After a multi-vehicle accident, there could be an entire list of men and women claiming damages.
Possible sources of evidence
• Road signs: Does it match with what is on a vehicle’s GPS system?
• Proof that any vehicle had a defective part
• Proof that any vehicle had received an unsatisfactory repair job
• Pictures of evidence that cannot be removed from the site of the collision
—Pictures of skid marks
—Pictures of debris in street
—Pictures of a stairway’s broken railing
Documents that could serve as evidentiary material
• A signed statement from a witness
• A police report: This could not be shown to a jury in a courtroom.
• The medical report from the driver’s treating physician
• The medical report from the doctor that was treating an occupant of the car that had been hit by the defendant
In a multi-vehicle accident, more than one automobile could have felt the impact of another vehicle.
Each of those same vehicles would have had a driver, and, perhaps one or more occupants. Some doctor would become responsible for treating a given driver. Some physician would be treating a specific occupant of one of the hit vehicles.
Information on the reported injuries should shed some light on the impact that caused a particular injury. An Injury Lawyer in Etobicoke would want to study that same information, if an adjuster had told the lawyer’s client that he/she was partly to blame for an injury to the occupant of a 3rd or 4th vehicle.
Someone that had failed to retain a lawyer could not obtain details, regarding how the facts could support the adjuster’s allegation. That same individual could be forced to accept the adjuster’s claim.
That would give the same adjuster a reason for offering a much lower bid. As a result, the agreed-upon settlement would be lower that it could have been. Insurance companies could take advantage of such a circumstance, and reduce a claimant’s demand to a marked extent.
A multi-vehicle accident could result in commission of multiple mistakes
Any failure by the occupant of a vehicle to get seen by a member of the medical community would count as one mistake.
If that same individual had hesitated to retain a lawyer, then that would count as a second mistake.
An adjuster in the insurance company for one of the other drivers might allege that the driver of the vehicle in which the occupant had failed to retain a lawyer was partly to blame for an injury to the occupant of a different vehicle.
A lawyer could demand proof of that allegation, but an unrepresented victim could not. That imagined tale should illustrate the value in hiring a lawyer, regardless of the severity of symptoms.
