Thursday, January 7, 2010

Update on Protecting the Elderly, the Ultra Brief Version.

Purpose of the Case:

Establish that the Elderly should not be forced into a one size fits all ages treatment paradigm for injuries suffered during a traffic accident.
Since the elderly cannot realistically expect the same type of treatment result as someone half their age, their settlement offers should not be based primarily on how many times they go for treatments since the treatments may prove to be less therapeutic.
Add civility language to existing insurance policies (does not have to be enforceable by the insurance companies) to reinforce the message that policy holders remain civil towards one another when exchanging insurance information after an incident.

This is a no brainer. It costs the insurance companies virtually nothing to implement this notice to their policy holders, yet they refuse to do it.

---------------------------------------------

Desired Result of specific Case:

Compensate for two subsequent T.I.A's that occurred after the accident.

Compensate for actual neck injury

Compensate for gross indifference to request that insurance policies include wording to act civilly towards others when exchanging insurance information.

Eradicate the age discriminating practice of forcing the elderly to go to as many physical therapy treatments as someone half their age.

------------------------------------

Winning Argument:

When insurance companies won't even take the simplest of actions to help protect their elderly policy holders, they must be held accountable.

No comments: