Insurance Ask You For A Recorded Statement After an Accident? Call an Attorney Instead

Should you contact the insurance company on your own?

Not if you are injured.

Why speak with an insurance company and its trained claims adjusters when you can have an experienced lawyer handle it for you? There are traps in these conversations; should you fall for any one of them, it could substantially harm your injury case. If a statement becomes necessary, the lawyer can steer the discussion, protecting you and ensuring that only relevant matters are addressed.

For insurance companies, minimizing payouts is essential. How you communicate and what you disclose can significantly influence the outcome of your claim. Here are some things to keep in mind when deciding if you are going to handle conversations with them on your own:

Recorded Statement Context

Insurance adjusters will typically request a recorded statement, often under the guise of an innocent pretext. They will suggest it’s a formality or perhaps a simple requirement to clear up, so that your claim can be paid. These statements are typically not required, especially with the at-fault driver’s insurer.

Be aware that you can decline this request, especially until you consult a lawyer.

Ways To Harm Your Case

Beware of circumstances that seem innocent, but which are actually a setup to apportion some or all fault on you for the crash. Even innocent statements such as “I’m sorry” or “I didn’t see the other car” can be misconstrued as an admission of guilt, negatively affecting your claim. It is essential to avoid making statements that could imply responsibility for the accident.

Let the insurance adjusters and investigators determine fault based on the evidence they collect.

Oversharing Unnecessary Information

Insurance companies and their lawyers would love for you to ramble on. All of it is being recorded, and things will inevitably be said that could be easily misunderstood.

Keep it short. If the insurance company wants information from you, it’s their job to get it, not yours to volunteer. Ensuring that you do not overshare with an insurance company is crucial. Hire a lawyer, and this issue will not arise. If you do not hire a lawyer, remember that giving too much information can unintentionally harm your claim. Do not guess or estimate details like speed, injuries, or fault; share the facts you know.

Settling too soon

Insurance companies often offer low settlements quickly to close the claim. These do not consider the full extent of your damages. It is important to never accept the first offer without reviewing your medical costs, property damage, and future needs.

Downplaying Your Injuries

Avoid making statements such as “I’m fine” or downplaying the severity of your injuries.

Some injuries may not be immediately apparent after the accident, so it is essential to seek a medical evaluation and document any symptoms.

Not Recording and Documenting Your Interactions

If you decide to speak with the insurance company, record the calls. Keep track of all communications, including dates, names of people spoken to, and the details of each conversation. Additionally, maintain records of your injuries, property damage, and expenses.

Why Choose Sam Aguiar Injury Lawyers?

Simple. We’ve Always Got Your Back.

You Focus On Getting Better. We Handle Everything Else.

With our exclusive Bigger Share Guarantee®, you keep more of your settlement.

We’ll never increase our fee, even if your case goes all the way to trial, and you pay nothing unless we win.

We are Forbes Best-In-State Top Lawyer in Kentucky for 2025 and the Courier Journal’s Community Choice selection as the Top Personal Injury Lawyer in Louisville.

Available 24/7, we’re here when you need us most.

The insurance company has lawyers working to minimize your claim. Shouldn’t you have Kentucky’s top-rated injury lawyers going after you?

Get Your Free Case Review

Call (502) 888-8888 or (859) 888-8000

Available 24/7

FAQ’s

What recourse is available in Kentucky for an insurance company’s conduct that is unfair or deceptive?

Kentucky has robust laws to hold insurance companies accountable for certain conduct. The state’s Unfair Claims Settlement Practices Act (KRS 304.12-230) prohibits 17 practices (e.g., misrepresenting facts, unreasonable delays, compelling litigation). Minimum claims-handling standards are further set by 806 KAR 12:095, which aims to establish standards for the prompt, fair, and equitable adjustment and settlement of property and casualty claims. Violations may be enforced by the Kentucky Department of Insurance, which reviews insurer conduct, investigates complaints, and adjudicates disputes.

What are some examples of things the insurance companies cannot do, and which would possibly fall under the Unfair Claims and Settlement Practices Act?

Examples are listed within statutes and regulations in Kentucky. Per KRS 304.12-230 and 806 KAR 12:095, these may include failing to investigate or pay claims promptly; misrepresenting or concealing coverage (e.g., not advising that UIM is on a policy and may apply after an at-fault driver’s policy pays out the coverage limits); not explaining denials; requiring unnecessary documentation that causes unreasonable delay; using misleading release language; or forcing policyholders to litigate by offering significantly less than is owed. More examples of prohibited practices:

Failing to promptly investigate or pay claims: Not being at fault for an accident and calling and reporting the claim after the accident, only for the insurance company to tell you for many weeks that they’ve still not finished investigating.

Misrepresenting or concealing coverage details from claimants occurs when you call your insurance company after an accident, report being hurt in a hit-and-run accident, and are told you have “liability only” and are not eligible for a claims payment. This would be partially true, but the claims adjuster’s failure to advise you that your uninsured motorist coverage steps in to pay you an injury settlement would likely be considered concealing coverage.

Other situations:

Failing to explain the denial or partial settlement of a claim.

Requiring unnecessary documentation that leads to unreasonable delays.

Using misleading release language in a property damage settlement prevents making an injury claim.

Forcing policyholders to litigate by offering significantly less than owed.

What’s the difference between Unfair Claims and Settlement Practices and “Bad Faith”?

Kentucky law recognizes both common-law and statutory standards for bad faith claims, applicable to both first-party (against one’s own insurer) and third-party (against another’s insurer) situations. A plaintiff must demonstrate that the insurer was obligated to pay, lacked a reasonable basis for denying or delaying payment, and knew or recklessly disregarded this lack of basis. Statutes such as KRS 304.12-230 and 806 KAR 12:095 outline these duties, but bad faith claims are distinct common-law claims.

How does the Department of Insurance assist individuals without lawyers who are dealing with insurance company issues?

There are administrative regulations and the Kentucky Department of Insurance, which also provide some layers of accountability for insurers. 806 KAR 12:095 elaborates on claim-handling standards, including how insurers must respond, document, and settle claims for motor vehicle and property losses. The Department of Insurance enforces these standards, audits claim files, and may penalize unfair practices based on consumer complaints or periodic examinations. If a complaint is filed with the Department of Insurance (DOI) regarding unfair claims and settlement practices, the DOI will notify the insurer, requiring the insurer to respond in writing within 15 days. This often prompts insurers to fulfill their duties rather than having to justify their actions to insurance regulators. With all that said, the DOI tends to be underfunded and has a revolving door effect in most states, including Kentucky. They do not historically impose much scrutiny on insurers here in the Commonwealth.

What is your firm’s experience with Bad Faith Cases?

Our firm litigates coverage issues and served as class counsel in Davis v. State Farm (W.D. Ky., No. 3:19-cv-00466-CRS), a certified bad faith class action concerning disclosure and payment of UM/UIM benefits to Kentucky policyholders. The court-approved settlement provided monetary relief and required remedial measures. See the public settlement notice: State Farm Settlement Order.