FEAR OF TRIAL REDUCES SETTLEMENTS
There is one question you must ask any lawyer who claims to be a “personal injury lawyer“. The question is; “when did you last try a personal injury case?” Recent discussions with personal injury adjusters from three insurance companies made it clear, they don’t expect most of the lawyers they deal with to be willing to try a personal injury case. This explains the current trend of low pre-lawsuit settlement offers. Some lawyers actually tell their clients to accept these terrible offers. As a result of low offers, we file more cases. For that reason, we usually see the offer rise significantly once the litigation department gets involved. Insurance companies know our experienced trial lawyers at Caron Colven Robison Shafton are not afraid to try your case.
HIRE A PERSONAL INJURY LAW FIRM THAT TRIES CASES
Sadly, many “personal injury lawyers” don’t go to trial. Aggressive insurance industry defenses have scared them off. As a result, the insurance companies know they can low ball cases. Based on that experience they learn who will take those low offers. In this day it is nearly impossible to both insist on fair settlements and avoid going to trial. The trend of terrible settlement offers is most pronounced in Under-Insured and Uninsured Motorist Insurance cases. Often the insurer never makes a reasonable offer. Because the insurance company won’t have to pay much more than the insurance amount they sold the customer, their strategy is to hold the insured hostage.
CARON COLVEN ROBISON SHAFTON PROVEN TRIAL RESULTS
Here at Caron Colven Robison Shafton we tried 5 cases to jury verdict in 2018. All 5 cases resulted in verdicts of $100,000 or more. We improved our personal injury client’s position in every case. In the first trial of the year, the jury returned a verdict of $500,000 improving the client’s recovery by over $200,000. The “worst” verdict was $100,000, beating the offer by $40,000.
PRE-EXISTING CONDITIONS WHAT THEY REALLY MEAN
The two most common reasons cases go to trial are pre-existing conditions and low visible property damage. Neither of these bothers us at Caron Colven Robison and Shafton. Insurance lawyers will dig back decades if they can, just to find something “pre-existing” to try to blame for the harms their insured caused. As a result, the insurance companies have used the “pre-existing condition” excuse up.
LOW VISIBLE PROPERTY DAMAGE
This is another favorite excuse the insurance companies have “used up”. Success has led the insurance industry to try to fit serious injury cases into the “low visible damage” pigeonhole. This can backfire spectacularly. The courts are getting wise to the junk science the defense employs. Jurors are also much wiser. As a result of personal experiences, jurors know modern cars can take a very hard impact and leave little visible property damage. Bill Robison is the author of the Low Visible Property Damage Cases chapter of the Washington State Association for Justice desk book.
Clark County, Vancouver, Camas, Ridgefield, Washington: Traffic Circles reduce crashes, save lives and reduce injuries.
/in Bicycle Accidents, Car Accidents, Motorcycle Accidents, Personal Injury, Wrongful Death /by William RobisonA person is injured or killed on a Washington roadway every 11 minutes. This problem is getting worse. Distracted driving is a major reason. Distracted driving is so common we even have a term: “red light prayer” to describe drivers texting away at traffic lights. Prohibition isn’t working so what can be done? Washington DOT, Clark County, and local cities are working to reduce the toll by replacing “stop go” intersections with traffic circles.
By preventing violent side impact collisions traffic circles save lives. Traffic circles further reduce wrongful deaths and serious personal injuries by taking out stop signs and traffic signals. Where they have been put to use traffic circles have cut crashes by at least 75%. Washington Department of Transportation. https://www.wsdot.wa.gov/Safety/roundabouts/benefits.htm In Washington traffic circles are still a bit of a novelty. PEMCO insurance conducted a poll that shows most people are okay with traffic circles, it’s the other folks we don’t trust!
As personal injury attorneys Caron, Colven, Robison, Shafton and Hojem welcome any measure that reduces injury and death on our roadways. To help drivers our neighbors in Alberta produced this short video: please share.
Just when you thought they couldn’t sink any lower
/in Uncategorized /by William RobisonState Farm has a new cost saving trick up its sleeve. When both driver’s are insured by State Farm only one adjuster is assigned to the claim. This adjuster determines who is at fault and how much they will be paid for their cars. It is pretty safe to say this is a serious conflict of interest.
Let’s look at a crash in Vancouver Washington with personal injuries to one driver and none to the other. Let’s call the uninjured driver, who turned left causing the crash Driver 1. The driver who was proceeding straight through a green light is Driver 2. Driver 1 admits to the police officer at the scene that she does not know if her light was green or not. It would be impossible for her to have a green light when oncoming traffic also has a green. Driver 2 is certain her light was green. Both driver’s agree other folks were going through the intersection in Driver 2’s direction of travel.
After Driver 2 leaves the hospital Driver 2 discovers that State Farm has appointed a single adjuster to the case. The adjuster seems friendly. Driver 2 tells her she had a green light. Driver 1 repeats that she thinks her light was green but she does not know for sure. The adjuster determines that there is inadequate evidence to figure out fault, so both insured’s bear 50% fault. This means Driver 2 loses half her $500 deductible on the spot. State Farm then undervalued her car by using an averaging trick that is the subject of another blog. That trick took about a $1,000 more off the payment to Driver 2.
The final part of the cost saving is basically just lying. Driver 2 told the adjuster that she was going back to the doctor for more treatment. The adjuster informed her that the claim was closed and she couldn’t get payment under the no-fault PIP insurance she had paid State Farm for.
By blaming the driver with the most damage State Farm reduces its losses. By blaming both driver’s State Farm justifies raising the rates on both of them. By blaming both driver’s State Farm makes it harder for the drivers to change insurance.
As someone said: You don’t have the wrong insurance, you have the wrong insurance company.
Dangerous Highway Defects Costs State of Washington $3 Million Dollars To Settle Motorcycle Accident Litigation
/in Motorcycle Accidents /by William RobisonThe State of Washington has agreed to pay $3.0 million dollars to a Clark County Washington woman for injuries she suffered in a 2015 motorcycle crash. The State blamed the motorcyclists both of whom were cited for traffic infractions. The investigation, however, proved the State was entirely to blame. The motorcyclists collided with a traffic island that was improperly designed,
constructed and maintained by the State.
The crash injured four people, two very seriously. No alcohol or drugs were involved and speed was not a factor. Traffic islands have been a contributing factor in motor vehicle accidents on SR 432 for years. In 2008 the State inexplicably missed a chance to bring the island into compliance with safety regulations at little or no cost to the State. The State has since made improvements to the island.
The crash occurred around 10 p.m. on October 17, 2015. Several experienced motorcyclists and their passengers were westbound on SR 432 also known as Industrial Way. The cyclists were riding in a staggered formation when they encountered the dangerous highway defects. Two cyclists riding on the right side of the lane collided with the traffic island. Although the island is entirely within a 50 m.p.h. through travel lane, it was constructed with prohibited 6-inch vertical curbing. The island lacked reflectors, high visibility paint, and gore lines making it nearly invisible at night. The improper vertical curbing made the impact with the island particularly dangerous to motorcyclists and caused both passengers to be ejected. Dash-cam video showed a State Trooper responding to the crash also nearly hit the island.
Had the island met even a few of the visibility safety requirements the motorcyclists would have seen it and avoided it. Tragically, had the curb been a “mountable curb as safety rules require, the State’s failure to maintain signs, paint and reflectors might have been excused because any driver who failed to see the island could drive over it without incident.
William D. Robison handled the litigation and settlement of this motorcycle accident case for Caron, Colven, Robison, Shafton.
Fear Of Trial Reduces Personal Injury Settlements
/in Personal Injury /by William RobisonFEAR OF TRIAL REDUCES SETTLEMENTS
There is one question you must ask any lawyer who claims to be a “personal injury lawyer“. The question is; “when did you last try a personal injury case?” Recent discussions with personal injury adjusters from three insurance companies made it clear, they don’t expect most of the lawyers they deal with to be willing to try a personal injury case. This explains the current trend of low pre-lawsuit settlement offers. Some lawyers actually tell their clients to accept these terrible offers. As a result of low offers, we file more cases. For that reason, we usually see the offer rise significantly once the litigation department gets involved. Insurance companies know our experienced trial lawyers at Caron Colven Robison Shafton are not afraid to try your case.
HIRE A PERSONAL INJURY LAW FIRM THAT TRIES CASES
Sadly, many “personal injury lawyers” don’t go to trial. Aggressive insurance industry defenses have scared them off. As a result, the insurance companies know they can low ball cases. Based on that experience they learn who will take those low offers. In this day it is nearly impossible to both insist on fair settlements and avoid going to trial. The trend of terrible settlement offers is most pronounced in Under-Insured and Uninsured Motorist Insurance cases. Often the insurer never makes a reasonable offer. Because the insurance company won’t have to pay much more than the insurance amount they sold the customer, their strategy is to hold the insured hostage.
CARON COLVEN ROBISON SHAFTON PROVEN TRIAL RESULTS
Here at Caron Colven Robison Shafton we tried 5 cases to jury verdict in 2018. All 5 cases resulted in verdicts of $100,000 or more. We improved our personal injury client’s position in every case. In the first trial of the year, the jury returned a verdict of $500,000 improving the client’s recovery by over $200,000. The “worst” verdict was $100,000, beating the offer by $40,000.
PRE-EXISTING CONDITIONS WHAT THEY REALLY MEAN
The two most common reasons cases go to trial are pre-existing conditions and low visible property damage. Neither of these bothers us at Caron Colven Robison and Shafton. Insurance lawyers will dig back decades if they can, just to find something “pre-existing” to try to blame for the harms their insured caused. As a result, the insurance companies have used the “pre-existing condition” excuse up.
LOW VISIBLE PROPERTY DAMAGE
This is another favorite excuse the insurance companies have “used up”. Success has led the insurance industry to try to fit serious injury cases into the “low visible damage” pigeonhole. This can backfire spectacularly. The courts are getting wise to the junk science the defense employs. Jurors are also much wiser. As a result of personal experiences, jurors know modern cars can take a very hard impact and leave little visible property damage. Bill Robison is the author of the Low Visible Property Damage Cases chapter of the Washington State Association for Justice desk book.
Three Important Factors about Personal Injury Law in Washington State
/in Laws & Legislation, Personal Injury /by vancouveradminPersonal injury law, also recognized as tort law, is the defense of a person who has suffered injury or loss due to the wrongdoing of another individual or entity. An individual who files suit under tort law is not expecting prosecution for negligence but rather hopes to recover financial losses caused by the defendant’s remiss.
Personal injury laws vary by state, which is why you need a qualified lawyer to fight for you in court. Here are three things that you need to know about tort regulations in Washinton state.
Washington has a Statute of Limitations for personal injury claims
The Statute of Limitations (SOL) in a state limits the time that a person has to file documents with the courts in hopes of seeking restitution for a crime committed. Regarding personal injury, the SOL refers to the time limit that the plaintiff has to file suit for medical bill costs, lost wages, and other financial strains caused by the defendant’s negligence.
Washington state has a SOL of three years when it comes to tort law. Any lawsuits filed after this time are typically denied by the courts, though there are exceptional circumstances in which the ordinary statute does not apply.
Settling a personal injury case may take months or years
It is important to note that all tort cases are different. Whereas a lawsuit that involves little injury may reach the settlement stage months after its initial filing, it may take years to close a case where the victim requires lifelong treatment and compensation.
Talking with the insurance company before discussing your case with a lawyer could hurt you in the long-run
Many consumers are tricked out of thousands every year because they failed to take their personal injury claim to a lawyer before discussing the incident with an insurance provider. It is important to remember that an indemnity company’s sole mission is to save money when accidents happen. They are not looking out for the best interest of the injured and will attempt to settle at the lowest rate even if such amount does not pay all of your legal bills.
It is important to gather evidence and present the facts to a personal injury lawyer first. The tort law attorney will evaluate the proof and determine which route is best.