How Lawyers May Handle Claim When Insurance Company Holds Victim At Fault For The Accident

It is not uncommon for an individual injured in a motor vehicle accident to be faced with a driver who denies liability. Sometimes, these defendants actually blame the plaintiff for the accident. Given that many vehicle accidents are not observed by bystanders the outcome of such lawsuits could come down to the credibility of the victim as opposed to the credibility of the driver. Attorneys who handle these types of cases find that in cases where this goes on the adjuster for the insurance company covering the driver will often take the side of the defendant.

Attorneys seasoned in handling such cases, most notably in those that deal with severe injuries to the victim, realize that they really do carry the load of showing that the driver was responsible. Depending on a credibility battle is unlikely to result in a settlement and wagers on the outcome at trial. While it is not always economically viable to work up a claim using experts, in cases where the damages are sufficient and there is sufficient insurance coverage or there are assets that could be used for a recovery, it may be appropriate to do so.

Look at the reported claim in which a truck hit a male messenger on a bicycle as the truck was making a right hand turn. The truck cut off the bicyclist. The front of the truck hit the bicyclist knocking him down. The truck's front tire and rear tire both ran over the victim. The victim bicyclist suffered fractures to his pelvis and suffered serious internal injuries. The bicyclist was twenty two years old when the accident took place.

The driver maintained that he was not at fault for the accident. In what is an all too common defense position the driver blamed the victim for the accident. The truck driver maintained that he signaled prior to making the turn. The driver also maintained that the bicyclist ran a stop sign, and further maintianed that he did not run over the plaintiff twice. The plaintiff was clear that the defendant did not have his turn signal on and that the driver could not have been paying attention when he made the turn.

The law firm that handled this lawsuit rebutted the defendant's version of how the accident happened with the assistance of an accident reconstruction expert. In demonstrating that the truck did in fact run over the bicyclist twice the law firm was able to show that the truck driver could not have been paying attention to traffic on his right when he took the turn. As a result, the law firm reported that the case settled in the amount of $400,000.

Should insurance company adjusters side with the defendent, usually the most effective way to persuade them to reverse their view is to pesent them with independent evidence that invalidates their insured's rendition of the accident. And, if the insurance company continue to follow their insured's version, then the case has been fully prepared for trial. If only expert testimony might achieve that goal an experienced lawyer will weigh the cost of bringing in an expert versus the likelihood that the expert will rebut the defendant's position and the probable span of how much a jury would give for the harm sustained by the victim.

To learn more about how a motor vehicle accident attorney can help you and about other vehicle accident cases including bicycle accident matters visit the websites