Auto Accident Demand Letter - Tennessee

DEMAND FOR SETTLEMENT - MOTOR VEHICLE COLLISION

STATE OF TENNESSEE

FOR SETTLEMENT PURPOSES — TENN. R. EVID. 408 MAY LIMIT SPECIFIED USES OF DISPUTED-CLAIM NEGOTIATIONS

[FIRM NAME]
[________________________________]
[________________________________]
[City], Tennessee [____]
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, Tennessee. 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 or reasonably expected to be disputed as to validity or amount, Tenn. R. Evid. 408 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 an unreasonable refusal to settle a clear-liability claim within policy limits may expose your insured to an excess judgment under Tennessee common law. (Tennessee's statutory bad-faith penalty, Tenn. Code Ann. § 56-7-105, does not apply to automobile policies — Giles v. GEICO Gen. Ins. Co., Tenn. Ct. App. 2021.)

I. TENNESSEE LEGAL FRAMEWORK

A. Modified Comparative Fault (49% Bar) - McIntyre v. Balentine

Tennessee follows a modified comparative fault system adopted in McIntyre v. Balentine, 833 S.W.2d 52 (Tenn. 1992). A plaintiff may recover only so long as the plaintiff's fault remains less than the fault of the defendant(s) - i.e., the plaintiff is barred if the plaintiff is 50% or more at fault (the "49% bar"). Where the plaintiff's fault is below that threshold, damages are reduced in proportion to the plaintiff's percentage of fault. In multi-tortfeasor cases, the plaintiff may recover so long as the plaintiff's fault is less than the combined fault of all other tortfeasors.

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

B. Several Liability - Tenn. Code Ann. § 29-11-107

Tennessee has largely abolished joint and several liability in negligence actions following McIntyre. Under the comparative-fault regime, each defendant is generally severally liable only for the percentage of fault attributed to that defendant.

C. Statute of Limitations - Tenn. Code Ann. § 28-3-104 (ONE YEAR)

CRITICAL DEADLINE — ONE-YEAR LIMITATIONS PERIOD. Tenn. Code Ann. § 28-3-104(a)(1) generally requires a listed injury-to-the-person action to be commenced within one (1) year after the cause of action accrued. The collision occurred on [__/__/____]; counsel's supported accrual date is [__/__/____], and the current working deadline is [__/__/____]. Property-damage claims have a separate classification under Tenn. Code Ann. § 28-3-105.

D. Financial Responsibility / Minimum Liability Limits - Tenn. Code Ann. § 55-12-102

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

E. Uninsured / Underinsured Motorist Coverage - Tenn. Code Ann. § 56-7-1201

Tennessee requires insurers to offer uninsured/underinsured motorist (UM/UIM) coverage (Tenn. Code Ann. § 56-7-1201 et seq.). We reserve all UM/UIM rights under our client's applicable policies.

F. Collateral Source Rule

Tennessee 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 Tennessee upon clear and convincing evidence of intentional, fraudulent, malicious, or reckless conduct. See Hodges v. S.C. Toof & Co., 833 S.W.2d 896 (Tenn. 1992). Under Tenn. Code Ann. § 29-39-104, punitive damages are capped at the greater of two (2) times compensatory damages or $500,000 (subject to statutory exceptions, including intent to cause serious injury and intoxication). Tennessee state courts enforce this cap; the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, however, held it unconstitutional in federal diversity cases in Lindenberg v. Jackson National Life Insurance Co., 912 F.3d 348 (6th Cir. 2018). We reserve the right to pursue punitive damages if evidence of aggravating conduct (e.g., DUI, extreme recklessness) emerges.

II. STATEMENT OF FACTS

A. Accident Description

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

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., Tennessee 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 Tennessee law, the elements of negligence are: (1) a duty of care, (2) breach of that duty, (3) injury, (4) cause in fact, and (5) proximate (legal) cause. See McClenahan v. Cooley, 806 S.W.2d 767 (Tenn. 1991).

Your insured breached the duty of care by:

☐ Violating Tenn. Code Ann. § [________________________________] [cite specific traffic statute]
☐ Operating a motor vehicle in a reckless manner (Tenn. Code Ann. § 55-10-205, reckless driving)
☐ Failing to maintain a proper lookout
☐ Failing to maintain a safe following distance (Tenn. Code Ann. § 55-8-124)
☐ Failing to yield the right of way
☐ Operating a motor vehicle while distracted / texting (Tenn. Code Ann. § 55-8-199, hands-free law)
☐ Operating a motor vehicle under the influence (Tenn. Code Ann. § 55-10-401)
☐ Exceeding the posted speed limit (Tenn. Code Ann. § 55-8-152)
☐ Failing to obey a traffic control device (Tenn. Code Ann. § 55-8-109)
☐ [________________________________] [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 attribute 50% or more fault to our client (the McIntyre bar), and the comparative-fault defense provides no avenue to defeat 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. Tennessee recognizes loss of consortium (Tenn. Code Ann. § 25-1-106 et seq.).

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 appropriate Tennessee Circuit Court without further notice. Given Tennessee's ONE-YEAR personal injury statute of limitations, time is of the essence.

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. Bad Faith - The § 56-7-105 Penalty Does NOT Apply to Automobile Claims

The Tennessee statutory bad-faith penalty, Tenn. Code Ann. § 56-7-105 (up to 25% after a 60-day formal demand), does not apply to automobile insurance policies — neither to the tortfeasor's liability policy nor to a first-party UM/UIM claim. Giles v. GEICO Gen. Ins. Co., No. M2021-00165-COA-R3-CV (Tenn. Ct. App. Oct. 28, 2021), reaffirming Tenn. Farmers Mut. Ins. Co. v. Cherry, 213 Tenn. 391, 374 S.W.2d 371 (Tenn. 1964) (the penalty reaches life, fire, and accident policies, not automobile liability policies). Tennessee also does not recognize a separate common-law bad-faith tort. Do not threaten the § 56-7-105 penalty on an automobile claim.

We expressly preserve all remedies available to our client, including, on any first-party UM/UIM coverage, an action for breach of contract and common-law punitive damages under the Hodges standard (the § 56-7-105 penalty being inapplicable to automobile policies).

B. Excess Exposure for Failure to Settle Within Limits

An insurer that unreasonably fails to settle a meritorious claim within policy limits may expose its insured to a judgment in excess of those limits. We make this demand to afford your company the opportunity to protect its insured.

C. 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

D. Reservation of Rights

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

VIII. LITIGATION WARNING

Should settlement fail, we will file in the appropriate Tennessee Circuit Court 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 ([__/__/____] - ONE YEAR - CRITICAL)
☐ Property damage SOL deadline calendared ([__/__/____] - three years)
☐ Treatment completed or at MMI
☐ Future medical projections obtained
☐ HIPAA authorization executed
☐ Demand sent certified mail, return receipt requested
☐ Settlement authority confirmed with client
☐ Lien search completed
☐ UM/UIM coverage evaluated (§ 56-7-1201)

XII. TENNESSEE-SPECIFIC PRACTICE NOTES

☐ Modified Comparative Fault (49% Bar): McIntyre v. Balentine, 833 S.W.2d 52 (Tenn. 1992) - barred if plaintiff is 50% or more at fault
☐ Personal-injury deadline: Apply Tenn. Code Ann. § 28-3-104(a) to the supported accrual and criminal-prosecution facts; calendar immediately
☐ Three-Year Property Damage SOL: Tenn. Code Ann. § 28-3-105
☐ Several Liability: Joint and several liability largely abolished post-McIntyre; Tenn. Code Ann. § 29-11-107
☐ Statutory Bad Faith (§ 56-7-105): Does NOT apply to automobile policies, including first-party UM/UIM (Giles v. GEICO, Tenn. Ct. App. 2021; Cherry, Tenn. 1964). No broad common-law bad-faith tort. On an auto claim use breach of contract + common-law punitive (Hodges); on a third-party claim, the common-law duty to settle within limits (excess-judgment exposure)
☐ Financial Responsibility: Minimum liability limits, Tenn. Code Ann. § 55-12-102 (verify current property-damage minimum)
☐ UM/UIM: Tenn. Code Ann. § 56-7-1201 et seq.
☐ Punitive Damages: Clear and convincing evidence; cap = greater of 2x compensatory or $500,000 under Tenn. Code Ann. § 29-39-104 (enforced in TN state court; held unconstitutional in federal diversity cases per Lindenberg, 6th Cir. 2018)
☐ Non-Economic Damages Cap: Tenn. Code Ann. § 29-39-102 ($750k / $1M catastrophic) - upheld in McClay v. Airport Mgmt. Servs. (Tenn. 2020); single aggregate cap per plaintiff (Yebuah, Tenn. 2021)
☐ Collateral Source Rule: Independent-source payments do not reduce defendant's liability
☐ Forum: Circuit Court; venue generally where defendant resides or cause of action arose

Respectfully submitted,

[FIRM NAME]

By: _________________________________
[________________________________]
[Attorney Name]
Tenn. BPR No. [________________________________]
[________________________________]
[Street Address]
[City, Tennessee ZIP]
Telephone: [________________________________]
Email: [________________________________]

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

SOURCES AND REFERENCES

• McIntyre v. Balentine, 833 S.W.2d 52 (Tenn. 1992): https://law.justia.com/cases/tennessee/supreme-court/1992/833-s-w-2d-52-2.html
• Tenn. Code Ann. § 28-3-104 (One-Year SOL - Personal Injury): https://law.justia.com/codes/tennessee/title-28/chapter-3/part-1/section-28-3-104/
• Tenn. Code Ann. § 28-3-105 (Three-Year SOL - Property): https://law.justia.com/codes/tennessee/title-28/chapter-3/part-1/section-28-3-105/
• Tenn. Code Ann. § 56-7-105 (Statutory bad-faith penalty; INAPPLICABLE to auto/UM per Giles v. GEICO, Tenn. Ct. App. 2021): https://law.justia.com/codes/tennessee/title-56/chapter-7/part-1/section-56-7-105/
• Tenn. Code Ann. § 55-12-102 (Financial Responsibility): https://law.justia.com/codes/tennessee/title-55/chapter-12/part-1/section-55-12-102/
• Tenn. Code Ann. § 56-7-1201 (UM/UIM): https://law.justia.com/codes/tennessee/title-56/chapter-7/part-12/
• Hodges v. S.C. Toof & Co., 833 S.W.2d 896 (Tenn. 1992) (punitive damages standard)
• Tenn. Code Ann. § 29-39-102 (noneconomic damages cap): https://law.justia.com/codes/tennessee/title-29/chapter-39/section-29-39-102/
• Tenn. Code Ann. § 29-39-104 (punitive damages cap): https://law.justia.com/codes/tennessee/title-29/chapter-39/section-29-39-104/
• McClay v. Airport Mgmt. Servs., LLC, 596 S.W.3d 686 (Tenn. 2020) (upholding § 29-39-102 noneconomic cap)
• Lindenberg v. Jackson Nat'l Life Ins. Co., 912 F.3d 348 (6th Cir. 2018) (§ 29-39-104 punitive cap unconstitutional in federal diversity cases)
• Tenn. Code Ann. § 29-11-107 (several liability): https://law.justia.com/codes/tennessee/title-29/chapter-11/section-29-11-107/