medicine is incredibly complex, often with no clear consensus among practitioners about the exact diagnosis, it is easy for the insurance company doctor to offer “opinions” that stretch the truth and perhaps contradict the conventional wisdom of those doctors who actually specialize in spine medicine.