Do Auto Injuries Discriminate?
September 10, 2007Do Auto Injuries Discriminate?
The National Safety Council reported that in the year 2001 there were approximately 12.5 million traffic accidents, with about 2.3 million disabling injuries. It is a good thing that the US government along with auto makers have spent billions of dollars on testing and research to make vehicles safer. Yet even with modern advancements not all vehicles offer the same level protection and each occupant has a different risk of injury. “The insurance company often uses the cost to repair the vehicle as a gauge for determining the extent of injury to the vehicle occupants.” says Richard Griffin, of the Griffin Law Firm, a large Atlanta firm that specialized in auto and work injuries. Griffin goes on that minorities, the elderly and the poor are often the most negatively affected by this practice of claims evaluation. “Statistically, minorities, elderly and the disadvantaged drive vehicles with below average safety ratings or older vehicles. They are also more likely to not have access to healthcare. Then, when they say that they are hurt, the insurance company simply states that there was not enough damage to the car to cause injury. This often leaves the injured person in pain, without proper treatment, unable to work and with medical bills. Everyone with an injury needs good legal representation, and that’s what my firm does!” The Highway Loss Data Institute is a nonprofit public service organization that gathers, processes, and publishes data concerning different types of vehicles. In their September 2005 publication, “Injury, Collision and Theft Loss”, the Institute rates the relative frequency of injuries in each model, year and class of vehicles. (A full listing of vehicles can be seen at www.iihs.org.) Vehicles such as the BMW L 7 series, Chevrolet Suburban, Ford Crown Victoria, Volvo V70, Buick Park Avenue and Saab 9-5 all rate substantially better than average. While the Kia (Rio, Optima, Grand Vitara), Mitsubishi (Lancer, Galant, Eclipse), and Hyundai (Accent, Tiburon, Sonata) all rate substantially worse than average. These ratings support the idea that minorities and the poor may be at a higher risk of injury because their vehicles have poor safety features or may be older with no modern protection devises. “The vehicle safety does have a major impact on occupant injury but so does the pre-injury health of the occupant and the forces generated during the collision”, states Griffin. “Many insurance carriers do not understand that each occupant has a different threshold and risk for injury. An 18 year old healthy football player will have a lower risk of injury than an 89 year old female with osteoporosis and osteoarthritis. There are literally thousands of factors that are involved with an injury but the cost to repair property damage is not a major factor.” In 2001 the Supreme Court of Delaware, in the case of Davis v. Maute stated that the defense “may not directly argue that the seriousness of personal injuries from a car accident correlates to the extent of the damage to the cars, unless the party can produce competent expert testimony on the issue. Absent such expert testimony, any inference by the jury that minimal damage to the plaintiff’s car translates into minimal personal injuries to the plaintiff would necessarily amount to unguided speculation.” But the insurance companies still routinely state that “less than $1500 of damage equals no injury”. “This leaves the injured person wondering, if they are really in good hands?” says Griffin. “The elderly, disadvantaged and some minority groups do appear to get taken advantage of. That is why our firm investigates each claim and protects the rights of the injured. We see many cases where the client did not immediately seek legal advice or may have gotten advice from an attorney that does not specialize in personal injury. We still fight hard for these individuals but it makes our job much more difficult. I recommend that any person injured get immediate legal advice from lawyers that specialize in personal injury.” Because of an extraordinary nationwide effort by insurance carriers, motor vehicle accident claims have been dramatically reduced. Carriers have been particularly successful in defending minor impact cases. In California alone, according to the research arm of the California Supreme Court, motor vehicle accident filings in superior court were down 50% in just 10 years. Few industries have successfully reduced its liabilities by 50% in just 10 years. The Insurance Research Council in a 2003 reported that 10% less claimants were utilizing the services of an attorney from 2002 to 1992. This is a surprising trend since 92% of claimants whose cases were value at over $25,000 were represented by an attorney. That still leaves the question, “do auto accidents discriminate?” Do auto accidents discriminate? Yes they do. If you have a weak or degenerated back, drive a car with a poor safety rating, or have any of the other hundreds factors that put you at high risk for injury. Then yes auto accidents do discriminate. But one thing is 100% certain. They never taught a doctor in medical school, that when you are evaluating a patient to leave the exam room, go to the parking lot, look at the patient’s car, come back in the examination room and give the patient your diagnosis.
Richard S. Griffin, Attorney At Law
See more at www.griffinlawfirmpc.com
