Auto Accident Demand Letter - South Carolina

DEMAND FOR SETTLEMENT - MOTOR VEHICLE COLLISION

STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA

FOR SETTLEMENT PURPOSES — RULE 408, SCRE MAY LIMIT SPECIFIED USES OF DISPUTED-CLAIM NEGOTIATIONS

[FIRM NAME]
[________________________________]
[________________________________]
[City], South Carolina [____]
Telephone: [________________________________]
Email: [________________________________]

DATE: [__/__/____]

VIA CERTIFIED MAIL, RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
AND VIA ELECTRONIC MAIL

[________________________________]
[Adjuster Name]
[________________________________]
[Insurance Company Name]
[________________________________]
[Street Address]
[________________________________]
[City, State ZIP]

RE: SETTLEMENT DEMAND - MOTOR VEHICLE COLLISION
Our Client: [________________________________] (hereinafter "Claimant")
Date of Loss: [__/__/____]
Location of Accident: [________________________________]
Your Insured: [________________________________] (hereinafter "Tortfeasor")
Policy Number: [________________________________]
Claim Number: [________________________________]
Date of Birth: [__/__/____]
Age at Time of Accident: [____]

Dear [________________________________]:

This firm represents [________________________________] (hereinafter "Claimant") in connection with personal injuries and damages sustained in a motor vehicle collision that occurred on [__/__/____] in [________________________________] County, South Carolina. This letter constitutes a formal demand for settlement of our client's claims arising from the negligence of your insured, [________________________________].

If and to the extent this demand constitutes compromise negotiations concerning a claim disputed as to validity or amount, Rule 408, SCRE may limit specified uses of the negotiations. It does not itself create confidentiality or privilege and may permit use for another purpose. We remind you that South Carolina law imposes a duty of good faith and fair dealing on insurers, and that an unreasonable refusal to evaluate and pay a meritorious claim within policy limits may expose your company to extracontractual liability for an excess judgment.

I. SOUTH CAROLINA LEGAL FRAMEWORK

A. Modified Comparative Negligence (51% Bar) - Nelson v. Concrete Supply Co.

South Carolina follows a modified comparative negligence system adopted in Nelson v. Concrete Supply Co., 303 S.C. 243, 399 S.E.2d 783 (1991). A plaintiff may recover so long as the plaintiff's negligence does not exceed the negligence of the defendant(s). If the plaintiff's fault is 50% or less, recovery is allowed but is reduced by the plaintiff's percentage of fault; if the plaintiff's fault exceeds 50%, recovery is barred. Where there are multiple defendants, the plaintiff's negligence is compared against the combined fault of all defendants.

In the present case, your insured bears 100% of the liability for this collision, and our client bears 0% comparative fault.

B. Apportionment and Several Liability - S.C. Code Ann. § 15-38-15

Under the South Carolina Contribution Among Tortfeasors Act, a defendant whose conduct is determined to be less than fifty percent of the total fault is severally liable only for that defendant's percentage of the indivisible damages. Defendants 50% or more at fault remain subject to joint and several liability. For claims arising or accruing after January 1, 2026, subsection (F) excepts willful, wanton, reckless, intentional, and illegal-or-illicit-drug conduct from subsection (A)'s several-liability protection; the amended version no longer lists gross negligence or alcohol and adds nondefendant-allocation procedures. Use the prior version for an earlier-accruing claim.

C. Statute of Limitations - S.C. Code Ann. § 15-3-530

Under S.C. Code Ann. § 15-3-530, the statute of limitations for personal injury and property damage is three (3) years from the date of the accident. The collision occurred on [__/__/____], and the limitations period expires on [__/__/____].

D. Compulsory Liability Insurance - S.C. Code Ann. § 38-77-140

South Carolina requires owners of registered motor vehicles to maintain liability insurance at the following statutory minimums:

E. Uninsured / Underinsured Motorist Coverage - S.C. Code Ann. §§ 38-77-150, 38-77-160

South Carolina requires uninsured motorist (UM) coverage in minimum amounts equal to the liability minimums (§ 38-77-150) and requires insurers to offer underinsured motorist (UIM) coverage (§ 38-77-160). We reserve all UM/UIM rights under our client's applicable policies.

F. Collateral Source Rule

South Carolina follows the collateral source rule: payments to the plaintiff from independent sources (such as health insurance) do not reduce the defendant's liability and are generally inadmissible to reduce damages.

G. Punitive Damages

Punitive damages are recoverable in South Carolina upon clear and convincing evidence that the defendant's conduct was willful, wanton, or reckless (S.C. Code Ann. § 15-32-520; punitive damages must be specifically pleaded in the initial complaint, § 15-32-510). Statutory cap (§ 15-32-530): punitive damages generally may not exceed the greater of three times compensatory damages or $500,000 (adjusted annually for inflation). That cap rises to the greater of four times compensatory damages or $2,000,000 where the conduct was motivated primarily by unreasonable financial gain (known/approved at the policy-making level) or could subject the defendant to a felony conviction (§ 15-32-530(B)). There is NO cap (§ 15-32-530(C)) where the defendant intended to harm, has been convicted of a felony arising from the same conduct, or acted while under the influence of alcohol or (non-prescribed) drugs to the degree that judgment was substantially impaired — the intoxication exception is directly relevant to DUI collisions. We reserve the right to pursue punitive damages if evidence of aggravating conduct emerges.

II. STATEMENT OF FACTS

A. Accident Description

On [__/__/____], at approximately [____] [a.m./p.m.], our client, [________________________________], was operating a [____ Year] [________________________________] [Make/Model], bearing South Carolina license plate number [________________________________], traveling [direction] on [________________________________] [Street/Highway] in/near [________________________________], [________________________________] County, South Carolina.

At the time of the collision, our client was [________________________________] [describe activity].

Your insured, [________________________________], was operating a [____ Year] [________________________________] [Make/Model], bearing license plate number [________________________________]. Your insured [________________________________] [describe negligent conduct].

As a direct and proximate result of your insured's negligence, your insured's vehicle struck our client's vehicle [________________________________] [describe point of impact].

B. Weather and Road Conditions

Weather conditions were [________________________________]. Road conditions were [________________________________]. Visibility was [________________________________]. The posted speed limit was [____] miles per hour.

C. Police Report

The collision was investigated by [________________________________] [e.g., South Carolina Highway Patrol; local police department]. The investigating officer, [________________________________], prepared a report assigned Case Number [________________________________]. The report [________________________________] [summarize findings].

D. Witnesses

E. Physical Evidence

☐ Photographs of the accident scene preserved
☐ Photographs of vehicle damage preserved
☐ Photographs of client's visible injuries preserved
☐ Dashcam or surveillance video footage [is/is not] available
☐ Event Data Recorder (EDR) data [has/has not] been preserved
☐ Cell phone records of the at-fault driver [have/have not] been requested
☐ Traffic camera footage [has/has not] been requested

III. LIABILITY ANALYSIS

A. Negligence of Your Insured

Under South Carolina law, the elements of negligence are: (1) a duty of care, (2) breach of that duty, (3) proximate causation, and (4) damages. See Bloom v. Ravoira, 339 S.C. 417, 529 S.E.2d 710 (2000).

Your insured breached the duty of care by:

☐ Violating S.C. Code Ann. § [________________________________] [cite specific traffic statute]
☐ Operating a motor vehicle in a careless or reckless manner (S.C. Code Ann. § 56-5-2920, reckless driving)
☐ Failing to maintain a proper lookout
☐ Failing to maintain a safe following distance (S.C. Code Ann. § 56-5-1930)
☐ Failing to yield the right of way
☐ Operating a motor vehicle while distracted / texting (S.C. Code Ann. § 56-5-3890)
☐ Operating a motor vehicle under the influence (S.C. Code Ann. § 56-5-2930)
☐ Exceeding the posted speed limit (S.C. Code Ann. § 56-5-1520)
☐ Failing to obey a traffic control device (S.C. Code Ann. § 56-5-970)
☐ [________________________________] [other negligent conduct]

B. Proximate Causation

Your insured's negligence was the direct and proximate cause of our client's injuries. But for the negligent conduct, this collision would not have occurred.

C. Allocation of Fault

Your insured bears 100% of the fault for this collision. Our client bears 0% comparative fault. There is no good-faith basis to assert that our client's fault exceeded 50% (the Nelson bar), and accordingly the comparative-negligence defense provides no avenue to defeat or materially reduce this claim.

IV. INJURIES AND MEDICAL TREATMENT

A. Emergency Treatment

Following the collision, our client was [________________________________] [describe transport to medical facility] on [__/__/____]. Presenting complaints included:

• [________________________________]
• [________________________________]
• [________________________________]

Emergency diagnoses:

• [________________________________]
• [________________________________]

B. Medical Treatment Chronology

C. Treating Physicians and Specialists

D. Current Medical Status and Prognosis

As of this demand, our client [________________________________] [describe current condition and prognosis]. Dr. [________________________________] has opined that [________________________________].

E. Future Medical Treatment

V. DAMAGES

A. Economic Damages

1. Past Medical Expenses

2. Future Medical Expenses

3. Lost Wages and Income

Our client was employed by [________________________________] as a [________________________________] earning $[________] [per period]. As a direct result of injuries, our client was unable to work for [________________________________].

4. Loss of Earning Capacity

[If applicable] $[________]

5. Property Damage

6. Out-of-Pocket Expenses

B. Non-Economic Damages

1. Pain and Suffering

Our client has endured significant physical pain, emotional distress, and diminished quality of life. [________________________________] [Describe nature and severity of pain, impact on daily life, sleep, anxiety, depression, loss of enjoyment.]

Pain and Suffering Valuation: Based on the severity, duration, and permanence of our client's injuries, we value pain and suffering at $[________].

2. Loss of Consortium

[If applicable] Our client's spouse, [________________________________], has suffered loss of consortium. South Carolina recognizes loss of consortium as an independent claim (S.C. Code Ann. § 15-75-20).

Loss of Consortium Damages: $[________]

C. Summary of Damages

VI. DEMAND FOR SETTLEMENT

Based upon the foregoing, we demand settlement in the total amount of:

$[________________________________]

This demand is open for thirty (30) days, expiring on [__/__/____]. If we do not receive a meaningful response or acceptable offer by that date, we will file a civil complaint in the Court of Common Pleas for [________________________________] County, South Carolina, without further notice.

This demand covers all claims including:

☐ Personal injury claims
☐ Property damage claims
☐ Loss of consortium (if applicable)
☐ All past, present, and future damages

This demand does not include punitive damages, which are expressly reserved.

VII. SETTLEMENT NEGOTIATION PROVISIONS

A. Good Faith and Fair Dealing / Bad Faith Preservation

South Carolina imposes a duty of good faith and fair dealing on insurers. An insurer that unreasonably refuses to settle a meritorious claim within policy limits may be liable for an excess judgment. See Tyger River Pine Co. v. Maryland Cas. Co., 170 S.C. 286, 170 S.E. 346 (1933); Nichols v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 279 S.C. 336, 306 S.E.2d 616 (1983). We expressly preserve any first- and third-party bad-faith claims, and this demand is made with that framework in mind.

B. Policy Limits Disclosure

We request immediate written confirmation of:

☐ The liability coverage limits
☐ Any umbrella or excess policies
☐ Whether coverage is disputed
☐ UM/UIM coverage limits on all applicable policies

C. Reservation of Rights

This demand is without prejudice to all rights, including punitive damages, bad faith claims, and all other available remedies.

VIII. LITIGATION WARNING

Should settlement fail, we will file in the Court of Common Pleas for [________________________________] County, South Carolina, and pursue full compensatory damages, punitive damages where supported, pre- and post-judgment interest, court costs, and all available relief.

IX. MEDICAL RECORDS AUTHORIZATION

Enclosed is a HIPAA-compliant authorization (45 C.F.R. § 164.508).

I, [________________________________], authorize the following providers to release records related to the collision on [__/__/____] to [________________________________] [Insurance Company]:

This authorization expires on [__/__/____] or upon final resolution, whichever occurs first.

Signature: _________________________________ Date: [__/__/____]
Printed Name: [________________________________]

X. ENCLOSED DOCUMENTATION

☐ Police/Accident Report
☐ Photographs of accident scene
☐ Photographs of vehicle damage
☐ Photographs of injuries
☐ Medical records and bills (itemized)
☐ Proof of lost wages
☐ Property damage estimates/invoices
☐ HIPAA-compliant medical authorization
☐ Witness statements
☐ [________________________________]

XI. DOCUMENTATION CHECKLIST - CLAIMANT FILE

☐ Accident/police report obtained
☐ All medical records collected
☐ All medical bills itemized (billed and paid)
☐ Lost wage documentation obtained
☐ Property damage documented
☐ Witness statements preserved
☐ Injury photographs at multiple recovery stages
☐ Insurance policy information confirmed
☐ Personal injury SOL deadline calendared ([__/__/____] - THREE YEARS)
☐ Treatment completed or at MMI
☐ Future medical projections obtained
☐ HIPAA authorization executed
☐ Demand sent certified mail
☐ Settlement authority confirmed with client
☐ Lien search completed
☐ UM/UIM coverage evaluated (§§ 38-77-150, 38-77-160)
☐ Bad-faith / excess strategy documented if policy-limits demand made

XII. SOUTH CAROLINA-SPECIFIC PRACTICE NOTES

☐ Modified Comparative Negligence (51% Bar): Nelson v. Concrete Supply Co., 399 S.E.2d 783 (S.C. 1991) - barred if plaintiff's fault exceeds 50%; compared against combined defendant fault
☐ Several Liability Under 50%: S.C. Code Ann. § 15-38-15 — defendant under 50% severally liable for its share; apply the version governing the claim's accrual date
☐ Three-Year SOL: S.C. Code Ann. § 15-3-530 (personal injury and property damage)
☐ Compulsory Insurance 25/50/25: S.C. Code Ann. § 38-77-140
☐ UM Required / UIM Offered: §§ 38-77-150, 38-77-160
☐ Bad Faith / Excess Exposure: Tyger River, 170 S.E. 346 (S.C. 1933); Nichols, 306 S.E.2d 616 (S.C. 1983) - unreasonable failure to settle within limits may create excess-judgment liability
☐ Punitive Damages: Clear and convincing evidence of willful, wanton, or reckless conduct (§ 15-32-520; plead in complaint per § 15-32-510). Cap (§ 15-32-530): greater of 3x compensatory or $500k (CPI-adjusted); 4x or $2M for financial-gain/felony conduct; NO cap for intent-to-harm, felony conviction, or DUI/impairment
☐ Collateral Source Rule: Independent-source payments do not reduce defendant's liability
☐ Forum: Court of Common Pleas; venue generally where defendant resides or cause of action arose

Respectfully submitted,

[FIRM NAME]

By: _________________________________
[________________________________]
[Attorney Name]
S.C. Bar No. [________________________________]
[________________________________]
[Street Address]
[City, South Carolina ZIP]
Telephone: [________________________________]
Email: [________________________________]

cc: [________________________________] [Client Name]
Enclosures: As noted above

SOURCES AND REFERENCES

• Nelson v. Concrete Supply Co., 303 S.C. 243, 399 S.E.2d 783 (1991): https://law.justia.com/cases/south-carolina/supreme-court/1991/23339-3.html
• S.C. Code Ann. § 15-3-530 (Statute of Limitations): https://www.scstatehouse.gov/code/t15c003.php
• S.C. Code Ann. § 15-38-15 (Apportionment of Fault): https://www.scstatehouse.gov/code/t15c038.php
• S.C. Code Ann. § 38-77-140 (Compulsory Insurance): https://www.scstatehouse.gov/code/t38c077.php
• S.C. Code Ann. §§ 38-77-150, 38-77-160 (UM/UIM): https://www.scstatehouse.gov/code/t38c077.php
• Tyger River Pine Co. v. Maryland Cas. Co., 170 S.C. 286, 170 S.E. 346 (1933) (excess/bad faith)
• Nichols v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 279 S.C. 336, 306 S.E.2d 616 (1983) (bad faith)