"Bill vs. Paid" and its effect on current legal cases

Posted February 11, 2013
Updated March 7, 2013

The North Carolina General Assembly enacted a statute in June 2011, reducing the compensation that injured plaintiffs can claim for their medical expenses. At least five other states passed this law, including Texas, Arkansas, Maryland, Missouri and Oklahoma.

This statue, known as “Bill vs. Paid,” states that in automobile accidents or other personal injury claims and lawsuits, evidence of medical expenses shall be limited to the amount actually paid to satisfy the bills. The Law Office of D. Hardison Wood is well versed in the changes in how insurance companies are evaluating personal injury claims.

The at-fault driver or insurance company gets the benefit of your health insurance. Attorney Adam Smith from the Law Office of D. Hardison Wood said, “Some insurance companies, such as Progressive, are already requiring claimants in auto accidents to sign affidavits stating they have filed their health insurance.”

“Bill vs. Paid” is not very popular among health insurance companies and hospitals. Hospitals and doctor’s offices do not like to file health insurance when injuries were caused by auto accidents; some even refuse to do so.

Smith said, “Clients often tell me, ‘why should my health insurance pay for something that was someone else’s fault?’”

Unless the law is changed, claimants should be prepared to prove that their health insurance is filed or they will find it extraordinarily difficult to settle their personal injury claims.

Click here to learn more about the Law Office of Hardison D. Wood or contact the office for more information. 

The Law Office of D. Hardison Wood is an advertising partner of, but each article is intended to be educational and informative in nature.