How to Build a Demand Package That Survives Scrutiny

An accurate attachment can still be overstated in a demand. Consider this hypothetical treatment note:

The demand might quote the note accurately but go too far when calculating future care. Check the rest of the package for the same mismatch between the record and what the letter claims.

Can the reader check the demand?

Use the first few paragraphs to tell the recipient what happened, what conduct is alleged, how the person was injured, and what resolution you seek. Explain the insured’s alleged responsibility through the evidence. Identify the facts the parties agree on and give your position on the disputed points.

The reader should be able to move from an important assertion to its supporting document, witness, recording, or opinion. An inference needs to be identified as an inference; a disputed conclusion should not read as an established fact. Check every assertion against the underlying record before asking the insurer to accept the calculation. The attachment’s accuracy cannot cure an overstatement in the letter.

The Texas injury claim value and litigation hub lays out the broader framework, and our guide to how Texas injury claims are valued and litigated goes deeper. A demand also depends on the coverage behind it, which we cover in policy limits, coverage and settlement mechanics.

Build the index alongside the letter

Show how each damages figure was reached

Address the point most likely to be disputed

A recipient looking at a treatment gap or a disputed charge needs more than a pile of attachments. Address the strongest known defense point in the letter itself, whether it concerns notice, responsibility, causation, treatment or a charge. Explain your position and the evidence for it. Follow the disputed assertion through the index to the exhibit. If that chain does not support the assertion, correct it or explain the gap.

If the present record cannot answer that point, name the missing record or testimony and say whether you have requested it. Keep the present limitation clear. New evidence may justify another review.

After checking the evidence references, redact private identifiers the insurer does not need. Use a secure delivery method suited to the sensitive material.

Put the offer and release terms in one place

Before the letter says that liens, reimbursement or settlement authority are resolved, discuss them with the client. Work out who can sign, and make sure every necessary claimant and released party is included. This is a check against confusion about the terms. It cannot guarantee a settlement or determine the insurer’s duty.

Check whether a policy-limits demand meets the legal requirements

An opening proposal is different from a demand to settle within policy limits, whatever its heading says. A specific limits proposal may have legal consequences. Coverage, the offered terms, the insured’s potential exposure, and the full circumstances determine that assessment.

In Seger v. Yorkshire Insurance Co., the Supreme Court of Texas identifies three requirements for a Stowers claim:

• The claim falls within coverage.
• The settlement demand is within policy limits.
• An ordinary prudent insurer would accept the demand in light of the likelihood and degree of the insured’s potential excess exposure.

That assessment depends on the facts. A “Stowers” heading does not establish that these requirements are met.

Check the outgoing files

• Review the version about to leave the office, not only the working folder.
• Check names, dates, and arithmetic.
• Read every page for legibility.
• Check exhibit order, links, and release language.
• Confirm that every intended attachment is included in the transmission.

Save the final letter and every exhibit exactly as sent, with the delivery method, recipient, date, time, confirmation, and any response. A later reviewer needs to establish what was received and when. The working folder may contain files that never accompanied the letter.

Keep both versions when making a correction. Retain the original package, including the letter, evidence and offer, alongside the separate corrected version and a record of the changes. A replacement on its own may not show what the insurer originally had to consider or distinguish it from material received later.

Use the response to inform the client’s decision

Ask why the insurer reached its position. For rejected treatment, identify the excluded bills and the reasons. Answer requests for missing records, and assess any coverage dispute separately from valuation. The response gives the client more to consider than the offer’s dollar amount.

New evidence may change the inputs to the defensible settlement valuation model. Update the model when it does, keep the evidence supporting the change, and explain to the client how it affects liability or damages.

Before the client accepts, review:

• The release.
• Deductions from the payment and expenses still ahead.
• The option of continuing the case.
• The gross offer compared with what the client would receive.

This is general information about Texas injury claims, not advice about a particular demand, policy or case. Reading it does not create an attorney-client relationship. Evidence, coverage, settlement terms and available recovery depend on the facts and applicable law.