Honestly, you need to talk to your attorney about this situation!!
In no way am I offering you legal advice, and in no way has my comment created an attorney-client relationship. You are not to rely upon my note above in any way, but insted need to sit down with counsel and share all relevant facts before receiving fully-informed legal advice. If you want to be completely sure of your rights, you must sit down with an experienced criminal defense attorney to be fully aware of your rights.
Have you discussed you concern with your attorney? If not, that would be great place to start, since no one in this forum is more familiar with your case than your attorney.
If your attorney formalized the agreement into a writing, then you may have a basis to have the chiropractor held to the first negotiated amount. Also, did the Chiro agree to a certain amount based upon a representation that your case was being settled for A, but then you got A+ ? There are many questions raised, and you should discuss this with your attorney.
I don't know what you mean by pre-negotiated, but is sounds like an amount was negotiated before you started your treatment. If so this is highly unethical, and very possibly illegal. But lets assume a different understanding, i.e. your file was in settlement negotiations and based on the then status of negotiations, an agreement was made to for amount of your chiro bill. Then the case settled for a higher amount and now the chiro wants more of his bill covered. That is reasonable.
Please consult a local attorney with your documentation
View my website & give me a call for a FREE consultation if you are a California resident 877-427-2752 or you can email me at Michael@Kingofpersonalinjurylaw.com www.KingofPersonalInjuryLaw.com I am licensed in California only and my answers on Avvo assume California law. Answers provided by me are for general information only. They are not legal advice. Answers must not be relied upon. Legal advice must be based on the interplay between specific exact facts and the law. This forum does not allow for the discussion of that interplay. My answer to any specific question would likely be different if that interplay were explored during an attorney-client relationship. I provide legal advice during the course of an attorney-client relationship only. The exchange of information through this forum does not establish such a relationship. That relationship is established only by personal and direct consultation with me followed by the execution of a written attorney-client agreement signed by each of us. The communications on this website are not privileged or confidential and I assume no duty to anyone by my participation on Avvo or because I have answered or commented on a question. All legal proceedings involve deadlines and time limiting statutes. So that legal rights are not lost for failure to timely take appropriate action and because I do not provide legal advice in answer to any question, if you are an interested party you should promptly and personally consult with an attorney for legal advice. Also, see Avvo's terms and conditions of use, specifically item 9, incorporated by this reference
Don't sign a settlement agreement until he knocks the bills down, as your lawyer won't get paid if you don't sign.
It happens all the time. First you offer a small amount to settle your medical bills under the assumption that the recovery will be X $'s, and then the doctor finds out there is more, so you have to pay more. However, your attorney should explain it to you. Best of luck.
This answer is provided by California Accident Attorney Manuel A. Juarez, Esq., 510-206-4492. Abogado de Accidentes de Autos de California: 510-206-4492. Abogado de Lesiones de Accidentes de Autos, provides answers of a general context. These answers are not intended to form an attorney client relationship. Oakland Abogado Accidentes Autos, Abogado de Lesiones Personales, Abogado de Accidentes de carros, Abogado de accidentes de Peatones, practices in Antioch, Berkeley, Concord, Oakland, Hayward, Martinez, Newark, Richmond, San Francisco and San Rafael. El abogado de lesiones y heridos en accidentes de autos, is licensed only in California. This information is good only in California and it is not to be taken as legal advice on car accidents, personal injury, divorce, bankruptcy or in any other type of situation. Esta respuesta es del Abogado de Accidentes de Autos, Abogado de Lesiones Personales, Abogado de Heridos en Accidentes de carros, Manuel A. Juárez, 510-206-4492. Abogado Hispano de Accidentes, Abogado de Divorcios, Abogado Latino de Accidentes, Abogado de Accidentes de Oakland, Hayward, San Francisco, California. Estas respuesta son solo para información general y no consisten en consejo legal sobre divorcios, mantención de esposas, mantención de hijos o bancarrotas. Las respuestas son comentarios legales que no forman una relación de abogado y cliente. Manuel Juarez, Esq., esta licenciado solo en el Estado de California.
Unfortunately, an absurd aspect of the American medical system is that health care bills, whether chiropractic or hospital or surgeon bills are often hugely inflated, only to get knocked down by insurance companies, attorneys' etc. it is virtually impossible to say with certainty what any particular treatment is really "worth."
I practice personal injury law in Nevada and I expect to compromise most medical liens at settlement time. The amount of compromise usually depends in part on the settlement amount.
For example, my firm of Reed & Mansfield offers a 25% discount contingency fee in auto accident cases in which the client is not cited but the at fault driver is cited. If it is mainly a chiropractic treatment case I try to get the chiropractors and associated liens (there may be a radiology bill and a medical doctor bill as well) collectively reduced to 1/3 of the settlement so that my client can get 5/12 of the settlement after my 25% (3/12) and the lien holders' 1/3 (4/12).
Let's say I get an offer of $10,500. I write up an Excel spreadsheet showing 1/3 or $3,500 going to the lien holders, $2,625 to me and the rest to the client. I send this out to the client and the lien holders for approval. And I say this based on the lien holders getting 1/3 of the total settlement. Let's say the client and the lien holders agree.
But this was only an offer. Maybe I can go back to the insurance company and settle the case for $12,750. Now, 1/3 of the settlement is $4,250. Assuming the unreduced lien amounts are greater than this I will pay out $4,250 to the lien holders.
Why would I do this if the lien holders would have taken $3,500? Because I honestly told them they were collectively getting 1/3 of the settlement and I was being transparent with them to earn their trust and cooperation in getting the case resolved.
As a general rule, lien holders are willing to deal but don't want to be played for suckers. Most lien holders will agree to reductions, even large reductions THAT MAKE SENSE IN THE CONTEXT OF THE OVERALL SETTLEMENT AND WHAT THE CLIENT AND ATTORNEY IS GETTING.
In this example, why couldn't I get the final $12,750 offer before asking about lien reductions? Because negotiations are a two way street and I need to make concessions off my opening offer if I want to get the insurance company to come up from their opening offer.
Sign up to receive a 3-part series of useful information and advice about personal injury law.