![]() |
|||||||
![]() |
If you work in an office and you type but due to the accident your production is less, then you are more likely losing the ability to be promoted or to continue your occupation. If you loss your ability to “do the same thing” or the ability to advance doing what you are doing, then you will have a valid loss of earning capacity claim. A teacher could have a successful loss of earning capacity claim if her voice was damaged due to the accident. So if you are modeling and your face has a permanent scar because of the accident. Then you are probably be hired less because of this permanent injury. It does not matter that the scar was or not painful, but its ability to hurt someone’s employment. If I am a typist and I have a scar on my face because of the accident, then the Loss of Earning Capacity Claim will fail because the injury is not casually related the ultimate damage (me typing slower). What does having a scar on my face has to do with my productivity when typing? Not much. Loss of Earning Capacity is a very hard claim to make. It requires skill and you probably would be looking to hire an attorney. The main reason for this is because you will have two options, either you hire a highly trained professional like an economist to evaluate the present value of your loss of earning capacity (with highly complex mathematical These professionals will probably end up in front of a jury defending the math. Or you allow the insurance company to pay to retrain you in another field that would pay the about the same income to you. Both options above have many complications; the first one will be highly disputed and would be dragged to through the courts eating a lot of your resources in legal bills. And the second one makes you go to school and learn something else you might not be in love with. Many times there is a third solution to the loss of earning capacity claim. Again not a very good solution but it is important to discuss here because of its implications. That is Surgery. Going under the knife sometimes is an easy choice. But most of the time I would say it is a difficult one. The pain of the surgery and the recovery time alone can discourage someone from doing it. Also, if the surgery can cause other problems or the side effects are significant, it could discourage someone completely from taking the risk. Insurance adjusters will tell the unrepresented claimant and the untrained attorney that this a mitigation of damages issue (you must do everything to avoid a bigger loss), however in reality this is an avoidable consequence. In this case, the plaintiff (the person suing) cannot recover for damages that she/he could have avoided, through reasonable conduct. However, reasonable is decided by the jury. If someone’s religion forbids blood transfusions and that person medically requires a blood transfusion due to the accident then what? should the defendant’ insurance company pay for damages as if the blood transfusion was not available? Or should the defendant carrier pay for the value of the injury mines what ever medical benefit the transfusion would have had? Both answer will be left to a jury! But again, surgery can be a “solution” to a loss of earnings claim. Make sure you contact an attorney and discuss the pros and cons of this type of claim. Consult one by filling the form below. It's free.
Subscribe to our Free Newsletter
Join our free monthly subscription with tips, news, articles, negotiation techniques, and more about insurance companies and their claim process.
| Home Page | Total Loss Ebook |Bodily Injury Ebook |Join Our Free Newsletter | Articles & News | Claim Blog | About the Author | Site Search | Sitemap|
|
||||||