Car Accident Injury, Initially Declined Treatment

[SamII]

My question involves a car accident that occurred in Washington D.C. but I am from Michigan.

On May 21, I was in D.C., stopped at a red light, and a car from Virginia was stopped behind me. A truck and driver from Ohio didn't notice the red light and slammed into the Virginia car which slammed into my car, pushing my car into the intersection. There was no question that the Ohio driver was at fault in the accident.

The Virginia car was demolished and the Virginia driver was transported to the hospital by ambulance. The Ohio driver complained of leg pain and his truck had front end damage. My car was not in the same condition it was in when it was rented, but it was driveable and I was late for a meeting and I felt ok, so I declined medical attention.

Last week, I started experiencing back and neck pain. I am a statistician and live a life much like the one you conjure in your mind when you think of statisticians (if you ever think of statisticians which you probably don't ). It is not exactly a job filled with strenuous activity and heavy lifting. So I can only come up with the car accident as the cause of my pain. After seeing a doctor yesterday, tests like an abdominal ct scan and xrays were done and the doctor mentioned possible disk injury. He did not rule out the possibility that the car accident was the cause. I will know more perhaps by Monday.

My questions: What besides a medical diagnosis would be necessary to connect what is wrong with me (back and neck pain wise, that is) to the car accident? I understand from having asked some knowledgeable people at another legal site that the amount of time that has passed between the accident and the onset of my pain makes any connection of the two far more difficult (if not impossible) to prove, should I try to hold the truck driver liable at some point. Is any of this even worth pursuing? Am I better off just dealing with all out-of-pocket medical expenses myself?

Thank you in advance for any answers you may provide.

- - - Updated - - -

Anyone?

Are my questions ones that can't be answered (or at least answered until my medical test results are back)? I am missing work, in pain, and looking at medical costs that are not insignificant, and I know it is because of the impact of that car crash.

Thank you in advance for any advice you can offer.

[Mr. Knowitall]

You can make a claim if you want, but absent something to medically relate the onset of pain in July to an accident that occurred in May you can expect the reaction to range from skeptical to an outright denial of your claim based upon your failure to relate it to the accident.

[lawaholic]

I think Mr. Knowitall makes an excellent point here. If the accident occurred on May 21st and you had in fact sustained a back injury from it, you would have felt pain from that injury long before last week. Even if your back was injured during the wreck, I think it would be a waste of your time and money to try and hold the truck driver liable, because so much time lapsed before you started hurting.

[SamII]

Thank you, Mr. Knowitall and lawaholic for responding to my questions. I guess your answers are what I expected.

It is very hard for me to accept that the truck driver cannot be held liable for medical expenses that I would not have had had it not been for his recklessness. I do understand the complications in proving his connection, though.

Because of these medical expenses, I didn't want to add legal expenses on top of them by hiring an attorney to pursue the matter if there was nothing worth pursuing. So thank you for not giving me false hope of recovering massive amounts of money and for not filling your posts with false information or statistics.

The other law site I visited had some people on it who seemed to know what they were talking about and they gave me similar direction, but the other law site also had a total imbecile posting advice on it claiming to be an expert. He offered advice based on trumped-up personal experience and phony statistics, and then he had the nerve to call me derogatory names when I questioned his statistics (and I work with statistics for a living!). What I found amusing is I discovered the figures he provided came from dialogue in a Simpson's cartoon episode.

I was able to cancel my registration at that site (the moderator was helpful) but I will keep my membership here, in the event I have any additional legal concerns.

Thank you again.

[Mr. Knowitall]

He can be held liable for injuries he caused. But as of yet you have no evidence that he caused the injury of which you're complaining. Courts work on evidence. I trust that you're an honest person, in which case you would probably be shocked by how many people injure themselves through no fault of anybody else, then try to blame their injury on a prior or subsequent incident, or even try to stage an incident, so that they can blame an employer (for worker's comp) or third party.

Personal injury lawyers work on contingency. The issue is not whether you would incur fees, but whether they would deem the case worth bringing. Of the three considerations, (a) liability, (b) damages and (c) causation, you have two big issues that might deter a lawyer - even with the facts of the accident not in dispute, you would have to prove both that your injury was caused by the accident and that you suffered an amount of damages that justifies the cost and time involved in litigation. You can talk to some lawyers; I would not be surprised if they tell you to try negotiating directly with the adjuster and see what (if anything) they offer, but so far it doesn't sound like your case will have a lot of appeal for a law firm.

I did find your thread on another forum, but didn't see the problematic posts. Assuming that you only posted in two forums, it may be that you were dealing with a spammer whose posts were deleted.

[SamII]

I actually thought I was speaking with lawyers here. I have since read the Notice at the bottom of the page, though. I probably should have read that first.

Thank you for the additional information, though, Mr. Knowitall. I think the three factors you listed are definite problems, and this has certainly been noted by all of you all along. I accept that making a connection between my back problems now and the accident then is probably too difficult to make taking any legal action against the Ohio driver worthwhile.

I had a physical in December and checked out fine, and I have no history of any back problems (or of any medical problems, for that matter), and I am relatively young, and my life has not exactly been filled with activities that would be hard on my back, and the accident is the only thing that has happened to me that has been out of the ordinary, but I do accept that the challenge is probably too great and costly for any attorney to want to tackle. I may call a couple of attorneys in my area later, though, anyway, once all my test results are back, to see what they say.

By the way, the thread that I started on the other forum was never a problem. Those who responded to my post seemed knowledgeable and they told me pretty much what you have told me here. It was when I was reading through other threads about accidents that I ran across a statistic that didn't seem right, so I simply questioned its source. While waiting for a reply, I researched the matter myself and posted a correction to what was posted.

The person who posted did come back to tell me the source was "the internet" and I basically told the poster that was a stupid answer (I probably could have been nicer). He then became hostile toward me and sent me nasty "visitor" messages and I kept deleting them until finally I sent one of them to the moderator of the site and asked that my membership be cancelled, which it was.

The moderator emailed me to say I should have just ignored that poster (he is a "senior" member on the forum). From other threads I read on that site, it seems to be the forum's policy to just ignore this poster and the incorrect information he provides.

Anyway, that is why I am here instead of there. I am taking the moderator's advice and ignoring.

[SamII]

I am back with a question.

I consulted with a couple of attorneys in my area and the suggestion I was given by both was the same one that Mr. KnowItAll made, which was to speak with the adjuster directly. I contacted the Ohio truck company that employs the driver and the truck company referred me to their claims person and the claims person told me to send a letter. So I sent a letter, detailing the accident and my visits to the doctor in July and the tests that have been done, and I sent on the medical bills I have incurred so far that have been in excess of my insurance coverage.

Here is what I need help with: I just received a return letter today and the letter says that they have been authorized to pay out $7,000 to cover my medical expenses but that I need to sign a release stating that I will not pursue any further action against them. With the release, the $7,000 would end all claims against the company and its driver.

I was never asked to make any connection between the accident and the back pain I sought treatment for several weeks later. I submitted only what expenses I had to pay myself. My medical expenses are not $7,000, or close to that yet, and I am not sure they ever will be. My insurance is good and has covered almost everything.

Does this letter and the offer mean that the truck company wants me to settle for this amount because I COULD get more if I pursued this? I found out that the Ohio driver employed by the truck company has had several traffic violations in the past. I also found out that the Virginia man who was in the car that was totaled is in really bad shape with severe injuries. Could this be the reason they want to settle this quickly and with what seems like little investigation on their part?

Any suggestion on what I should do now?

[Mr. Knowitall]

I actually thought I was speaking with lawyers here. I have since read the Notice at the bottom of the page, though. I probably should have read that first.

You're in an online forum. Nobody wants to create either an expectation that you're getting professional advice or an attorney-client relationship, so even if an attorney posts here he's going to be doing it in his off-duty capacity, so to speak.

The moderator emailed me to say I should have just ignored that poster (he is a "senior" member on the forum). From other threads I read on that site, it seems to be the forum's policy to just ignore this poster and the incorrect information he provides.

Under this particular software package, the default meaning of "senior member" is "somebody who has posted a lot" (100 or more posts). This forum, in my opinion, is pretty good about policing accuracy, many other forums are more casual about it or simply don't care. (But anybody can make mistakes....)

Does this letter and the offer mean that the truck company wants me to settle for this amount because I COULD get more if I pursued this?

It means they want you to settle for that amount because they're liable for something and if that amount lets them close the books on your claim, that's worth something to them. Might they offer more if you asked for more? Perhaps, but I expect the adjuster is going to hold pretty firm (you won't know unless you try). Might they have offered more to a lawyer? Perhaps, but I can't promise that the difference would exceed the amount you would end up paying the lawyer in fees (plus, if applicable, reimbursement of costs).

I found out that the Ohio driver employed by the truck company has had several traffic violations in the past. I also found out that the Virginia man who was in the car that was totaled is in really bad shape with severe injuries. Could this be the reason they want to settle this quickly and with what seems like little investigation on their part?

The history of violations could support a claim of negligent hiring and retention against the employer, in addition to vicarious liability associated with the attorney-client relationship. It is quite possible that your case, if litigated, would end up before the same judge who is hearing the other case (if it has been filed) and perhaps even consolidated for trial, not that it's apt to have a huge impact on the cost or outcome of that case. I suspect that with some amount of documented damages and no real defense, they would rather pay you $7,000 now then pay more than that amount to a lawyer to perhaps fight you down to a $2,000 settlement or judgment (picking an arbitrary number). The cost-benefit analysis says "settle".

[TerriGlover]

Sam II,

Hi, saw your post and sorry to hear you have spine/back issues rearing it's head and needing to get treatment. I thought I would lend a view for having been in unfortunately one motor vehicle accident, and in having spinal injuries which did end significant than I imagined it would without much pre-existing problems. Not that it may happen to you, each persons injuries and spine is unique for sure. But thought I would offer the following:

In considering the settlement offer of $7k when you have just been experiencing problems with your back, take your time in decided WHEN to taking the $ and signing off. You do not have to pick up an attorney right NOW to seek good medical care assessment and treatment for your back issues, which may be improving or getting worse. A thorough good orthopedic or neuro spine specialist can offer you a plan and guidance for good treatment and recovery all non-interventional for yes, just "minor" issues, which can snowball when it comes to the spine and being involved in a motor vehicle accident. AND it doesn't snowball because you have $ dreams in your head. Truly allow yourself some time to get resolution for your back problems and improvement before taking $$$ and signing off. There are diagnostics if necessary and/or treatments for your back/spine, and you deserve a plan for treatment since your back is different and is having problems. A Plan of treatment is more than popping pills/injections too to deal with your back i.e. pain, inflammation, dysfunction, physical therapy, neuromuscular treatments, etc. The treatment could be accomplished in weeks or months, depending on your back problem.

I understand your situation and it is not a situation of wanting to get medical bills paid for because you don't have insurance and you do have good insurance; it is more of being a thorough patient who has had to seek spine medical care for back problems, believed to have been caused by the motor vehicle accident.

Time is on your side; your spine deserves a thorough plan of "recovery", even if you think at this point it may not be much. I suggest you consult with the best physician and orthopedic or neuro-spine be fully satisfied with your problems of your back having a reachable and satisfactory non-interventional plan of treatment; with you being better (which could be soon or later) the $7k settlement won't be taken off the table, and if anything if you do need treatments and time to resolve your back problems, that is the focus that is important resolve your back problems is the #1 vip consideration then know you can advise parties you are under treatment and will be giving them an update in a reasonable period of time (weeks/months) according to YOUR treatment plan and YOUR doctors. AND You don't have to have an attorney to do anything of that. Advocacy for you and your body is #1 in this situation. If it were me, my body, it's care and my recovery come first, the settlement with parties worried is second. And they have no influence on your true recovery or not - - remember that !

Just offering this view in the prism of so much to consider. Hope it helps !