Washington Injury Law Blog

This post continues my series with answers to frequently asked questions about Washington car accident claims.

Q: I was injured in a rear-end collision but there was little damage to my car. The other driver’s insurance company says there’s no way I could’ve been injury when there’s little damage to my car, and they’re refusing to pay for my medical bills. What do I do now?

A: I hear this more and more these days from people who call me looking for some advice following a Seattle area car accident. Many insurance companies have a policy to outright deny or only offer very small amounts to settle car accident claims when the vehicle damage is less than a certain amount, like $1,000.

Insurance companies do this despite having no credible scientific support for the suggestion that injury likelihood can be determined by the amount of vehicle damage. They hire so-called “experts” (I call them “hired guns”) to help them spread the myth that low vehicle damage equals little or no injury. If you’re in this situation here are a few tips.

1. Take your car to a body shop of your choice and have them give you an estimate of the damage. Often times the bumper may look fine, but the damage is hidden underneath the bumper where there can be significant damage. The bumper may need to be removed to find this damage which the insurance company adjuster won’t do.

2. Document everything surrounding the car accident. Get the estimate of the damage on your car, take photos of your car damage, take photos of the accident scene, getting the names addresses and phones numbers of all witnesses, and complete an accident report. You can get a blank accident report from your local police department if the police didn’t respond at the scene of the accident. If the police did respond – make sure you get the officer’s business card with the incident report number on it.

3. You should not repair the car or accept a vehicle damage settlement until you have spoken with an experience Washington car accident attorney. You need to hire an experienced Washington car accident attorney because a lawsuit will in all likelihood be necessary to get you a fair recovery for your injuries from the car accident.

This post continues my series with answers to frequently asked questions about Washington car accident claims.

Q: How often do you “win” your cases?

A: As Kirkland car accident lawyer I would love to tell you that I win every case, but I don’t. As in life, there are no guarantees – even with a very good case. As most trial attorneys will tell you, there are cases that should be won at trial, and are not, and there are cases that should be lost, and are won.

Each case is different based on the specific facts involved in each case. Your case may be similar to another of my client’s but not exactly the same in every way. Different impact speeds, different vehicle types, angle of impact and many other factors go into the mix to cause your injury. You also have a unique body that is injured and healed in its own unique and individual way. As you can see – many factors affect your injury case.

In addition, there are many cases where a confidential settlement has been reached that my clients would definitely consider a ‘win’ but I cannot publicize the details of the case.

You can check out some of my results at my law firm’s web site.

An interesting video was posted by the Atlanta Injury Law & Civil Litigation Blog showing the braking characteristics of the front cab of a semi-truck that is driving without pulling a trailer. Here in Washington you can often see trailer-less semi truck cabs driving around to and from the Port of Seattle or Port of Tacoma.

The video shows a skidding test for a trailer-less semi-truck cab on a wet road. The results seem to indicated a predictable, repeatable and unsafe result.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=584OPjR2dw0[/youtube]

Another reason to give semi-trucks more room when driving on busy Seattle highways during our wet winters.

A Vashon Island, Washington widow, Jodi Scanlon, has been forced to file a lawsuit against her late husband’s $500,000 accidental-death life insurance policy with CIGNA Group Insurance. Her husband Michael suffered from MS and was living part time in a nursing home, where he fell and struck his head in November 2006. The fall led to a traumatic brain injury which Michael never recovered from. The autopsy report ruled Michael’s death an accident.

Jodi submitted a claim shortly after Michael’s death. The Scanlon’s had been paying Michael’s life insurance policy premiums for 10 years and were stunned to receive a rejection letter from CIGNA. A doctor hired by CIGNA had reviewed Michael’s medical records and somehow determined that the fall was caused by a pre-existing heart condition. The doctor went on to say that the pre-existing heart condition was made worse by the blood thinning aspirin he was on – which contributed to his death.

Now, I have not review the medical records or facts surrounding Michael’s fall, but this is unbelievable. This poor family pays premiums on a life insurance policy for 10 years, an autopsy rules Michael’s death an accident, and the accidental fall is the triggering event that ultimately results in his death. To you and me this seems like an open and shut case. How can CIGNA deny payment?

The answer is they most likely can’t. Washington voters recently approved R-67 (aka Fair Insurance Conduct Act), which is a new law aimed at holding insurance companies accountable for their bad faith practices in handling first party insurance claims. First party insurance claims are those that you make against insurance that you have purchased – like life insurance.

CIGNA is going to have to show that its denial is based upon sound medicine – that Michael’s heart condition caused the fall. I not sure how they can determine this based on a medical records review.  Seems to me witnesses to Michael’s fall – if there were any – would have to say something like he was grabbing his chest or arm prior to falling – thus indicating a possible heart attack. Even then the autopsy would have likely revealed damage to the heart from the heart attack – and if bad enough – the coroner would’ve ruled the death by natural causes – heart attack. I’m not a doctor by any means and this is all pure speculation by me, but CIGNA’s story doesn’t really seem to add up.

Jodi’s story strikes at the heart. Not only did she lose her husband to a tragic accident - but the loss was made much worse by CIGNA denying payment on the life insurance policy. CIGNA by forcing Jodi into litigation will cause Jodi to re-live over and over again the painful memory of her husband’s death. Situations like this is why Seattle injury attorneys like me have jobs. Big insurance companies take advantage of the little person by twisting the facts to fit their need and greed for evermore profits.

Luckily for Jodi Scanlon Washington laws are on her side. Jodi has filed her lawsuit under the Fair Insurance Conduct Act. If CIGNA is found to have acted in bad faith they could have to pay triple damages or 1.5 million to Jodi plus her attorney fees and costs of the lawsuit.

If you’re faced with this type of situation or know someone who is – please contact an experienced Washington injury attorney – and get some good advice on your rights.

Source: Seattle Times article, February 15, 2008 by Sonia Krishnan

There’s another good post by Missouri Injury Law Blog concerning Allstate’s settlement tactics. Allstate advertises that you’re in “Good Hands” with them. But ask any experienced Washington injury attorney or injury victim who has had to deal with Allstate on an injury claim and you’ll quickly hear how those hands came wrapped in boxing gloves.

Many of my clients have found dealing with Allstate on your own is like going a few rounds with Mohammad Ali. There’s a lot of jabs, some body blows and eventually you’re seeing stars wondering what happened. There are numerous stories of how Allstate adjusters have not dealt with people on a level playing field just like the story of attorney Ben Sansone’s client. 

A case in Washington had to reinforce the fact that Allstate cannot tell a Washington car accident victim they don’t need to speak with an attorney because the insurance adjuster is looking out for them and attorneys will only take money out of their pocket. When an insurance company tells someone they’re looking out for them and they don’t need an attorney to review a release of all claims form they want signed – the insurance company is giving legal advice without a license to practice law. That’s illegal – and just not right.

Although I haven’t personally had an insurance company threaten bankruptcy of the at fault driver as a way to force a low settlement — it doesn’t surprise me. An experienced Washington injury attorney should know that a bankruptcy has no effect on the available insurance. This underhanded tactic does not work on experienced injury attorneys, but if it were you — would you know the threat was hollow? I have had several cases were the at fault party went bankrupt, but the insurance coverage was still available and paid despite the bankruptcy. This is definitely a trap for the unwary and another reason you should speak with an experienced Washington injury attorney before speaking with an insurance adjuster.

Or better yet order my free book “The Guide to Washington Injury Cases” by clicking here. The book will give you some good information about the whole Washington car accident claim process before you speak with that pushy insurance adjuster.

Fircrest, Washington police are looking for a Maroon Mercedes that hit 66 year old bicyclist Sandy Johnston of University Place in an intersection at about 5:30 a.m. Sunday, February 17, 2008. After this Tacoma, Washington bicycle v. car accident, the driver appears to have dragged Ms. Johnston to the side of the road while she was unconscious as indicated by the trail of blood at the scene and then drove off. Ms. Johnston was taken to Tacoma General Hospital with multiple fractures and cuts to her body.

Police are requesting that anyone with information about this Washington bicycle accident please call. Crime Stoppers is offering a $1,000 reward to identify the driver. 

Source: Seattle PI, 02/20/08, Regional Briefs section

Think your MySpace, Facebook, or social network page is not really going to come back to haunt you someday? Think again — it could happen in the worse of circumstances. A recent King 5 story tells the story of a young Arlington, Washington woman, Marissa Schneider, who was in a severe car accident and suffered very serious injuries that have left her in a nursing home unable to talk or care for herself at 21 years old.

The car accident that hurt Marissa so badly was caused by a driver that crossed the I-5 median into oncoming traffic and hit Marissa’s Dodge Spirit head-on. Marissa and her family have sued the driver and Chrysler — the maker of the Dodge Spirit — due to an alleged design flaw. Chrysler’s attorneys are being very aggressive and have subpoenaed Marissa’s MySpace account records including her private blog entries.

Corporation and insurance company lawyers are conducting these kind of “cyber-investigations” more and more. Chrysler believes the information on Marissa’s MySpace page will lead to relevant evidence in her car accident case. Defense attorneys in fact promote these kind of tactics openly as can be found on this defense attorney blog. Corporation and insurance company lawyers are looking for things on your MySpace page that contradict your injury claims or “there could be interesting stuff we’d like a jury to see.”

Kind of makes your stomach turn a little doesn’t it? Anything you put out there on the web could someday be fodder for a jury to decide your fate. Ouch, that’s scary! It’s enough to make you second guess that video from Friday night’s party you were thinking about posting. Defense attorneys have discussed the possibility of subpoenaing your online “friends” as witnesses including using your “friends” access to your page’s private areas, or even trying to become on of your “friends” to spy on you. These kinds of sneaky and underhanded tactics are what big corporations and insurance companies do in an effort to attack your credibility in a car accident case.

You may be asking yourself, is my Facebook or MySpace page in anyway relevant to my car accident? Why should I have to turn over my private account information for something that has no relevance to my car accident injuries? I totally understand that feeling of frustration and it’s what nearly everyone of my clients feels when faced with questions from defense attorneys in areas that seem irrelevant to the car accident.

Rules that apply to Washington car accident lawsuits allow a broad scope of questioning by defendants. This area of questioning is called discovery. During discovery both sides get to ask each other questions that will help find the truth about what happened and how badly you were injured. The rules give a very broad scope of things that can be questioned and discovered about you.  Sometimes this results in over-reaching or requests for stuff that is out of bounds.

The ultimate question is given Washington discovery rules is your MySpace, Facebook or other social network page out of bounds in your Washington car accident lawsuit? Unfortunately, the answer is not clear. In some circumstances your MySpace page may be relevant because it shows you doing things your injuries should not allow you to do. Other times there may be nothing there. The general rule the courts follow is whether the information requested could lead to information that is relevant to the car accident lawsuit. So if there’s a possibility that information requested could lead to information that could be used in your injury case, then a judge is likely to grant access to your MySpace page.

Washington appellate courts have not had an opportunity to address a question regarding access to a person’s MySpace, Facebook or other social network page. However, it is only a matter of time before we see some rulings from the Washington high courts to give this area added guidance. Until then — it’s probably a good idea to speak with an experienced Washington car accident attorney about the effect your MySpace page may have on your car accident case. There are steps that your attorney can take to protect you in certain circumstances.

But for now — BEWARE — you’re private MySpace page may be an open book when you least want or expect it.

Blue Cross has apparently been fishing for doctors who will report pre-existing conditions of new Blue Cross members during office visits according to a good post by California Personal Injury And Insurance Blog. Blue Cross is looking for doctors to refer new Blue Cross members with the condition that the doctor agrees to report back on these new members pre-existing conditions. You wonder why would Blue Cross do this? The answer is corporate greed and the pursuit of what else but PROFITS!! 

The post on  California Personal Injury And Insurance Blog has a link to a funny video about Blue Cross and its denials for pre-existing conditions. Check it out – it’s funny! [youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UisM6rlhbCQ[/youtube]

Doctors should not be the ones checking up for Blue Cross or any other health insurance company. It violates doctor-patient privilege and undermines patient trust in doctors. Blue Cross has all the tools it needs to check a new members past medical records for pre-existing conditions. Blue Cross is trying to shortcut this process by having doctors do it for them. This is just not right – - and another example of what is wrong with healthcare in America. “Profits over People” seems to be the theme heard again and again!

I wonder which of the current Presidential candidates has a good idea for dealing with this health insurance problem?

I was raised by a single mother who was very involved in my life well into my 20’s. I lived with her during college and law school off and on. When I was 19 years old I bought a Kawasaki GPZ 750, which is a racing style street motorcycle. My mom was convinced I would seriously injure or kill myself with that “thing.” She even went as far as to donate blood in large amounts during my teens and 20’s. Luckily I avoided any motorcycle accidents or serious injuries while I owned my beloved motorcycle. I still miss my red rocket occasionally.

However, if I had been killed in a serious motorcycle accident, which was caused by the carelessness of another car or truck driver, my mom under Washington law would not have been allowed to do anything against the driver who killed me. Washington’s wrongful death laws do not allow parents to hold wrongdoers accountable for the negligent death of their child–once the child turns 18–unless the parent can show they were economically dependant on the child. This is an unfair and discriminatory, especially for single parents.

A new law has been proposed in the Washington State Legislature — HB 1873 – to change this law, so that parents who are very involved in their child’s life can hold a wrongdoer accountable. 47 other states have already passed laws giving similar rights to parents of wrongfully killed children. Washington needs to do the same.

Please contact your legislator and urge them to pass this law because every family should be valued.

This post continues my series with answers to frequently asked questions about Washington car accident claims.

Q: I was on a jury and the plaintiff was asked for her medical bills to be repaid. The jury thought that the bills were probably all covered by insurance. Was this correct?

A: In Washington, as in most states, evidence about whether or not a plaintiff’s medical bills have been paid by insurance is kept from a jury during a trial. There are many reasons for this law. Sometimes, however, juries attempt to account for the fact that insurance has paid the medical bills and adjust their award accordingly.

If you are on a jury in a personal injury case you should not do this. The reason is that insurance is not simple and different insurance “rules” may apply to the claims at hand. In most cases the plaintiff has to pay back her insurance company out of any award, so she really was not insured at all! Almost all insurance policies require the injured person to pay back any amounts the company paid for the medical bills if the plaintiff wins her lawsuit.

Insurance policies differ and not every insurance policy requires this type of reimbursement. What the courts have done, however, to make the issue fair for everyone, is to simply take insurance out of the consideration of the jury.

If you’re a juror please don’t discount a plaintiff’s damage award because you think the medical bills have already been paid. In almost all of my cases my clients have to repay the insurance company that paid the medical bills. Insurance companies would love this to happen, but it really only hurts the injury victim.

If you’re called for jury duty please go. The justice system in Washington and all other states depends on citizens showing up for jury duty when called. I know it’s a pain and you get paid peanuts, but I need you and my clients need you. We need jurors like you to fight the greed of the insurance companies that force their customers to file lawsuits to get the insurance benefits owed.