When you’ve been hit and hurt, the last thing you expect is a fight with your own insurance company. Yet that’s where many people end up, chasing calls, waiting on vague “reviews,” and watching medical bills stack up. Bad faith in insurance is more than just slow service or a grumpy adjuster. It’s when an insurer breaks the promises baked into the policy and the law, putting its interests ahead of yours. If you’ve had a car accident, truck accident, or motorcycle accident, recognizing the difference between a normal claim dispute and bad faith can save you months of frustration and a lot of money.
This guide comes from years of seeing claims from the inside. I’ll share how insurers evaluate cases, why good claims go sideways, and what practical steps work when you suspect bad faith. You’ll see real-world signs that matter, how to document your claim so it holds up, and where the legal lines usually sit.
What “bad faith” actually means
Insurance policies are contracts. In exchange for premiums, the company agrees to handle claims fairly and pay valid losses. Every state layers on rules requiring good faith and fair dealing. While the exact language varies by jurisdiction, you typically see obligations like timely investigation, prompt communication, and reasonable settlement offers within policy limits when liability is clear. When insurers violate those duties, that can be bad faith.
There’s a spectrum. A simple mistake or a reasonable disagreement about value usually isn’t bad faith. A pattern of unjustified delays, misrepresentations, and lowballing in the face of clear liability starts to cross the line. In some states, you can sue your own carrier for first-party bad faith, such as uninsured motorist or medical payments claims. In others, you may bring a third-party bad faith claim if your insurer mishandles a claim brought against you, exposing you to a judgment beyond your policy limits. The context matters, and the rules for a car accident may look different than for a truck accident or motorcycle accident because the injuries and evidence profiles differ.
Why these cases go wrong
Insurance adjusters work within set authority levels and performance metrics. Claims with soft-tissue injuries, minor bumper damage, or gaps in treatment tend to move slowly and settle for less, because the insurer sees them as low-value. Truck accident and motorcycle accident cases get more scrutiny, partly due to higher injury severity and complicated liability, but also because the payouts can be large. That scrutiny can be fair, or it can become a pretext for stalling.
Delays often stem from incomplete medical records, unclear fault, or inconsistent statements. Sometimes they come from staffing issues. Other times, they are strategy. If the insurer believes you’re financially squeezed after a car accident injury, they might wait, assuming you’ll accept less. Where the line tips into bad faith is when delay or denial isn’t supported by a reasonable investigation or when the company ignores obvious facts.
Early signals that deserve your attention
If you’ve filed a claim and something feels off, start tracking specifics. Vagueness is an insurer’s friend. Concrete details give you leverage later.
Watch for these patterns in the first 30 to 90 days:
- Repeated requests for the same documents without explanation, especially after you’ve already provided complete medical records, bills, and wage loss verification. Long gaps in communication after you submit key materials. Most states require carriers to respond within set timeframes, often 10 to 30 days, or to tell you what information is missing. Sudden changes in adjusters with no handoff notes, forcing you to re-explain the claim. Changes happen, but failure to transition knowledge can be a tactic to reset the clock. Denial letters that cite policy provisions without applying them to the facts. If the letter quotes exclusions but doesn’t explain how they fit your car accident injury, that’s a red flag. A settlement offer that ignores obvious damages, such as an emergency room bill or diagnostic imaging, or offers pennies on the dollar in the face of clear liability.
I’ve seen claims transform once a homeowner or driver begins documenting every call and email. The moment you show a timeline, the tone often shifts from casual to careful.
How insurers actually evaluate injury claims
Understanding the valuation process helps you spot when an adjuster is off the rails. Most carriers use a combination of software, prior verdict data, and internal guidelines when pricing an injury claim. They’ll categorize injuries, weigh objective evidence (x-rays, MRIs), factor in the length and type of treatment, and look at whether you had preexisting conditions. They also assess venue and jury tendencies, especially for serious injuries from a truck accident or catastrophic motorcycle accident.
A strained neck with four weeks of physical therapy will be treated very differently from a displaced fracture with surgery. If your records show consistent complaints, diagnostic confirmation, and timely treatment, the value goes up. Gaps in care, missed appointments, or social media posts of high-activity vacations during alleged disability can hurt credibility. None of this is unfair on its own. It becomes questionable when the insurer cherry-picks facts, ignores severe symptoms, or refuses to consider new imaging that clarifies the injury.
Distinguishing hard negotiation from bad faith
Adjusters expect back-and-forth. A low opening offer is normal. Bad faith is not about negotiation posture alone. Look for whether the insurer:
- Investigated thoroughly before deciding. For example, in a rear-end collision with an independent witness and a police report, liability shouldn’t be “under investigation” for months. Explained the basis for the offer. They should identify which medical bills they accepted, which they reduced, and why. Silence or a vague “we don’t see value” response is suspect. Applied the policy correctly. Underinsured motorist coverage should activate after the at-fault driver’s policy pays out and your damages exceed it. If your carrier blocks this without a policy basis, it’s a problem. Accounted for future care when supported by medical opinion. If your surgeon writes that you’ll likely need hardware removal or follow-up injections, the value isn’t just past bills.
Disagreement is expected. But repeated refusal to Accident Doctor engage with facts, or moving goalposts after you meet every request, is where many bad faith claims start.
The special complexities of truck and motorcycle claims
Truck accidents often involve federal and state regulations, electronic logging devices, and maintenance records. The insurer may represent a commercial carrier with layers of coverage and a rapid response team that secures evidence within hours. If you were seriously hurt, preserving the driver’s logs, the tractor-trailer’s ECM data, and dispatch communications is critical. Delays from the carrier in producing those materials can tilt an investigation. Courts usually expect prompt preservation. If records disappear after a written preservation request, spoliation issues arise that can influence both liability and bad faith arguments.
Motorcycle accident cases present a different challenge. Riders face bias. I’ve heard adjusters suggest a rider must have been speeding, even with no skid marks, no witness testimony, and a clear left-turn violation by the other driver. It takes disciplined documentation and, at times, reconstruction to overcome those assumptions. When an insurer leans on bias instead of evidence, or refuses to consider helmet use, visibility gear, or daylight conditions that favor the rider’s account, that’s fertile ground for a bad faith review.
Typical tactics that cross the line
From the patterns I’ve seen, three tactics are the most corrosive when they persist after you’ve supplied evidence: slow-walking, withholding policy information, and misrepresenting law or policy terms.
Slow-walking looks like prolonged “review” without clear action items, or serial requests for authorizations that open your entire medical history far beyond the car accident injury. Reasonable carriers narrow the timeframe and providers to what’s relevant.
Withholding policy details can be more subtle. You’re entitled, in most states, to know the at-fault driver’s policy limits with reasonable documentation of your injuries. Some insurers resist disclosing limits, hoping you’ll settle blind. Likewise, your own insurer should accurately describe your coverages. I’ve seen underinsured motorist claims delayed because the carrier “lost” the declarations page, then later admitted there was stacked coverage that doubled the available limits.
Misrepresenting law or policy terms includes suggesting you must give a recorded statement to the other driver’s insurer, or implying you can’t consult a lawyer before signing medical releases. Your duty to cooperate is to your own carrier, and even then, it has boundaries. Broad, indefinite authorizations are not required in many jurisdictions.
Use documentation to shift the dynamic
Claims breathe through timelines. Anchor yours with simple practices that build credibility and pressure:
- Keep a claim journal. Date every communication, note who you spoke with, and summarize what was said and what’s next. Save every bill, EOB, prescription, mileage to treatment, and therapy schedule. Organize them by provider. If you’re out of work, keep pay stubs and a letter from your employer confirming missed time and duties. Request everything in writing. After a call, send a short email summarizing agreements or requests and ask the adjuster to correct anything inaccurate. When you send records, list what you included. If you used a cloud link, note the file names and dates. Reducing “we didn’t get it” moments narrows excuses. Track your symptoms and limitations weekly, briefly and honestly. This helps link your condition to the crash timeline and supports non-economic damages.
When disputes arise, your file becomes your witness. Adjusters and their supervisors notice when a claimant runs a tight ship, which tends to move offers and timing.
When good claims get undervalued
Valuation disputes often come down to three questions: how clear is liability, how consistent is the medical story, and how sympathetic is the claimant. Even with perfect answers, some cases get discounted. Here are recurring reasons I’ve seen, and how to address them:
Preexisting conditions. Insurers argue your back pain predates the crash. If you had occasional stiffness before but no radiculopathy until after, ask your doctor to document the difference in symptoms and explain aggravation. The law in many states recognizes that a crash can worsen a preexisting problem.
Gaps in treatment. Life interrupts care, especially for hourly workers or parents. If you miss sessions, note the reason and resume as soon as possible. Explain the gap to your doctor so the records reflect the context.
Low property damage. Modern bumpers can rebound from impact and hide energy transfer. Repair estimates don’t always reflect the forces on your neck and back. Photographs, paramedic notes, and immediate complaints help bridge this gap.
Social media. Insurers often check public posts. A smiling photo at a family event can be twisted into “no pain.” Privacy settings help, but the best approach is to avoid posting about your health or activities.
Steps to take when you suspect bad faith
Start with the simplest lever: ask for clarity in writing. If you’ve satisfied all document requests and the adjuster is silent or evasive, escalate in stages. Keep your tone neutral and professional.
Here’s a practical sequence that balances firmness and cooperation:
- Write a clear status request. Identify what you’ve submitted and ask what remains outstanding, the current evaluation, and when you can expect a decision. If nothing moves, request a supervisor review. Include your timeline and attach the key emails or letters. Ask for the specific policy provisions relied upon for any denial or reduction. Send a time-limited demand, when liability is clear. For third-party claims, a reasonable demand within policy limits that includes medical records, bills, wage loss proof, and a deadline can create pressure. The deadline must be fair, often 15 to 30 days, depending on the state and complexity. File a complaint with your state insurance department. Regulators track patterns. A concise complaint with dates and specifics can prompt a faster response. Consult a lawyer experienced in motor vehicle injury and insurance bad faith. Many offer free consultations and contingency fees. In serious injury cases, especially truck accident claims with layered policies, counsel can prevent costly missteps.
A note on recorded statements: for your own carrier, you may be required to give one, but you can schedule it, prepare, and limit it to relevant topics. For the at-fault driver’s insurer, you don’t have to give a recorded statement, and doing so can backfire.
Timeframes that commonly apply
Many states require insurers to acknowledge your claim within 10 to 15 business days, update you periodically, and accept or deny within a reasonable time once you provide necessary information. Medical payments coverage often has swift timelines, while liability and underinsured motorist claims take longer. If you’re waiting more than 30 to 45 days after submitting complete documentation with no meaningful response, you’re entitled to ask pointed questions about what remains and why.
Statutes of limitation for filing a lawsuit vary widely, from one to several years, and can differ for claims against a government entity or in wrongful death cases. Bad faith claims may have their own deadlines. Calendar these dates early, because missing them can end your rights even if the insurer is dragging its feet.
When a low offer might still be fair
Not every disappointing offer signals bad faith. Sometimes the medical records don’t support the pain level you report. Maybe imaging is normal, treatment was brief, and your activities returned to baseline quickly. In those cases, a modest settlement may be reasonable, even if it feels insulting. This is where having an outside perspective helps. A seasoned injury lawyer can compare your facts to local verdicts and settlements. If they say the number is in range, you can close the claim with more confidence.
On the other hand, when you have objective injuries, consistent care, and clear liability, and the adjuster refuses to bridge the gap or explain the math, that’s when a formal demand and possible litigation make sense.
The role of medical opinions
Insurers anchor on medical documentation. Short, generic notes like “patient improving” with no functional detail do little to support value. Ask your providers to document specific limitations: how far you can lift, how long you can sit or stand, the range of motion, and whether your job duties aggravate symptoms. If future care is likely, such as injections every few months or hardware removal, a written prognosis with estimated costs creates a concrete basis for negotiation.
For serious injuries from a truck or motorcycle accident, consider a treating surgeon’s narrative report. This is not a puff piece. It connects the mechanism of injury to the damage, lays out the course of treatment, and projects long-term impact. Insurers tend to take these reports more seriously than templated clinic notes.
Property damage headaches that spill into bad faith
Vehicle repairs and total loss valuations often trigger their own disputes. If your car is declared a total loss, the insurer must use fair market valuation, not a bargain-basement average. Ask for the valuation report, review comparable listings, and correct inaccuracies like missing options or mileage errors. If they insist on aftermarket parts or substandard repair methods, check your policy. Some endorsements require OEM parts, especially on newer vehicles.
Delays in paying storage or towing fees can create avoidable costs. Once the insurer knows the location, they should move promptly. If storage is accruing because they won’t authorize a move, document the requests and dates. While property issues are separate from bodily injury, a pattern of poor handling across the board can support a bad faith narrative.
When litigation becomes the right tool
Filing suit does more than aim for a courtroom win. It opens discovery. You can request claim notes, internal guidelines, and communication logs that show whether the insurer evaluated your claim reasonably. In a bad faith case, those records are often the heart of the matter.
Litigation has costs and risks. It can take a year or more. For moderate injuries where the dispute is only a few thousand dollars, the time and hassle may outweigh the upside. On the other hand, if you have a severe car accident injury, lost wages, and permanent impairment, and the offer sits far below fair value, litigation is often necessary. Truck accident defendants typically carry higher limits and have counsel from day one; matching that with your own legal team early helps preserve leverage.
Practical expectations about money
People ask what a claim is “worth.” There isn’t a universal formula. A rough, defensible approach starts with documented economic damages: medical bills at reasonable rates, lost wages, and property loss. Non-economic damages like pain and loss of enjoyment hinge on the duration and severity of symptoms, the invasiveness of treatment, and the credibility of your story. Juries tend to respond to surgeries, fractures, and objective findings more strongly than to strains and sprains. In many regions, settlements for straightforward soft-tissue injuries range from a few thousand dollars to low five figures. Fractures with surgery can escalate into six figures, especially with ongoing impairment. Catastrophic injuries from truck or motorcycle accidents can go into seven figures and beyond, driven by life care costs and long-term loss of earnings.
Policy limits cap third-party recovery unless the insurer’s bad faith exposes it to excess liability. Underinsured motorist coverage can bridge the gap, but only if you preserved the claim and complied with notice and consent requirements.
Keeping your claim on track without burning bridges
Be assertive, not adversarial. Adjusters are people. Many respond well to organized, polite persistence. If you set reasonable deadlines and meet your own obligations, you build the high ground. A short, steady cadence works better than bursts of frantic emails followed by silence. If you need more time for a doctor’s appointment or records, say so and give the date when you’ll deliver.
When you reach an impasse, state it plainly: you’ve provided X, Y, and Z; liability is clear; here’s your demand with supporting materials; and here is a fair deadline. If the response is a non-answer, you have a record to justify the next step.
Final thought for people in the thick of it
After a crash, energy is scarce. Pain steals attention. Bills demand it. If you do nothing else, control the two elements you can: documentation and timing. Keep your file clean and your follow-ups steady. If your gut tells you the insurer is not dealing straight, trust it enough to ask for specifics in writing and, if needed, to bring in help. Bad faith thrives in shadows. It struggles when the facts are organized and the deadlines are clear. Whether your case involves a routine car accident, a complex truck accident, or the unique dynamics of a motorcycle accident, those habits will serve you just as well as any legal strategy.