Estudio de la diferencia entre la valoración del daño corporal por las entidades aseguradoras y por las pericias extrajudiciales en Valladolid durante los años 2021 y 2022. Presentación de una metodología de comparación

Introduction

After the approval of Law 35/2015, the insurer is obliged to submit a motivated offer in cases of traffic accidents and the possibility of requesting an extrajudicial expert advice from the Institutes of Legal Medicine in case of disagreement with the previous one.

Objective

The objective of this paper is to describe the differences between the motivated offers of insurers and the forensic reports of the 409 extrajudicial expert advice requested to the Institute of Legal Medicine in Valladolid from 2021-2022 and to propose a methodology for comparing.

Material and methods

All extrajudicial expert advice data from 2021-2022 was obtained, analyzing the days of personal injury and sequelae and translating them into compensation variables.

Results

Forensic reports are more favorable for traffic injuries in about 81% of cases, granting on average an amount of almost € 1,400 more. This difference is mainly due to a greater consideration of sequelae, as well as a higher proportion of days of moderate particular damage in the forensic report. However, this difference is more or less accentuated, depending on the company that makes the motivated offer.

Conclusion

Translating the data from the forensic reports and motivated offers to compensation variables, allows us to make a comparison of the differences between both reports, observing that the forensic reports are more favorable than those issued by the insurers, at least in the province studied, and more studies are needed to have a more complete view.