The doctor has only the patients description of the incident and their symptoms to go on- whiplash can’t be seen in and examination, or a scan or a blood test. Thats why its the injury of choice for spurious claims.
However… if you ask the claimant to provide a contact for the doctor that has made the assessment so that you can show that doctor a photograph of the vehicles damaged in the accident…. then the claimant goes all quiet and the claim gets dropped. The claimant will have had to describe a collision far more severe than the one that actually happened to get the diagnosis and speaking to the doctor would make that evident.
So rather than ‘let’ the insurance co deal with it, make them deal with it properly.
You’ve completely missed my point. I’m not saying what happens is right but what you have described just doesn’t happen in the real world.
Person goes to doctor and says “I’ve had a car crash my neck hurts” so Dr says “you have probably got wiplash”. There is no physical sign of this so cannot use Xrays or anything definitive as proof.
So a few phone pics of tiny dents in bumpers will not hold up in court as proof they didn’t have wiplash against a qualified medical professional’s diagnosis.
Also a doctor will base their diagnosis on what the patient has desribed as being their injury doctors don’t ask you for pictures of where you fell over or what your car looked like after the crash to work out what injuries you have do they?