Plaintiff personal injury counsel writes thousands of demand letters every year. Adjusters read them in two passes: a thirty-second skim for the headline number and the obvious red flags, then a more careful read if — and only if — the skim warranted it. A demand letter that doesn't survive the skim doesn't settle. One that does will get assigned to an adjuster with authority and an evaluation deadline.
The difference is structural. The substance of two demand letters for the same case can be identical, but the one that lands in the second pile is built differently. Here is what that build looks like.
What Goes in the First Page
An adjuster's first page should answer five questions before they have to flip:
- Who is the plaintiff and who is the defendant?
- What is the incident and when did it happen?
- What is liability and how certain is it?
- What is the policy limit being demanded against and is the demand within or above limits?
- By what date is a response expected, and what happens if there is no response?
That information lives in the first three paragraphs. Everything that follows is supporting evidence. A demand letter that buries the headline ask in paragraph seven loses to one that puts it in paragraph one.
The Liability Section
Liability proof is the most-skipped section in mediocre demand letters and the most-developed section in good ones. Adjusters know what their insured did or did not do; the question is whether plaintiff's counsel can prove it.
- Police report findings, with the assignment-of-fault language quoted directly.
- Photographs — scene, vehicle damage, scene-context shots.
- Witness statements with names and contact information.
- Surveillance or dashcam footage where it exists.
- Any admission against interest the defendant or their representative has made.
- Applicable statute or regulation that the defendant violated, cited by section number.
If liability is contested, the letter says so, then explains why the plaintiff still wins. Pretending liability is unassailable in a contested case is the fastest way to lose an adjuster's trust.
The Specials Section
Special damages are the spine of the demand. The structure that works:
- An itemized table — date, provider, treatment type, billed amount, paid amount, balance. Adjusters want to scan this.
- A running total at the bottom of the table.
- Lost-wages computation with employer documentation attached as an exhibit.
- Out-of-pocket expenses with receipts.
Where billed vs. paid amounts differ — and they will for any insured plaintiff after Howell v. Hamilton Meats — the letter shows both numbers and explains which one the demand is anchored on. For lien-based treatment after Pebley v. Santa Clara Organics, the billed amount is the relevant number for damages purposes, and the letter should say so.
The Future-Care Section
Past medicals anchor the floor; future medicals anchor the ceiling. The letter should identify each future care item by treating provider's recommendation, quantify it, price it with current rates, and reduce to present value if the time horizon is long enough to matter. Adjusters discount future-care numbers reflexively. The way to limit the discount is to make each line item independently defensible.
The General-Damages Section
This is where the demand earns its number. Two paragraphs of how-it-affected-the-plaintiff narrative beats ten paragraphs of legal boilerplate every time. Specifics: what activities the plaintiff can no longer do, what they have done with their kids or spouse that pain has interrupted, what sleep looks like now, what driving feels like. Concrete details persuade; abstractions don't.
Lien Disclosure: When and How
Lien disclosure is one of the most-debated sequencing questions in PI practice. The conservative approach is to disclose all liens in the demand letter, at the bottom of the specials section, with the same itemization the firm's closing ledger uses. The aggressive approach is to disclose only the must-disclose liens (statutory hospital, government) and hold the rest until settlement discussions are advanced.
The argument for full disclosure: it builds credibility, lets the adjuster price the case more accurately, and reduces post-settlement surprises that can blow up a deal. The argument for selective disclosure: it preserves negotiating room and avoids handing the defense ammunition about specific provider relationships. Most practitioners we have surveyed land in the middle.
The Closing Demand
- Make it a number, not a range. A range gets the lower bound; a number gets a counteroffer.
- Make it defensible. If the demand cannot be derived from the specials, future care, and general damages discussed in the letter, the adjuster will not take it seriously.
- Make it time-bound. A response deadline that is too short looks performative; one that is too long invites the adjuster to deprioritize. Twenty-one to thirty days is the working range in most markets.
A demand letter is not a final argument; it is the opening move of a settlement negotiation. Built carefully, it sets the frame for everything that follows.