How To Assess The Value of Your Pain And Suffering In A Personal Injury Case

If someone has been injured in an accident, the negligent party becomes accountable for all of the damages, both economic and non-economic. Personal Injury Lawyer in Barrie know that pain and suffering would be categorized as illustrations of non-economic damages.

Possible reasons that an injured victim could claim pain and suffering

Loss of an enjoyment for life: This reason could be one that has pushed someone that must rely on a wheelchair to seek compensation for pain and suffering.

The existence of temporary or permanent limitations: A patient with a broken leg would have a temporary limitation; someone that had been paralyzed from the waist down would have to deal with a permanent limitation.

Loss of the ability to communicate with others: If a deaf person had his or her hands mauled, or injured in some other way, then that same person would be unable to communicate with others.

Loss of eyesight: Exposure of the eyes to toxic chemicals, or the effects of an explosion might cause someone to suffer a loss of sight.

Permanent disability: The need to rely on a wheelchair would qualify as a permanent disability. The need to rely on the operation of a ventricular shunt might be viewed as a permanent disability.

• Becoming mentally disturbed, or having a victim’s emotions create an inner turmoil
• Pain, especially chronic pain
• Disfigurement: Both the formation of scar tissue and the loss of a limb are disfiguring processes.
• Forced infertility
• A shortened life

How a claimant might prove the existence of pain and suffering?

• A doctor’s diagnosis, as mentioned in the claimant’s medical records
• Medical bills
• Pictures of the injury
• Records that show the need to undergo psychiatric care
• Testimony from an expert: This can fight a claim from an adjuster, someone that lacks both medical and legal expertise.

Factors that can decrease the apparent value of a plaintiff’s pain and suffering

• Attempts by the insurance adjuster, or the opposite party to suggest that the plaintiff is partly to blame for the accident, or for the injury that resulted from the accident
• Attempts to show that the reported injury demonstrated the latent effects of harm that had been suffered by the plaintiff during an earlier accident.
• A low-ball bid by the insurance company at the start of negotiations could force the opposing party to feel content with a rather small compensation.
• Failure on the plaintiff’s part to seek medical help as soon as possible, following the accident’s occurrence
• Miscommunications between the doctor’s office and the offices in the insurance company of the defendant, i.e., the responsible party
• Poor or incorrect diagnosis made during an accident victim’s first visit to a doctor’s office, or to a hospital emergency room, or to a medical clinic