Settlement Intelligence co-founder, Aaron DeShaw, talks about problems with Competing "AI Demand Letters" using claims that are unsubstantiated by medical records, voc rehab evaluations or an economist in this new video.
In this video, Settlement Intelligence co-founder, Dr. Aaron DeShaw, Esq., discusses concerns with recent trends in AI demand letters started by people who are not practicing plaintiff lawyers. Notable amongst the problems are the use of unsubstantiated economic damage projections and "comparable case" values in the demand letters of our competitors.
In addition to obtaining over $1 billion for his clients, including record verdicts, DeShaw is the author of the only legal treatise on insurance bodily injury claim software that determines case value for over 90% of auto insurance claims. He is also the founder of leading litigation publisher Trial Guides, and co-founder of the AI demand letter platform Settlement Intelligence.
In this video he covers a few key points about why using demand letters that use unsubstantiated future economic damages for diminished earning capacity and future medical bills, as well as "comparable case" values could damage your law firm.
After over 20 years of research, publishing and speaking on the topic of insurance claims software, it is clear that there are right ways and wrong ways to handle claims.
One of the concerning things that we've seen in the legal profession recently is claimed AI models that are generating unsubstantiated future medical damages and future wage loss claims in personal injury cases. The problem with this is insurance adjusters are trained specifically not to enter anything into insurance claim software that isn't substantiated by an expert report. So claims of economic damages that are not substantiated by medical, voc rehab or economist opinions are going to be completely disregarded by the insurer.
These companies are coming from an investment banking background, not from the personal injury legal field. As a result, it is clear they don't understand how claims are being evaluated. The concerning thing is that personal injury law firms are using companies like this to write their demand letters.
The unsubstantiated future economic damage projections are not the only problem. These startup demand letter companies then use those future economic damages to set what they claim to be "comparable settlements or verdicts." Some of the values are from uncontested default judgments where a defendant never appeared.
While some of the cases may have some aspects similar, the comparisons are based on projected economic damages that have no substantiation. Making an insurance claim using comparative settlements and verdicts that are based upon unsubstantiated economic damage claims sets you up for a malpractice claim, because it puts in writing that you are making an insurance claim based upon damages that don't exist. The client then can look at that demand letter and see that you believe their case has a specific value. Your failure to get substantiation for that value, or your settlement of the claim far below the claim value, leaves you subject to a claim of malpractice.
We strongly suggest that if you are looking at demand letter technology, that suggests that it's going to add a giant economic damage number in order to leverage your settlement values up, that is going to backfire on you and create problems for you.
Settlement Intelligence is completely different. Our platform is based upon over 20 years of research into insurance claim software and over 15 years of writing demand letters and consulting on claim settlement practices with law firms. Settlement Intelligence founders are not new to the field of personal injury cases or demand letters. We do not generate unsubstantiated economic damages or "comparable verdicts" in your demand letters. To find out more about how we help law firms obtain higher values on their auto and premises liability claims, learn more here.