We are always amused when we get called by a potential client who has been negotiating their own case for a while. They will then tell us about the discussion that they had with the adjuster once they have indicated they may go to an attorney. I have heard adjusters say all sorts of things in their attempts to close the file down. The most recent one was, “Yes, a lawyer is going to get you more money, but you are going to get less because you have to pay them.” This is interesting for a number of reasons:
1. It admits the truth that the case is worth more money. All indications are that people who represent themselves get far less than they would if they were properly represented by an experienced trial lawyer.
2. It is giving legal advice. By making the statement of what they are going to get from a lawyer and what their case is worth, the adjuster is giving them legal advice. The consumer is relying upon the worst possible slanted advice they can get.
3. This statement needs to be tested. As I have written in the past, when someone comes in with a previous offer, we discuss with them what we think of their case. If the offer seems supported by the evidence, we will tell them that. If their case is worth more, it only makes sense that getting more means more for the person. We do not get involved in the case so that we can get paid and they get nothing additional or lose money. What sense would that make?
It makes sense to hire or at least talk to somebody who is looking out for you and your family’s best interest.
A founding partner with Bradshaw & Bryant, Mike Bryant has always fought to find justice for his clients—knowing that legal troubles, both personal injury and criminal, can be devastating for a family. Voted a Top 40 Personal Injury "Super Lawyer" multiple years, Mr. Bryant has also been voted one of the Top 100 Minnesota "Super Lawyers" four times.
4 Comments
jc
Mike, as I have stated several times in this column, plaintiff attorneys like you lose 85% of their medical malpractice cases that go to trial. This astounding rate of failure is even worse than it looks. Because it takes $100,000 in legal costs to bring a medical malpractice case and because the plaintiff attorney takes an additional 40% off the top, the patient has to win at least $150,000 before he gets a dime. Most winning plaintiffs get less than $150,000, so if a plaintiff goes to trial, he has only about a 5% chance of winning any money at all. What a record of shame! What a scam! Only 1 in 20 patients that goes to court in a medical malpractice trial gets any money at all!
You never hear that statistic in lawyer TV adds! Do you tell your clients what their odds are Mike?
Mike Bryant
Dr Cox, very early in the day to be this messed up. Your rant has nothing to do with this post at all. It is as close to spamming as you ever have been.
My post has nothing to do with med mal, In fact in the cases where they would be negotiating directly with the injured person, you know they did something really wrong, which is different than that family you lied to.
jc
Actually Mike the post is on point. You are saying that insurance adjusters do not tell the whole story. I am saying that plaintiff attorneys also do not tell the whole story.
Mike Bryant
No, the post is dealing with car collisions and the active adjusters we see there. The are trained to keep people away from lawyers and give illegal legal advice.
Your numbers as have been pointed out many times are not true, Which does make them a lot like these adjusters. They also only deal with med mal. Very rarely do you see any adjusters dealing with people in med mal cases directly, unless they really screwed up bad, and even then it is usually the administration.
Now let's revisit your fairy tale land for a minute and look at the result. if your made up numbers were true then in the end the truth would always come out , the person would lose , and the lawyer would lose all the money they have in the case. There would be an end result.
In my post when people are are not told the truth ( like what you did with that family: does that bother you at all?) the person settles for far less than their case is worth, they may end up just forgetting the whole thing, or they may mess up their case so bad there is no return.
Since you have never cared about the consumer maybe you see the same thing and are happy about both results.
Your rants are misplaced and faulty in the "affected" logic, Dr Cox.
Comments for this article are closed.