How can a Ins co say... Because of minimal damage to a vehicle. The Patient was not injured. Our Patient's some who have attorney's are not keeping their care. I have seen this more and more lately. I know Indeed the Patient's are having a Problem. It's happened to me. I work for a Chiropractor. I was intoduced to DC care as the result of an Accident. Please Clariify. Thanks
1 Answer from Attorneys
Re: Personal Injury
The first issue is whether this is first-party coverage (e.g. "med pay" coverage) or third-party coverage (e.g. liability coverage). The duty of the insurer to pay is basically greater if the coverage is first-party. I have personally had to litigate such a claim against an insurance company, which failed to pay for its insured's chiropractic bills. (I also alleged bad faith.) The mere fact that there is minimal damage is no reason to deny the claim. The minimal damage may, however, be a general indicator that a person was not likely to be injured. This has been a hotly litigated issue. The patient (and doctor) generally argue that everyone's body is different, and people can be injured even in a minimal impact. There is no hard and fast rule on this. The patient has to be aggressive and ultimately may have to sue the insurer (or the other driver) to get the bill paid, and a jury of twelve people may decide the issue. There may be some bias against chiropractors, but these days a lot of people have been to D.C.'s.