Bodily injury assessment: why many compensations are settled too early

One of the most delicate situations following an accident is not only the injury itself, but how that injury is assessed and when the case is closed.

Many people accept compensation for injuries without realizing that:

• The assessment was done too soon
• The resulting injuries haven't yet stabilized
• There are injuries that will appear later
• Or that the compensation doesn't reflect the true loss suffered

This article explains how the assessment of bodily injuries actually works, why many cases are closed incorrectly, and what recourse there is to defend a fair compensation claim.

How Injuries Are Assessed After an Accident

The assessment of injuries is generally based on:

• Medical reports
• Clinical evolution
• Recovery time
• Permanent disabilities
• Functional and occupational impact

The system itself isn't flawed. The problem lies in how and when it's applied.

In many cases, the assessment is carried out when:

• Rehabilitation is not complete
• Significant pain persists
• The medium- and long-term impact has not been evaluated
• The resulting injuries have not yet fully developed

Closing the case at this point usually works against the injured party.

The most common mistake: closing the case too soon

One of the most frequent patterns is the premature closure of the case.

This usually occurs when:

• The insurance company proposes an early settlement
• The injured party needs cash
• The feeling is conveyed that “this is what it is”
• It is not explained that the injury may progress

Once the settlement is agreed upon, the case is closed, even if months later the following appear:

• Functional limitations
• Chronic pain
• The need for further tests
• Permanent injuries

The resulting injuries that appear over time

Many injuries do not show their true extent in the first few weeks.

It is common to find:

• Cervical injuries (C3–C4) with slow progression
• Chronic mobility problems
• Neuropathic pain
• Limitations on traveling, lifting weight, or maintaining prolonged postures

In these cases, an early assessment does not reflect the true extent of the damage.

Real case: C3–C4 cervical injury in an architect

Elvira is an architect who worked on international projects. After an accident, she suffered a cervical injury at the C3–C4 level.

Initially:

• The diagnosis seemed moderate
• The insurance company proposed a quick settlement
• The proposed compensation was limited

As the months passed:

• The pain persisted
• Mobility limitations appeared
• She was advised against flying
• She was unable to travel to supervise construction projects or attend international meetings

The impact was not only medical, but also professional and financial.

A premature assessment would not have reflected the true loss of capacity.

Real Case: Hip Injury in a Hospitality Professional

Another common scenario involves young people with physically demanding jobs.

A client in her twenties, working in the hospitality sector, suffered a serious hip injury in an accident.

In these types of cases:

• It's unknown whether she will be able to return to work in the same sector.
• There is a risk of permanent mobility limitations.
• Prosthetic problems may arise in the future.
• The aesthetic damage (scars) is not always properly assessed.

Closing the case without a medium- and long-term perspective can seriously affect the injured person's future.

Aesthetic Damage and Loss of Capacity: Two Often Overlooked Factors

In many assessments:

• The aesthetic damage is minimized or omitted.
• The loss of work capacity is not properly quantified.
• The injured person's specific profession is not analyzed.

A scar is not the same for someone with an administrative job as it is for someone whose image, mobility, or physical presence are essential parts of their professional activity.

The Importance of Independent Medical Assessment

Insurance companies work with medical assessors who manage a large volume of claims.

This leads to:

• Standard criteria being applied
• In-depth analysis of each case
• Prioritizing efficient case closure

An independent medical assessment allows for:

• Waiting for the injuries to truly stabilize
• Properly documenting the resulting disabilities
• Analyzing the functional and occupational impact
• Avoiding premature closures

Injuries and Loss of Income

For self-employed workers, freelancers, or skilled professionals, the damage is not only physical.

There may be:

• Temporary inability to work
• Loss of projects
• Cancellation of travel plans
• Reduction in future income

These losses must be analyzed and properly documented to be included in the claim.

Why many people accept less than they are entitled to

It's usually not due to lack of knowledge, but rather to:

• Exhaustion
• Financial need
• Pressure to close the case
• Lack of technical support

Accepting insufficient compensation may seem like a quick fix, but in the long run, it can be very costly.

Conclusion

The assessment of bodily injuries is not an administrative procedure.

It is a medical, technical, and economic process that requires time and sound judgment.

Closing a case prematurely, without analyzing the long-term effects, impact on work, or future damage, usually benefits the insurance company… not the injured party.

A proper review can make the difference between fair compensation and one that doesn't reflect the true extent of the damage suffered.