Whoever authored this post doesn’t know much about the use of 3rd party software like Colossus. The tone of the post suggests it has been influenced by a personal injury attorney. (aka commission salesperson).
Software is often used as a “tool” to train adjusters and to provide a “ballpark” settlement number. The actual settlement evaluation and decision is made by the adjuster; NOT THE SYSTEM.
Whoever is alleging otherwise is mis-informed. Some people have been brainwashed by personal injury attorneys that just because you’ve been in an “accident” you deserve money. What’s with that? Personal injury attorneys milk the insurance system by attempting to portray every accident victim as being severely injured. There is no profit to portray any alleged injuries accurately since they’re on commission. The more they get from the insurance company, the more they make. Anybody see anything wrong here?
Achmed is right on point. I have 2 clients now with minor accident claims and attorneys who are directing them to milk their injuries to look more severe than the are. “Milk” was the exact term used by one of the attorneys ….. such an honorable business
As a defense attorney representing insurers and insureds in West Virginia, I can advise that those adjusters using one or more of the computerized damage estimate software packages to adjust claims should document his or her claim file to demonstrate that the claim decision and course of negotiations did indeed involve individual claim consideration and judgment. Care should be taken to complete the questionnaire or input data in a fair manner and to recognize the differences among specific areas in terms of jury verdict potential. Using these systems as tools for training and development of adjusters is fine, but the claim file cannot be devoid of justification that indicates individual adjuster judgment.
We have updated our privacy policy to be more clear and meet the new requirements of the GDPR. By continuing to use our site, you accept our revised Privacy Policy.
“Clearance Auto Insurance” rates are very low and now I am saving a lot on my car insurance. Dont be fooled by 5 mins can save 500$
Whoever authored this post doesn’t know much about the use of 3rd party software like Colossus. The tone of the post suggests it has been influenced by a personal injury attorney. (aka commission salesperson).
Software is often used as a “tool” to train adjusters and to provide a “ballpark” settlement number. The actual settlement evaluation and decision is made by the adjuster; NOT THE SYSTEM.
Whoever is alleging otherwise is mis-informed. Some people have been brainwashed by personal injury attorneys that just because you’ve been in an “accident” you deserve money. What’s with that? Personal injury attorneys milk the insurance system by attempting to portray every accident victim as being severely injured. There is no profit to portray any alleged injuries accurately since they’re on commission. The more they get from the insurance company, the more they make. Anybody see anything wrong here?
Achmed is right on point. I have 2 clients now with minor accident claims and attorneys who are directing them to milk their injuries to look more severe than the are. “Milk” was the exact term used by one of the attorneys ….. such an honorable business
Legislation, to limit Personal Injury awards, is the answer… but alas,
As a defense attorney representing insurers and insureds in West Virginia, I can advise that those adjusters using one or more of the computerized damage estimate software packages to adjust claims should document his or her claim file to demonstrate that the claim decision and course of negotiations did indeed involve individual claim consideration and judgment. Care should be taken to complete the questionnaire or input data in a fair manner and to recognize the differences among specific areas in terms of jury verdict potential. Using these systems as tools for training and development of adjusters is fine, but the claim file cannot be devoid of justification that indicates individual adjuster judgment.