Every insurer claims to be fair. The demand package is where that promise gets tested. It is the document set that moves a claim from “we’re investigating” to a real number on the table. When a car accident attorney or car wreck lawyer builds a demand, they are not just stapling records together. They are crafting a proof file, an advocacy piece, and a negotiation roadmap that anticipates counterarguments and closes gaps before the adjuster can exploit them.
This is the work behind the scenes that most clients never see. It is tedious, detail-heavy, and unforgiving. Done well, it shortens the path to settlement. Done poorly, it invites delay, lowball offers, and needless fights.
Starting at the end: what a persuasive demand achieves
A strong demand package answers three questions without forcing the reader to hunt for them: who is responsible, what harms were caused, and what the claim is worth. It does this in a way that is coherent, verifiable, and easy to audit against the insurer’s internal checklists. Adjusters handle dozens of files at a time, and supervisors sign off on the larger payouts. If your demand lets both of them track the logic and the numbers without guessing, you earn momentum.
The end result is not a single letter. It is a body of documents tied together by a concise narrative and a clean valuation section. The narrative should match the records, not fight them. The valuation should read like math, not wishful thinking.
Establishing liability with the facts you want the adjuster to repeat
Liability is the gatekeeper. In most rear-end crashes, negligence is straightforward, but comparative fault can creep in through small cracks. A car accident lawyer builds the liability section with the understanding that the adjuster will defend the file later to a manager or a defense attorney. That means using sources that survive scrutiny.
Police reports do a lot of heavy lifting. Still, they are not gospel. I’ve seen reports misstate the road direction or mix up vehicles. So we cross-check. The narrative gets anchored by the official crash report, supplemented with photos, video, and statements that snap the facts into focus. If a dash cam captured the light cycle or a storefront camera shows the impact angle, we secure and preserve it immediately. Timing matters, because many systems overwrite footage within days or weeks.
Witness contact is another quiet priority. Phone numbers in the report go stale quickly. A simple call can lock down a supportive statement, and it can also expose a witness who is hesitant or inconsistent. Better to learn that before making assertions in the demand.
Liability arguments also anticipate policy language. For instance, if the at-fault driver claims a sudden emergency due to a blown tire, the demand should include photos showing tire wear, maintenance receipts, and any citations that undercut the excuse. If comparative negligence is plausible, the narrative frames it honestly, while tightening the causal chain between the defendant’s choices and the injuries. A demand that ignores a credible defense invites a brusque denial. One that acknowledges the issue, then narrows it with facts, keeps the door open.
Preserving and organizing the medical story
Injury claims rise and fall on the medical record. The adjuster will not accept conclusions that the records do not support. A car accident attorney reads the chart first as a skeptic, then as a storyteller. Both passes matter.
The first pass is for landmines. Gaps in treatment, inconsistent pain ratings, missed appointments, prior complaints to the same body parts, and phrases like “patient appears well” or “denies pain” in a triage note months after the crash. None of these are fatal, but each needs context. If the client had a month with minimal visits, we explain it with work demands, childcare, or a COVID exposure. If a primary care note shows an old shoulder issue, we gather those prior records to draw a line: what was baseline, what changed after the crash, and what the images or exams show now.
The second pass is for the arc. Adjusters look for a clean healing narrative that tracks: ambulance or self-transport, ER or urgent care, primary care follow-up, specialty referrals, imaging, therapy, injections, surgery if indicated, and eventual release with permanency ratings or recommended future care. Not every case follows the full arc, and it shouldn’t unless clinically appropriate. What matters is that the sequence fits the injury. A herniated disc that leads to an epidural steroid injection three months in makes sense. A meniscus tear with immediate physical therapy and delayed MRI does not. A good demand anticipates those questions and answers them in the text while citing dates and records that prove it.
Billing records need the same discipline. Insurers often claim that charges are excessive or unrelated. We preempt that by matching bills to providers and dates of service, stripping out duplicates and balance bill threats, and using state-specific benchmarks if allowed. If the client used health insurance, we obtain the lien or subrogation ledger, because that affects net recovery. For care under a letter of protection, we include the signed letter and confirm that charges align with local customary ranges. An inflated bill can shrink a settlement faster than any defense argument.
Special damages: numbers that must add up for anyone, even on a Monday morning
The demand’s damages section should let an adjuster reproduce the total with a calculator in five minutes. Past medical expenses get tabulated by provider and date. Future medical care, when supported by a physician’s recommendations, is estimated with reasonable cost assumptions, itemized per category of care. Wage loss calculations track pay stubs, W-2s, or tax returns. For self-employed clients, we tie time missed to gross revenue dips and expense patterns, not just a letter that “work was lost.” If the client used PTO, we count its value. If they were on light duty with reduced productivity, we explain the change and back it with supervisor notes or emails, when available.
Non-economic damages require a different touch. Many adjusters think in terms of ranges tied to the injury type and treatment duration, but that does not mean the demand should be vague. The most persuasive descriptions are concrete. Not “pain and suffering,” but the way a forklift operator who loved weekend fishing lost the ability to stand more than 30 minutes, missed a planned trip with his daughter, and still wakes at 3 a.m. when he rolls onto his injured shoulder. When those facts are grounded in therapy notes or physician comments, they carry weight. We do not oversell. If the client ran a 10K two weeks after discharge, the demand does not pretend otherwise. Trust built in the facts raises the ceiling in negotiation.
Causation: the bridge between a crash and a diagnosis
Insurers push hard on causation, especially with degenerative findings. MRIs often show bulges and osteophytes in adults over 30, whether they are symptomatic or not. The question is what changed. The demand leans on doctor statements that connect symptoms and functional limits to the crash, not just raw imaging. We prefer language like “Given the temporal relationship, absence of prior symptomatic treatment, and clinical findings, it is more likely than not that the collision aggravated preexisting degenerative changes and caused the patient’s current radicular symptoms.” That is not fluff. It is an anchor that adjusters use to justify paying for pain that appears on a scan as age-related.
Timelines matter here. Symptoms reported within the first 24 to 72 hours tend to persuade. Delayed treatment does not kill a claim, but we explain the delay plainly, for example, a teacher who waited until school break to see orthopedics, then promptly followed through with therapy.
Property damage is more than an afterthought
Photos of vehicle damage help a human understand severity, but they also shape an algorithm’s output on the insurer’s side. Some carriers still try to argue low property damage equals low injury. Jurors do not always buy that, but an adjuster’s initial offer often carries that bias. Including quality photos, repair estimates, and total loss valuations helps combat the low-damage narrative. If the vehicle intrusion or delta-V was significant, we say so and, if available, cite the estimate or repair notes that show frame work or airbag deployment.
When the property damage appears minor, we calibrate expectations. Claims have settled well above property damage in cases with medical proof and credible pain reports, but the demand avoids the trap of framing the case as catastrophic. Measured tone, strong documentation, and medical consistency do more work than adjectives.
The structure of the demand letter
A demand letter has a voice: calm, direct, and anchored in exhibits. It does not need to be long to be effective, but it does need to be complete. Underwriting supervisors often skim, so each section should stand alone clearly. Most run eight to fifteen pages for mid-range injury claims, with exhibits carrying the bulk of the file size.
The opening paragraph establishes the claim, date of loss, policy identifiers, and a one-sentence statement of liability. The next sections walk through facts of the crash, injuries, treatment timeline, damages, and the demand figure. Citations to exhibits appear where needed, not as a cluttered string after every sentence. When the letter references ER imaging on April 4, the corresponding exhibit is labeled in a way any reader can find in seconds.
The demand amount is not random. It should account for the policy limits, the comparative fault risk, venue tendencies, and the medical profile. Asking for the policy limit can be appropriate when injuries and exposures warrant it, but doing so reflexively signals bluster. If the client’s medical special damages are 22,000 dollars with three months of therapy and no surgery, asking for 1 million dollars kills credibility. On the other hand, if there is a permanent spinal injury with injections and surgical recommendations, a limits demand is not only reasonable but necessary to set up bad faith leverage if the insurer drags its feet.
Exhibits that speak for themselves
The best exhibits carry your argument without extra ink. Clean accident scene photos go first, followed by the crash report. Medical records should be complete but curated. Not every lab value is worth its weight. We include cover sheets that summarize each provider’s role, dates, and key findings so the adjuster can absorb essentials quickly before diving deeper. Billing exhibits sit beside medical records, in matching order, so nothing feels out of place.
Pay records and employer letters get their own section. If the client worked modified duty, the job description before and after the crash can be persuasive. For self-employed clients, we use profit and loss statements and client cancellations to show the real impact, not just projections.
For future care, physician recommendations carry the day. A generic life care plan without physician adoption often invites pushback. When we cannot get a clean statement from a treating provider, we consider a brief independent consultation with a specialist who can translate the chart into a practical treatment roadmap.
Timing, notice, and statute pitfalls
Deadlines drive leverage. Some states require early notice of bodily injury claims to preserve certain rights. Uninsured or underinsured motorist claims often have policy-specific notice provisions and consent-to-settle clauses. A car accident lawyer tracks these from day one. Settling with an at-fault carrier without obtaining UM consent can forfeit the underinsured claim. We also watch the statute of limitations. If negotiations stall as the clock runs down, we file suit to protect the claim, then resume discussions with a litigation calendar in place.
Medicare and ERISA liens create their own urgency. A settlement cannot close cleanly unless lienholders are addressed. We open those files early and provide periodic updates so the final figure is not held hostage for months after an agreement is reached. When a hospital asserts a lien that exceeds statutory limits or includes unrelated care, we challenge it with records and, when needed, a short letter citing the statute.
Negotiation posture built into the demand
An adjuster reads a demand looking for two things: exposure and opportunity. Exposure is what a jury might do. Opportunity is where the claimant’s side might bend. We signal firmness on liability and core damages, and we leave measured room in discretionary areas like general damages within a fair band. The number we demand is above the expected settlement but within the zone of reason given the venue and facts.
We also think a step ahead. If the insurer predictably challenges treatment duration as “excessive,” the demand already includes the provider’s rationale for continued therapy or the reason for a switch in treating clinics. If wage loss seems soft, we limit the claim to what we can prove and name it as such, which protects credibility. If surveillance is likely, we advise the client to live life honestly and we do not overstate limitations in writing.
The first offer sets a tone, but it is not the finish line. We respond with a reduction only when justified by new information or strategic positioning. Each move is documented in short, clear letters that become part of the file, because if the case later requires litigation or a bad faith claim, that paper trail proves reasonableness.
Insurance policy limits and the art of the limit demand
Limit demands have their own choreography. A limits letter must present liability, damages, and causation with enough clarity that a reasonable insurer would protect its insured by paying. It sets a fair time limit, usually 20 to 30 days depending on jurisdiction, offers to provide additional materials reasonably related to the claim, and identifies all liens. If there are multiple claimants or limited per-accident funds, the letter proposes a fair apportionment or requests disclosure and coordination.
Sloppy limits demands that hide records or compress timelines to force error are less likely to trigger bad faith leverage. The goal is to be both firm and fair, which puts the onus on the insurer to act.
When the record fights you
Sometimes the facts come with baggage. A client might have missed months of care during a family crisis. Another might have documented opioid misuse that complicates pain management. Shoulder complaints could predate the crash by years. These are not reasons to abandon a claim, but they change the approach.
We narrow the claim to what is defensible. Instead of seeking compensation for every ache, we focus on exacerbations and document the difference. We use treating providers to draw those lines. We avoid absolute statements. “No prior issues” becomes “No prior treatment in the five years before the collision,” supported by records. If the case calls for an honest concession, we make it once and move on. That candor keeps the rest of the presentation believable.
Subrogation and net recovery: the numbers clients actually care about
Clients rarely ask what the gross settlement will be. They ask what they will keep. The demand package anticipates this by tracking liens and reimbursement obligations. Health plans under ERISA often have powerful recovery rights, but even there, equitable reduction for attorney’s fees and limited fund doctrines can reduce the payback. Medicare’s final demand is negotiable only within tight bounds, yet conditional payments can be corrected where unrelated. State Medicaid programs vary widely, and some require petitioning a court for allocation in larger settlements.
We flag these moving parts in the demand, not to invite the insurer into lien resolution, but to show that the claim is being handled responsibly and that settlement funds will not be tied up indefinitely.
Practical checklist: materials most demands include
- Police report, citations, and scene photographs, with a short summary of fault and key traffic controls Medical records and bills, organized by provider and date, including imaging and discharge summaries Proof of wage loss and employer verification, or business records for self-employed claimants Health insurance lien statements or subrogation ledgers, plus any letters of protection A clear damages summary with past medical totals, wage loss, out-of-pocket costs, non-economic damages narrative, and, where supported, future care estimates
Technology helps, judgment decides
Practice software can fetch records faster, flag gaps, and create exhibit labels. It cannot decide whether the “normal exam” in a rushed urgent care visit should reduce the non-economic demand when later orthopedics found a tear. It will not catch that Discover more the physical therapy plan of care expired and was not refreshed, weakening the last month of billing. An experienced car accident lawyer reads between the lines, calls providers to clarify chart notes, and decides what to include or omit to keep the file clean and persuasive.
Venue and jury bearings
Insurers price risk by county. A soft-tissue case in a conservative rural venue does not carry the same value as the same case in a metropolitan area known for robust verdicts. A car wreck lawyer who knows the courthouse culture can tune the demand accordingly. Citing local verdict examples is risky unless the cases are close on facts and injuries, but referencing the venue’s general range can ground expectations on both sides. It also shapes the settlement bracket and whether filing suit early is sensible.
When to stop negotiating and file
No one likes to litigate unless it adds value. Some files do not move without a complaint on the docket. Signals include repeated low offers untethered to the record, requests for records already provided, or shifting liability arguments after months of exchange. Before filing, we send a final, crisp letter summarizing the impasse and the specific reasons the insurer’s position is unreasonable. Then we file and keep the door open for resolution. Litigation often unlocks adjuster authority and defense counsel can become a pragmatic partner when they see the file is trial-ready.
What clients can do to strengthen a demand
The quiet truth is that clients influence the value of their case every week. Showing up to appointments, following through on home exercises, communicating changes in symptoms to providers instead of only to the lawyer, and keeping personal photos of recovery milestones all matter. Social media restraint helps too. A single cheerful hiking post can overshadow months of therapy notes in an adjuster’s mind, even if the hike was a rare good day that cost two days in bed afterward.
Clear communication with the legal team about new bills, employer changes, or insurance letters keeps the file tight. Small administrative lapses can create big negotiating headaches.
The finish line: drafting for closure
A well-built demand aims at clean settlement documents. It respects the policy’s release language, protects UM claims where relevant, and ensures checks are made out correctly to satisfy liens and providers. It includes a reasonable response window and invites a phone call rather than a form letter. The tone remains professional even when the insurer has tested patience. There is no victory in a nasty demand that gets a defensive response. The goal is money in the client’s pocket, sooner and fairly.
Experienced negotiation feels like chess, but much of it is carpentry. Measure twice, cut once. Match the story to the proof. Anticipate the arguments. Keep the math honest. That is how a car accident attorney builds a demand package that moves an adjuster from no to yes, and makes the settlement stick.