I used these guys for my successful DV claim http://vehicle-info.com/

Secondly, my wife's personal injury lawyer didn't want to handle our DV claim either, and said if he did get involved it would be added to the injury claim, meaning they'd get a cut of that as well. I just sent the report I received from the company listed above directly to the other party's insurance company, and they paid it with no issues.

To reply to the other comment about messing up the DV claim by settling the injury claim, as far as I know they are completely unrelated. One is a settlement for personal injury, the other for property damage. Our DV claim was filed after we got the final bill from the collision shop, and once they paid that I signed off that they were free and clear on the property damage, but the injury and medical claim was still ongoing and unsettled at the time. Those didn't get settled for another 8 months or so. Anything that needs to involve the courts is very slow.

 

Well, maybe in your state there is a prohibition against linking one settlement with another. In California, one claim does not get settled without the other being addressed. The general practice in California is that $ doesn't change hands until there is a global settlement on everything. Think about it from the insurance company negotiating position - if they can put you under pressure (financial, getting out of the s**tbox rental, whatever), you may accept a lower settlement amount in order to get on with your life. Krassanova, any thoughts?

 

Material damage claims are settled directly against the PD portion of a defendant's auto policy. Material damage claims are usually settled at a different time than the injury claim. Usually, the property damage is resolved well before the injury claim settles. In California, the statutes of limitations on material damage claims and injury claims are three and two years, respectively.

The only time that it might seem that you are receiving a global settlement for both material damage and injuries is when the at fault party's company refuses to accept liability. When they finally accept (or are forced to accept) liability, they will pay both claims at once.

You had mentioned the stall tactics that insurance companies use, in hopes that a desperate client accepts a lower settlement; this happens quite a bit.

 

Nothing like squeezing a claimant....