Road accident investigators in Israel
-
גרסת הדפסה
-
שלח לחבר
Code of conduct with road accident investigators in Israel:
With most accidents, the insurance company sends its investigators whose job, among other things, is to clarify that an accident occurred or that there is the need to obtain prompt payment, and that the damage as posited by the victim to the insurance company is not excessive, and for other reasons.
It should be noted that most of the casualties in traffic accidents are investigated after the fact by several types of researchers, and it is better not to confuse the different types of investigators, as detailed below:
Police investigator.1
2. Investigator from the National Insurance Institute (If it is a work accident as well as a car accident).
3. Investigator from the insurance company regarding the damages caused to the vehicle.
4. Investigator for the insurance company of the other vehicle involved in the accident.
5. Investigator for the insurance company that insured the victim's life insurance policy or personal accident insurance policy.
6. Researcher for the insurance company that insured the mandatory insurance policy for the vehicle in which the victim was injured during the accident.
Regarding the investigators mentioned above, the victim must cooperate with some, can voluntarily cooperate with others, and should not cooperate with still others. According to the law the victim has a duty to cooperate with the police investigator as well as the investigator from the National Insurance Institute. However, my recommendation is to contact both of these institutions only after consultation with an experienced lawyer. In principle, if you are not currently consulting with a personal injury attorney, you should stick to the truth and only the truth. Sometimes, for various reasons, victims and their families decide present different versions of the truth to the police investigator or researcher from the National Insurance Institute. The distortion occurs for numerous reasons, including the desire "not to complicate" the driver from the standpoint of traffic, or "not get involved" with the job, etc. ... The victim presents an incompatible representation of the truth to the investigators, or in other words - a false situation. The victim thinks he is helping someone, but in reality they are wrong. In most cases, the victim cannot help anyone with a false story. However, the victim must understand that in most cases the false version may damage primarily the victim. If it turns out that the version presented to the researchers is different from the evidence available to the insurance company, the insurance company may not even suspect that there was a car accident. In this case the insurance company will reject the claim, the case will be implicated, and the victim may lose his rights. My recommendation is to stick to the truth and not be tempted to listen to misdirecting advice-givers. The victim should tell the police investigator and researcher of the National Insurance Institute the truth only.
In any case, I emphasize again, that it is not recommended to give reports and/or messages to anyone before the victim has spoken to an experienced lawyer. An accident attorney will not recommend that the car accident victim change their story, but he or she is able to advise and guide the victim in how to phrase the messages and/or reports, and what is important to emphasize in these reports. Sometimes a misplaced word could bring down the whole case.
Victim should not replace consultation advice from a personal injury law firm with other "advice givers" such as the insurance company, doctor, friends, or anyone else. Keep in mind that after the victim has presented a particular version, it is almost impossible to change it. To get the right lawyer, you should also read the article: How to choose a lawyer for accidents
In any case, the way an accident victim describes the accident in writing occurs in several places, including traffic police station, a form for unemployment NII injury and accident notification forms filled by the insurance agent.
You have to photograph all of the forms listed above before bringing them to the various institutions, so that the lawyer will be able to see the original versions of the various reports provided by the victim. It should be noted substantial variation between different versions of the reports may show the victim as a liar and make it difficult for case management.
Usually, there is no reason to talk to the investigators of the National Insurance Institute or the researchers of the Department of Labor, or even researchers insured insurance executive accident insurance or the prosecutor. Conversations with these investigators help expedite the handling of the various claims. Of course, the victim should also consult with a personal injury attorney before these cases, because there may be rare situations in which a work accident lawyer will recommend the victim not to cooperate with these investigators or others without the presence of a lawyer. In every case, even if one decides to cooperate with investigators, the victim should not sign any document without consulting a lawyer, including consenting to a polygraph test.
It is generally advised not to cooperate with the investigator, the operation of inquiry appointed by the insurance company that granted the liability insurance policy for the employers (the company should compensate the victim in respect of personal injury caused as a result of a work accident). Such an investigation can take place only in the presence of the lawyer of the victim. Investigators would rather that the attorney is not present at the investigation, and therefore the investigators usually try to convince the employee that he does not need the lawyer present. Investigators like to use hidden tapes to record the conversation with the victim and his family, and the primary objective of the investigation is to reduce the compensation as much as possible. This would force the insurance company to eventually pay the victim, and in effect the researcher may damage the case from the perspective of the victim. Therefore, if a work accident lawyer that is accompanying the victim did not tell him explicitly to cooperate with the investigator, the victim should not cooperate with him. It is important to note that there are probably cases where the accident attorney will approve the worker to cooperate with the investigator. We encourage that the victim discuss the meeting with the investigator before he actually meets with the investigator.
Even if the victim decides to listen to the advice of the lawyer and not cooperate with the investigator, note that interrogator may use various methods to make the victim open up. The researcher will not present himself with threatening words such as "investigator." He prefers to introduce himself to the victim and his family using less harsh expressions such as, "soft," "I'm from insurance," "I am handling the case for the insurance company," or "I am the representative from the insurance company." After the researcher introduces himself and receives signals indicating unwillingness from the victim and his family to cooperate, he usually will not give up and may use different tactics such as: "You cannot refuse to cooperate," "I just want to give you between NIS 300,000 and NIS 500,000, but I cannot do this if you do not cooperate." "If you do not cooperate I will have to call the police and you might be arrested." "If you do not cooperate the insurance company will be angry, and they will put your file on hold and it will not be completed before 2021." The judge in court knows if you participate, and it will help your credibility.
Of course, an experienced interrogator has additional methods, many which are varied when talking to the victims and their families, so the victim should not try to outsmart the investigator, and try to show that they are cleverer than the investigator, or give partial information. The victim has to adhere to the directive given by the attorney, which is usually a lack of cooperation with the investigator unless the attorney is present.
If, however, the investigator was able to persuade the car accident victim to cooperate, and the victim brought him to his house to "chat," after the investigator leaves the house you should immediately after the investigator left the house, write down all the questions that the researcher asked, and all the answers he answered. This record is important in order to help the attorney to negotiate later on. It is preferable that the personal injury attorney knows exactly what was recorded in conversation with the investigator (Remember! Any conversations with the investigator should be recorded with a covert device, so that the insurance company will not be at an advantage over the victim's lawyer when negotiating).
Notably, the researcher will investigate the victim in several stages during the hearing of the car accident case. The main goal of the first interrogation is to clarify the circumstances of the accident and the primary and direct damages caused to the victim. Later, having already established disability, the insurance company sends the investigator further, and he follows the victim, secretly recording and photographing the victim's ability to perform various operations such as carrying baskets from the market, replacing the wheel of a car, working out at the gym, climbing ladders, flexibility, etc….
If the investigator is shadowing the victim, there is no need to escape it. On the contrary, fell victim in part of the privilege. In this case the victim should continue to be natural and to expect that if he acts naturally and does not perform activities that require physical a lot of exertion, it is expected that the very day exceptions occur, the investigator might force or try to lure him to irregularities. Here are examples from the field that indicate creative insurance company investigators in Israel:
Moses was severely injured in his car accident. The court expert ruled that Moses remained permanently disabled at a rate of 30%. Moses had difficulty performing various physical works. The insurance company was willing to show in court that Moses able to make the most of daily physical activities, such as changing a tire.
An insurance company investigator made sure that there would be a surprise of a flat tire on Moses' car. That day Moses is very late for work, and he decided to try replacing the tire. Despite suffering from severe pain, he replaces the wheel of the car by himself. This process was documented on video by the investigator without the Moses' knowledge. The court did not accept our claim that changing the wheel was accompanied by intense pain, and that it was a one time event that Moses will not repeat. The court ruled that Moses could do a variety of daily activities, including replacing the wheels on his car. Of course, this decision meant that ultimately the financial compensation Moses received was significantly lower than what he would have received if it had not been for the investigator's video.
Simon was an accident similar to accident of Moses, but instead, he was not tempted to risk his health (and the legal case) by changing the wheel himself. He called a mechanic to replace the wheel on the car. Meanwhile, Simon went to work by taxi. The insurance company did not give up and a few days later, they put a car in the garage next to Simon's. which also had a flat tire. Oddly enough, the vehicle's owner (who worked in the interrogation course) was a pretty young woman. With her sultry voice she asked Simon to help her to change the wheel of her car. At this point, Simon was tempted. Bracing himself under excruciating pain, he replaced the wheel of the car for the young woman. As in the case of Moses, this event did not help Simon's claims that the action was accompanied by pain and suffering. The Court assumed that Simon was able to perform similar operations without a problem. This event caused significant damage to Simon's lawsuit.
In conclusion, we should try as much as possible to avoid giving unnecessary information to investigators who are hired by the insurance company that insured the vehicle. Always remember that the investigators are usually more skilled than families of the victims, and sometimes they extract unnecessary information from the road accident victims and even take actions later that are harmful to the lawsuit. Therefore, always consult with an attorney who has experience with accident investigators, and try not to deviate from his or her instructions.
If the issue of car accidents interests you, read the following article, click here:
What to do after a car accident
How to choose a lawyer accidents
Insurance investigators
Medical disability and functional disability
Normal accident
Accident on his way to work
Accident on his way home from work
Hit and run
Replacing a car accident lawyer
What is a car accident
Compulsory insurance
Down payment on a car accident
The accident Pedestrian
Train accident
Children's accident
Truck Accident
Scooter accident
Motorcycle accident
Bus accident
Road accident with fatalities
Accident pension losses
Our firm is a Law Office of traffic accidents, we will be happy to provide you with an attorney to advise you on traffic accidents. An initial consultation is free of charge and without any obligation.
Call now and set a free consultation with no obligation
Call Now 1-800-229-444