Medical bills following a Utah car crash can add up in a hurry. An ambulance ride, for example, could cost over a thousand dollars. The ER visit with the battery of imaging studies, could cost well over five thousand dollars. So who is going to pay for all of this? And what if I don?t have health insurance?
Under Utah law, the first $3,000 (more if you have better insurance coverage) is paid for by your own insurance company, or the insurance company of the person whose car you were traveling in. After that, though, you could run into problems if you don?t have health insurance.

You see, the insurance company of the at-fault driver will not pay your bills as they accrue. That?s just not how it works. They will make one payment and one payment only: that is at the end of the case when you have reached a resolution with them or when you have obtained a verdict against them. Many Utah accident victims wish they would pay bills as they come due, but that?s not how Utah?s liability system is set up.

Many times, this system can create serious hardship for the injured victim, who did not ask to be placed in that situation. What can they do if they don?t have health insurance and have no financial resources to get treatment, sometimes even a surgery? Can they try to settle first and then use that money to fund the treatment or surgery?

Luckily, there are some doctors and therapists that work on a ?lien? basis. This means that they will treat you now and expect to be paid back when your case resolves. If your case goes south, however, you will remain on the hook to pay back the unpaid medical expenses. Happily, more doctors are agreeing to provide medical services on a lien. This is an especially valuable service in this economic climate where many individuals and families cannot afford to have health insurance.

Before doctors would provide service on a lien, an injured accident victim was required to basically ask the insurance company for money for the treatment that was anticipated. The insurance companies would almost always offer less money in those instances, arguing that there was no guarantee that the claimant would ever actually use those services and that the only sure way to know would be for them to go out and get the surgery first. Obviously this was a dilemma that could seriously affect the amount that an injured person could expect in settlement. I?m glad we have moved past this point, at least in Utah, and that these injured persons have resources they can tap into to get the care that they need NOW so that their cases can be fully and effectively worked up for maximum settlement value. Rk