Proving Injuries in Low Impact Collisions | Slepkow Law

Rear end collisions are one of the most common types of auto accidents.  In fact, according to statistics from the National Safety Council, there are approximately 2.5 million rear impact accident claims reported every year in the U.S. and they comprise approximately 28% of all auto crashes each year according to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.

Proving damages in low-impact car accidents can be challenging

Proving damages in low-impact car accidents can be challenging, but it is not impossible. In many cases, the extent of damages may not be immediately apparent, and it may require thorough documentation and professional evaluation to establish a valid claim. Here are some steps you can take to prove damages in low-impact car accidents:

1. Seek Medical Attention: Even in low-impact accidents, it’s essential to see a healthcare professional for a thorough evaluation. Some injuries, such as soft tissue injuries, may not manifest symptoms immediately but can become more severe over time.
2. Document Injuries: Keep detailed records of all medical evaluations, treatments, and expenses related to your injuries. This can include medical bills, doctor’s notes, prescriptions, and any recommended follow-up care.
3. Photographs and Videos: Take photos and videos of the accident scene, your damaged vehicle, and any visible injuries. These visual records can be valuable evidence in demonstrating the impact of the accident.
4. Gather Witness Statements: If there were witnesses to the accident, collect their contact information and ask if they are willing to provide statements about what they saw.
5. Consult with an Attorney: It’s often beneficial to consult with a personal injury attorney who specializes in car accident cases. They can provide legal advice and guide you through the process of proving damages.
6. Obtain a Property Damage Estimate: Get a professional estimate of the repair costs for your vehicle. This can be used as evidence of the physical damage sustained in the accident.
7. Keep a Pain Journal: Document your daily experiences and how the accident-related injuries are affecting your life. Note your pain levels, any restrictions on your activities, and any emotional or psychological distress.
8. Request and Review Medical Records: Obtain and review your medical records to ensure that they accurately reflect the extent of your injuries and treatment. If there are discrepancies, address them with your healthcare provider.
9. Expert Testimony: In some cases, you may need to consult medical experts who can testify to the causation of your injuries and their impact on your life.
10. Establish a Timeline: Create a timeline of events from the accident through your recovery process, including medical treatments and any financial losses, such as missed work.
11. Consider a Pain and Suffering Claim: In low-impact accidents, it’s essential to demonstrate the physical, emotional, and psychological suffering caused by the incident. Pain and suffering claims may help recover damages for non-economic losses.
12. Be Cautious with Insurance Adjusters: When dealing with insurance companies, be cautious about providing statements or accepting settlement offers without fully understanding the extent of your damages. Consult with an attorney before engaging in negotiations.

Remember that proving damages in low-impact car accidents can be complex, and it’s essential to gather thorough evidence, seek professional guidance, and advocate for your rights. Consult with an attorney to determine the best approach for your specific situation.

Low impact collisions

As a personal injury attorney for the past 20 years, I have seen incidents where vehicles are struck from behind as probably the number one scenario for motor vehicle collisions causing bodily harm.  Unfortunately, I have also seen a steady and more aggressive effort on the part of insurance carriers to discount these claims or deny them outright based upon the “level of impact” (as judged by their own internal standards).  A recent letter I received from an insurance claims representative is a typical example stating as follows: “We have investigated the incident of __________, and have determined based upon the level of impact to the respective vehicles that the incident was not significant enough to cause bodily injury and we are, therefore, denying the claim.”

This raises some important questions such as the following:

• Is there really a minimal level of impact that can cause injury?
• Can the age, health condition, or prior medical history of the victim play a role in this analysis?
• Can factors such as the position of the vehicles the position of the driver or passenger make a difference?
• Can the insurance company “back up” their claims with competent expert opinions?

Whether a Rear-Impact Crash Can Cause Injury is Usually Not as “Cut and Dry” As Insurance Carriers Claim The current trend on the part of auto accident insurance companies is to set a “threshold” of the amount of property damage done to a vehicle as a “cut off point” for either accepting or denying claims of bodily injury.  This is a flawed method of analysis, in my opinion and is not supported by sound scientific evidence. For one, there are numerous factors that come into play when examining this issue and the scientific literature and studies do not support analyzing impact on the human body based simply upon impact to the vehicle.

“egg shell” or “thin skull” plaintiff rule

Second, all humans are not equal in age, health or prior medical problems.  In almost every jurisdiction, including California and Rhode Island, there is a so-called, “egg shell” or “thin skull” plaintiff rule. As stated in the Rhode Island Supreme Court case of  Lebon v. BL & M. BOTTLING COMPANY, INC., 339 A.2d 272 (1975)

 “That the wife may also have had a pre-existing condition which interfered with her recovery is of no legal effect, for it is well settled that a defendant in a personal injury accident takes his victim as he finds him and cannot defend on the ground that his actions only aggravated an earlier condition or that the plaintiff was weak, decrepit, or among those unusually susceptible to the injury sustained. Lebon, See Prosser, Torts § 43 at 261-62 (4th ed. 1971); Annot., 2 A.L.R.3d 290 et seq. (1965).

also see:  Iazzetta v. Nevas, 105 Conn. App. 591, 593, FN4 (2008)(Citation omitted; internal quotation marks omitted.) citing Rowe v. Munye, 702 N.W.2d 729, 741 (Minn.2005); see also W. Prosser & W. Keeton, Torts (5th Ed.1984) § 43, p. 292.

prior back, neck or other spinal condition prior to the accident

“a defendant in a personal injury accident takes his victim as he finds him and cannot defend on the ground that his actions only aggravated an earlier condition or that the plaintiff was weak, decrepit, or among those unusually susceptible to the injury sustained.” Therefore, for example, if a person had a prior back, neck or other spinal condition prior to the accident, and were in a “decrepit” or weakened state and the incident caused an aggravation to that condition, the defendant would still be held liable for medical costs and pain an suffering related to that exacerbation.

whiplash type injury

In addition, the position of the vehicles and occupants at impact can play a role.  For example, if the front (so-called “target vehicle”) is at a complete stop, the rear (so-called “bullet” vehicle), this can impact the force on the human bodies inside the front car.  Likewise, if a person’s head is turned to the side, even a minor impact could cause a whiplash type injury.  Without analyzing the facts of any particular case for these types of issues, the analysis as to whether injury “should have” or “did” occur is incomplete.

“peak” force of impact

Finally, insurance adjusters and defense attorneys cannot simply assert blanket claims without supporting such claims with admissible evidence.  Often times, insurance companies will retain the services of an accident reconstruction expert who has no expertise in bio-mechanical issues.  Thus, they could testify as to things like the “Delta V” force of impact to a vehicle but, would not be competent to testify as to how this may have impacted the human occupant.  Likewise, physicians are used many times to testify but, the doctor will provide no factual basis upon which their opinion that the accident was too minor to cause injury. In addition, experts often rely upon flawed data such as measuring the “average force of impact” instead of the “peak” force of impact, studies not involving lower impact collisions, and studies where only young, healthy individuals were used as test subjects.

The Need To Consult a Quality Auto Accident Attorney After Any rear-end Crash

Based upon the general tendency of insurance companies to use any excuse to deny or devalue payment on a claim and the specific trend discussed above, it is all the more imperative for auto accident victims to consult with a lawyer familiar with rear end collision claims.  Whether you are in R.I., California or any other state, the national trend on the part of all major auto insurance carriers is to simply deny all lower impact claims.  Without a competent attorney to analyze the specific facts of your case including not just the damage to the vehicles but, also the other factors discussed above, you may be stuck with medical expenses, lost wages and the physical pain and emotional trauma of a legitimate injury with no legal recourse!

Sources:

Diffusing the Defendant’s Biomechanical Engineer, Trial Diplomacy Journal, Vol. 21, 1-7 (1998)