It is not uncommon for a victim to reject and demand a renegotiation after a matter has been settled. There are numerous reasons why this can happen and there are certain concessions within the law that allow for this to happen. Car accidents are the most common types of injury in these cases. The victim often realizes, long after the settlement has been accepted, that issues are arising resulting from the accident. The settlement doesn’t cover the rising costs, and they go back to renegotiate. Here are a few reasons why this could happen.
Circumstances of Fraud and Misinterpretation.
If it is ascertained, with relevant evidence, that the opposing party has been fraudulent in the course of negotiations, the victim can demand fresh negotiations. If they have deliberately misrepresented and withheld vital information, the initial settlement can be rejected and fresh negotiations with the recent information can begin.
Accepted Settlement Under Duress or Severe Stress.
This is another tricky reason. However, it has seen time and again, via successful suits, that if a victim claimed to have accepted a lesser or unfavorable settlement while under threat or duress from the opposition or any related party, that settlement can be thrown out the window and fresh talks will begin. The attorneys for car accidents can even escalate the issue to include intimidation of their client. Accepting settlements under any kind of stress can void them as it can be argued that the client was not being rational or in the right state of mind to make such a decision.
Mutual Mistake of Both Parties.
In uncommon situations, both parties may realize and accept that have both made mistakes in their proceedings. In a bid to correct it, they can both toss out the initial settlement and return to the negotiation table with fresh facts and a resolve to do right by each other.
Poor and Insufficient Coverage.
A common reason for rejecting an accepted settlement is the consequent realization that the amount that was settled for does not cover the damage sustained from the accident. Car accidents often involve damage to multiple things. Asides from medical bills, the cost of fixing or replacing the vehicle, depending on the extent of the damage, could easily be underestimated. Oftentimes, the true extent of the damage is only known when the damaged property begins to undergo reconstruction. If they can’t be fixed and need to be replaced, the current cost price has to be made available.
The Future Consequence of Sustained Physical Injuries.
Another major reason for a demand to renegotiate an agreement is the consequent liabilities incurred from the accident. In serious accidents, the effects of sustained injuries can be far-reaching. Most times, the victim does not even realize how bad the injuries are until further into the future where the effects inhibit them from working, earning a living, carrying out basic daily functions, and living a normal life. While these possibilities should be anticipated and backed by medical statements, it is not always apparent.
Conclusion.
- It is not always acceptable to reject settlements or drag liable parties back into negotiations after a matter has been settled. However, if conditions like the above have been met, there are concessions within the law that allow this to happen. A good personal injury attorney will be able to advise correctly.
