$410,000 Settlement with Minor Property Damage
Last Updated: 11/12/2025 | Written by Elliot Bourne (Partner)
Minor Property Damage Resulted in a $410,000 Settlement. The picture is the actual damage to our clients bumper in the wreck.
Winning Challenging Car Accident Claims
Minor Damage ≠ Minor Injuries
This case proves that minor property damage doesn’t mean minor injuries:
- Trailer hitch effect: Absorbed impact instead of bumper, increasing force on vehicle occupants
- Insurance lowball: $50k policy, but our client suffered significant injuries
- Persistence wins: Aggressive advocacy secured 8x the policy limits
- State Farm settlement: $410,000 total recovery
- Key lesson: Minor impact cases require scientific evidence and trial-ready attorneys
The Insurance Industry’s “Minor Impact” Defense
Insurance companies will often try to minimize payouts. Their favorite argument is that minor property damage means minor injuries.
These are known as minor impact, soft tissue injury cases. Insurers frequently use questionable tactics to deny or undervalue these legitimate claims.
The logic seems simple: little damage to the car equals little damage to the person. But this ignores basic physics and human anatomy.
Insurers count on juries (and claimants) believing that minor property damage means no serious injury. They invest heavily in “biomechanical experts” who testify that low-speed impacts can’t cause injury—despite overwhelming medical evidence to the contrary.
The Facts of Our Client’s Case
In a recent case, our client was involved in a rear-end collision. The impact resulted in only minor property damage to their vehicle.
You can see the actual damage in the photo above. It looks minimal—just bumper scratches.
Despite the seemingly minor impact, our client suffered significant injuries. These injuries required extensive medical treatment.
The insurance company saw an easy denial. We saw an injured person who deserved justice.
The Trailer Hitch Factor
The severity of the impact was worsened by a critical detail. Our client had a trailer hitch on their vehicle.
The trailer hitch soaked up most of the impact instead of the bumper. This changed the physics of the collision entirely.
When a bumper absorbs impact, it’s designed to crumple and dissipate energy. A trailer hitch doesn’t crumple—it transfers force directly into the vehicle frame.
It is a scientific fact that trailer hitches can worsen the severity of a rear-end collision. The rigid hitch transfers more force to vehicle occupants than a crumple zone bumper would. This is a critical factor that many insurance adjusters overlook when evaluating claims.
The Initial Insurance Barrier
The at-fault driver’s insurance company only had a $50,000 policy. This policy was exhausted almost immediately.
Our client’s injuries and medical bills far exceeded this amount. The question became: where do we recover additional compensation?
Most attorneys would have accepted the policy limits and moved on. We knew our client deserved more.
Finding Additional Coverage: The State Farm Claim
We pursued a claim against our client’s own insurance carrier, State Farm. This involved the underinsured motorist (UIM) coverage.
UIM coverage protects you when the at-fault driver doesn’t have enough insurance. It’s part of your own policy but many people don’t understand it.
State Farm initially resisted the claim. They deployed the typical “minor impact” defense.
Overcoming the Minor Impact Defense
We countered with scientific evidence and expert testimony. We explained the trailer hitch physics. We documented the medical evidence of serious injury.
We prepared the case for trial. Insurance companies only negotiate seriously when they face a credible trial threat.
Our message was clear: we would prove this case to a jury if necessary.
Insurance companies use various insurance tactics to minimize payouts. They only offer fair settlements when facing attorneys who are ready and willing to try cases. Many lawyers settle cheap because they lack trial experience.
The Settlement Result
Our relentless advocacy ensured our client’s medical bills were paid. More importantly, we secured a $410,000 settlement from State Farm.
This represented 8x the at-fault driver’s policy limits. It provided fair compensation for our client’s injuries and suffering.
The case demonstrates what’s possible with experienced representation. You can still get a great settlement with the help of an experienced car accident lawyer who knows how to counter insurance company strategies.
Key Lessons from This Case
Several important takeaways emerge from this case:
1. Property Damage Doesn’t Determine Injury Severity
Minor vehicle damage does not mean minor injuries. The human body is far more fragile than car bumpers.
2. Trailer Hitches Change Collision Physics
If your vehicle has a trailer hitch, this affects how force is transferred. Make sure your attorney understands this science.
3. Don’t Accept Initial Policy Limits
The first insurance check might not be the only source of recovery. Explore UIM coverage and other potential sources.
4. Scientific Evidence Wins Cases
Biomechanical experts, medical testimony, and physics matter. These cases require investment in proper evidence.
5. Trial Readiness Forces Settlements
Insurance companies settle major claims with attorneys they take seriously. You need a lawyer who actually tries cases.
Warning Signs Your Minor Impact Case Is Being Undervalued
- Insurance adjuster says your property damage is too minor for injuries
- Offer comes quickly without reviewing all your medical records
- Adjuster disputes the need for treatment recommended by your doctor
- Settlement offer doesn't cover your medical bills and lost wages
- Insurance company won't explain how they calculated their offer
- They pressure you to settle before you finish treatment
Minor Damage, Serious Injuries?
Insurance companies use 'minor impact' defenses to deny legitimate injury claims. Don't let them lowball you. Bourne Law Firm knows how to prove serious injuries even when property damage is minimal. We've secured settlements 8x policy limits in these challenging cases.