Insurance companies look closely at the method used for treating an injured claimant, before determining the worth of the associated claim.
The adjuster asks this question: Who prescribed the treatment?
Did a medical doctor prescribe it? A claim’s worth increases, if a medical doctor has prescribed the treatment.
Was it prescribed by a chiropractor? A claim’s worth would get lowered, if an adjuster were to discover that a chiropractor had prescribed the utilized treatment.
An adjuster might also ask this question: Who ordered the procedure(s) used for diagnosing the nature and extent of the victim’s injury?
Insurance companies normally cover the costs for both diagnosis and treatment. Still, the size of the payoff could decrease if the amount of time spent on diagnostic tests were to exceed by far the amount of time spent on treatment.
Some adjusters have to nail down the facts that are related to an extended treatment program.
Visits to a physical therapist could be part of an extended treatment program. Adjusters have fewer questions, if such a program calls for visits to a doctor’s office, instead of times when a physician comes to the recovering patient’s home. Those same insurance company employees would have fewer questions, if a physical therapy program for an injured victim did not continue for many months.
How a recovering victim could increase his/her chances for receiving a fair personal injury settlement?
While undergoing any recovery from an injury-linked accident, the recovering victim should strive to cooperate with all of the different medical professionals. Such cooperation should help with speeding the rate of the victim’s recovery, as per personal injury lawyer in Orangeville.
Insurance adjusters have learned the average recovery time for the most common injuries. A certain discovery could arouse an adjuster’s suspicions. That would entail discovery of the fact that a given victim’s recovery time was far longer than expected.
By the same token, smart accident victims pay attention to what the doctor has said about their condition or their treatment. Each of those same victims should strive to gain a sense for what might happen to them in the future. That sense could prove useful, if an adjuster were to suggest a possible approach for limiting the development of problems for a given instrument or piece of equipment.
An adjuster might suggest the need for a special safety device, if someone with a chronic health condition has been hit by a defendant’s vehicle. Sometimes adjusters like to pretend to have great familiarity with a victim’s condition.
In fact, adjusters’ knowledge does not equip them to comment on medical devices that work to keep certain individuals safe. That would be certain persons, namely those that have relied on the functionality of a given device.