A victim may decide to dispense with a doctor or a lawyer in order to avoid incurring additional expense.
This is particularly true for victims of motor traffic accidents, where an offer of compensation will at some stage be made by an insurer – and frequently the victim’s own insurer acting on behalf of the opposing insurer. This situation is clearly prone toconflicts of interest.
It is also true when the victim can be compensated even if he acts on his own: CRCI , CIVI, FIVA, work-related accident, etc.
Whilst this attitude is sometimes justified for cases where the financial stakes are very small, in most cases it is not recommended, particularly when the physical injuries are more serious. In many cases, even if the victim saves money by not paying fees to the aforementioned professional he stands to lose a great deal more by not receiving the full compensation to which he is entitled.
In the case of a medical assessment, the victim will receive a much stronger defence if he has chosen the doctor who is there to put forward his case.
This doctor must be able to translate the victim’s injuries into medico-legal terms, e.g. assess whether the permanent functional disability is 30% or 40%, or the pain suffered is 4/7 or 5/7, and so on.
Most doctors are not well versed in such practices; your general practitioner will probably be of no help whatsoever.
The input of a specialist lawyer is also necessary.
Not only will he be able help to help the victim find an appropriate doctor, but he will be able to advise on any settlement made, on which procedure to initiate, and help to obtain the maximum award possible.