Bodily injury demand package review: every page read, every figure cited, the reply out before the deadline
Thousand-page demands read in full and answered before the deadline.
See one case, screen by screen ↓Software that reads a bodily-injury demand package — the lawyer's letter, medical records, bills, liens and wage proof — and turns it into what an adjuster needs to evaluate it: a medical chronology, the specials and what the letter leaves out. Bodily Injury Demand Package Review adds a treatment timeline with gaps and post-MMI care shaded, and drafts the reply from the adjuster's value.
How to choose AI solutions for insurance →
Updated
A claimant's lawyer sends a bodily-injury demand: a letter asking for the policy limits by a date, and behind it a thousand pages of ambulance, emergency, chiropractic, imaging, orthopaedic and surgery-centre records, itemised bills, letters of protection, photographs and wage letters. Under a time-limited demand the clock is already running — in Georgia, at least 30 days from receipt — whether or not anyone has read page 409.
So the adjuster reads it page by page and totals the specials in a spreadsheet. What slips through is what the letter leaves out: the weeks in the middle when the claimant did not treat, the line where the doctor recorded maximum medical improvement, an earlier injury to the same neck, a future surgery no surgeon recommended, an amount in the letter with no bill behind it. Each miss inflates the evaluation — or leads to an uninformed answer to a limits demand.
Estimated split, in hours, for one demand package of about a thousand pages, by hand and with the solution. The adjuster's own reading and decisions stay in the after column.
Six agents sort, summarise, total and check every page; the adjuster sets the value and signs.
Danielle Ferrante was rear-ended at a red light in Duluth, Georgia, on March 14, 2026. On September 29 her lawyers sent a time-limited demand for the $100,000 bodily-injury limit. Here is what happens next, screen by screen, in the working solution.
Marisol opens her unit's demands: 9 open in the Atlanta unit, 5 of them time-limited, the next deadline Oct 15. Each track shows how much of the response window is gone. Ferrante v. Paulsen — 1,146 pages, 6 flags, deadline Oct 29 — reads “Ready for your value”, with 17 days left.
“Every demand read the day it arrived.”
The package arrived by certified mail. The package sorter split it by provider, date and type — demand letter, Rivermark EMS, Lakemont Regional's emergency department, 34 chiropractic visits at Peachline Spine & Rehab, the MRI, Ridgeline Orthopaedic & Pain, the surgery centre, the pharmacy, 154 pages of bills — and linked 142 faxed duplicates to their originals.
Duplicates are kept and linked to the original, never removed.
The demand terms reader found a time-limited offer for the $100,000 limit, received Sep 29: accept by Oct 29, 5:00 pm ET. It started the clock and sent one extra condition to claims counsel. The summarizer placed 42 visits on the timeline; the bill reader coded 211 bill lines; the checker went looking for what the letter left out.
The demand terms reader never decides whether a demand is valid — counsel does.
Seven lanes, from ambulance to pharmacy, March 14 to the deadline, each visit placed on its date with its bill and a running total of $38,529.60 billed. Shaded in the middle: 47 days without treatment, May 8 to June 24. Below it the two pages open side by side — discharged at pain 2/10 with goals met on May 8, and on June 24 “symptoms worsened after moving furniture on June 20.”
“47 days without treatment · May 8 → Jun 24 · p. 409 → p. 592”
A second band covers Aug 19 to Sep 23. Dr. Rao recorded maximum medical improvement on Aug 5 — 5% impairment, no work restrictions, home exercise. Peachline then resumed care at 2 visits a week and billed 10 visits, $3,800.00. Clicking the band opens p. 651 and p. 548 with the lines highlighted.
She lowers the gap threshold to 14 days and two shorter gaps shade in — 21 days and 14 days. She switches the amounts to reasonable value and every visit and the running total re-price: $14,712.60, against $38,529.60 billed and $3,285.40 paid.
Every line from the itemised bills, with its codes, beside the record of the visit it pays for. The letter states $40,379.60; the bills total $38,529.60. Leave out the $1,850.00 Sep 30 charge with no bill and the $3,800.00 after MMI, and the specials she evaluates on are $34,729.60 billed, $13,112.60 reasonable value. The employer confirms 12 days of wages, $3,120.00 — not 24.
The bill reader never reduces a bill on its own; it shows the basis for every value.
Each flag carries its two pages and what would change it: the 47-day gap, the 10 post-MMI visits, a 2022 neck injury with a prior claim settled, a $148,000.00 fusion surgery the records do not support, the $1,850.00 with no bill, and the wages. Marisol asks for four sets of records in the reply. On flag 2 she asked the nurse; Tessa answered on Oct 9.
“Not medically necessary on this record — MMI with no restrictions (p. 651).” — Tessa Lindqvist, RN
Marisol sets a range of $27,500 to $36,000 and an offer of $31,500. The reply to Whitcombe & Saldana is redrafted from those figures: every figure carries its page, it declines the $100,000 offer as made and asks for the gap records, the 2022 records, any surgical recommendation and the Sep 30 bill. Beside it, each of the demand's terms is checked against Georgia's pre-suit offer statute.
“You set the range; the agents never do.”
The offer is over $25,000 and answers a time-limited demand, so it needs a co-signature. Marisol signs at 10:24; Owen Pritchard co-signs at 10:41; the reply goes by email and certified mail at 10:43 on Oct 12 — 17 days before the deadline, with a copy to the claim file.
The same limits demand, seen by the four people who carry it — what their week looked like, and what it looks like now.
Six agents sort, summarise, total and check every page; the adjuster sets the value and signs.
Splits a demand package into its documents by provider, date and type, dates each page, and links duplicate and faxed copies to their originals.
Builds the chronology of treatment — dates, providers, complaints, findings, diagnoses, procedures and pain scores — and notes any MMI statement, restrictions, prior injuries and referrals.
Reads itemised bills (UB-04, CMS-1500, ledgers), codes each line, totals billed and paid, prices reasonable value and reconciles to the lawyer's letter.
Finds treatment gaps, care after maximum medical improvement, earlier injuries to the same body part, intervening events and future care the records do not support.
Reads the letter's amount, deadline, release, payment period and extra conditions, checks them against the state's rules and starts the clock from the date of receipt.
Drafts the response to the claimant's lawyer from the adjuster's value and the flags, every figure cited to its page.
Sets the value and signs; supervisor co-signs time-limited replies. The agents propose; a named person decides.
The adjuster can ask in plain words, or tell it what to draft. Every answer points to its page.
Why is there a 47-day gap?
Ms. Ferrante was discharged from chiropractic on May 8 at pain 2/10 with her goals met. Her next visit was June 24, 47 days later, at 7/10 — and the consult note says her symptoms worsened after moving furniture on June 20. Everything billed from June 24 on, $16,890.00, follows that event.
How much was billed after MMI?
Dr. Rao recorded maximum medical improvement on Aug 5, with no restrictions. Peachline then billed 10 visits, Aug 19 – Sep 23: $3,800.00, reasonable value $1,600.00. Tessa Lindqvist's nurse review on Oct 9 found them not medically necessary on this record. They are left out of the specials.
Did she hurt her neck before?
Yes. Her family doctor records neck pain after a car accident in 2022, treated with chiropractic for about two months. The prior claims index shows a 2022 cervical-strain claim settled with another carrier, and the MRI shows mild degenerative changes from C4 to C7. The reply asks for the 2022 records.
Draft the reply at $31,500
Done. The reply offers $31,500.00, inside your range of $27,500 – $36,000. It cites the bills, the gap, MMI and the wages, and asks for 4 sets of records. Owen Pritchard co-signs after you — it answers a time-limited demand. It can go out today, 17 days before Oct 29.
11 screens from the working solution, on its sample data. Pick one to see it large.
What the agents shade, how reasonable value is priced and who signs are settings, saved as a draft version and applied to the next package.
| Setting | Default | Choose from |
|---|---|---|
| Shade gaps in treatment of at least | 30 days | 14 · 21 · 30 · 45 days |
| Shade all care after a maximum medical improvement statement | On | On · Off |
| Ask nurse review for post-MMI care over $1,000 | On | On · Off |
| Reasonable value | 75th percentile | Regional charge benchmark by ZIP code: 60th · 75th · 80th percentile |
| Florida claims | On for FL | Medical damages at amounts paid or the health-coverage rate |
| Supervisor co-signs offers over | $25,000 | Set by amount, plus every reply to a time-limited demand |
| Claims counsel reviews limits of | $250,000 | Set by amount |
| Deadline alerts to the adjuster and supervisor | 10 · 5 · 2 days | Days before the deadline |
Every figure is labelled: a target the solution is built to, an estimate, a typical published result, or a proven one.
“demo” = seen in the working solution, on its sample claim data · “target” = the design goal, measured in the live solution · “estimated” = our estimate · “typical” = published figures (Verisk, Demand Package Review brochure — record review of 4–5 hours by hand). Statutes named as context: O.C.G.A. § 9-11-67.1 (Georgia pre-suit offers to settle) and Fla. Stat. § 768.0427 (Florida medical damages). People, companies, law firms and providers named on this page are fictional — characters and sample data in the working solution.
Software that reads a bodily-injury demand package — the lawyer's letter, medical records, bills, liens and wage proof — and turns it into what an adjuster needs to evaluate it: a medical chronology, the specials and what the letter leaves out. Bodily Injury Demand Package Review adds a treatment timeline with gaps and post-MMI care shaded, and drafts the reply from the adjuster's value.
The medical record summarizer records each visit's date, provider, complaint, findings, diagnosis, procedures, pain score and plan, quotes the sentence it used and cites its page. Every visit is placed on the timeline with its bill, so the chronology and the specials come from the same pages.
Yes. The bill reader codes each bill line, totals billed and paid, and prices reasonable value at your benchmark — in the demo, the regional charge benchmark at the 75th percentile, with paid amounts used where paid. It reconciles the letter's total to the bills and lists every difference, but never reduces a bill on its own.
That is its main job. The gap and causation checker shades every gap at or above your threshold and all care after an MMI statement, each with the last page before and the first page after. It also looks for earlier injuries in the records and the prior claims index, and compares future care in the letter with the records. It flags; the adjuster and nurse decide.
The demand terms reader reads the amount, deadline, release, payment period and extra conditions, checks them against the state's rules — Georgia, Florida, South Carolina, Tennessee and Alabama in the demo — and starts the clock from receipt. Deadline alerts go to the adjuster and supervisor; anything unclear goes to claims counsel, who decides whether a demand is valid.
Yes. The adjuster sets the range and the offer and signs; the reply drafter never states a value she did not set and never sends. A supervisor co-signs every reply to a time-limited demand and every offer over $25,000.
Only the claim's team. Health information is shown by role, the nurse gets only the cited pages behind a flag, and every read, decision and signature is on the claim's activity trail.
The Agentic Solution Engine builds and deploys it from your requirements — your claim handling standards, reply templates, state rules and a sample of past demand packages — and it goes live once every quality gate has passed. We will walk you through it on your own demands first.
No policy-limits deadline missed: every demand on a clock, every condition checked.
1-min demoBodily Injury Claim ValuationSettlement authority set from comparable closed files and local verdicts.
1-min demoLitigation Propensity PredictionFiles turning toward a lawsuit raised early, with the evidence behind each.
1-min demoWe'll run Bodily Injury Demand Package Review on a sample of your own past demand packages.