What Goes Into a Georgia Car Accident Demand Letter

The demand letter is the document that opens formal settlement negotiations in a Georgia car accident claim. It is not a form letter. A well-constructed demand establishes credibility, documents case strength with attached evidence, sets a defensible opening figure, and creates the deadline pressure that prompts a serious response from an insurer. In Georgia, the demand also operates against a specific legal backdrop, including the bad-faith exposure that a properly structured policy limits demand can create and the 2025 limits on how a noneconomic figure may be presented, both of which shape how an effective letter is written.

The Function of the Demand Letter

A demand letter does several things at once. It frames liability in a way the insurer must engage with, it organizes the damages so they can be evaluated rather than disputed in the abstract, and it sets a clock. Because the letter often anchors the negotiation that follows, its internal logic matters: a figure that is unsupported invites the insurer to set its own anchor, while a figure tied to documented losses and explained reasoning is harder to dismiss. The letter is also a preview of how the claim would look to a jury, so its tone, accuracy, and supporting documentation signal whether the claim is prepared for litigation.

Structure of an Effective Demand Letter

Facts and liability. A clear, factual narrative of how the collision happened, who was at fault, and what evidence supports that conclusion, referencing the police report, witness accounts, any dashcam footage, and any citations issued. This section establishes fault without disclosing complete trial strategy. Where a traffic citation supports the liability case, its evidentiary weight is governed by the negligence-per-se principles addressed in the discussion of traffic violations and liability.

Injuries and treatment. A chronological summary of injuries, diagnoses, treating providers, procedures, and current status, noting whether maximum medical improvement has been reached and, if not, the expected timeline and remaining treatment. This section connects the mechanism of the crash to the documented harm, a link that depends on the medical records addressed in the discussion of why medical records are critical.

Damages calculation. Economic damages are itemized with documentation attached: medical bills by provider, date, and amount; lost-wage verification through an employer letter and pay records; and property-damage estimates. Noneconomic damages, such as pain and suffering, are presented as a separate category supported by treating-physician statements on functional limitations and by therapy records. How medical specials are presented now interacts with OCGA 51-12-1.1, discussed below.

The demand amount. A specific dollar figure, because vague language invites the insurer to set the anchor. A demand pitched too high loses credibility, while one pitched too low anchors below fair value; the figure is generally set to leave room for negotiation while remaining defensible if later presented to a jury.

Response deadline. A defined period, often around 30 days, with a clear statement that litigation may follow non-response or an inadequate response.

Documentation package. All supporting materials attached, including medical records and bills, the police report, photographs, witness statements, employer verification, pay records, and any expert reports, so the insurer has what it needs to evaluate the claim without further requests.

The Policy Limits Demand and Bad-Faith Exposure

When documented damages clearly exceed the at-fault driver’s policy limits and liability is established, a policy limits demand can create bad-faith exposure for the insurer under OCGA 33-4-7. Such a demand offers to settle all claims for the policy limits, includes the information the insurer needs to evaluate, allows a reasonable response time, and specifies a date after which the offer is withdrawn. The leverage is that an insurer which unreasonably refuses a proper demand may, if a later verdict exceeds the limits, be exposed to the full verdict rather than only its policy limit. The full bad-faith analysis and the leverage it produces are addressed in the discussion of insurance policy limits in Georgia car accidents. This kind of demand is sometimes called a Holt demand after the Georgia case law on the subject, and its precision matters, because an ambiguous or incomplete demand may not trigger the exposure.

How SB 68 Affects the Demand

SB 68, effective April 21, 2025, bears on demand letters in two practical ways. First, under OCGA 51-12-1.1, recovery of medical specials is limited to the reasonable value of necessary care, and the amounts actually paid or accepted are admissible alongside the billed charges, applicable to causes of action arising on or after that date. A demand that itemizes medical bills should therefore be prepared with the understanding that billed charges alone may not be the figure a jury ultimately uses to determine reasonable value. Second, under OCGA 9-10-184, a figure offered for noneconomic damages such as pain and suffering must be rationally related to the evidence, and the presentation of such a figure is now constrained; this anchoring rule applies to pending cases. A demand that states a pain-and-suffering number should tie it to the documented functional limitations and treatment rather than presenting it as a free-floating figure. On the attorney-fee side, SB 68 added a no-double-recovery rule under OCGA 9-15-16 and made contingency-fee agreements inadmissible, but it did not restrict OCGA 13-6-11 to contract actions, so the bad-faith and stubbornly-litigious fee remedy remains available in tort.

What Happens After the Demand

After the demand is delivered, the insurer evaluates liability and damages and typically responds with an acceptance, a counteroffer, or a rejection, often through several rounds of negotiation. How those negotiations proceed, including the dynamics of counteroffers and the point at which suit becomes the alternative, is addressed in the discussion of settlement negotiations in Georgia. The demand’s deadline frames that process, because a clear date after which the offer is withdrawn distinguishes a serious demand from an open-ended invitation to delay.

Illustration: A Demand Damages Summary

To show the structure rather than predict any result, consider an outcome-neutral damages summary that a demand might present. Suppose documented medical specials total $42,000, lost wages with employer verification total $8,000, and property damage totals $6,000, producing $56,000 in economic damages. A noneconomic figure would be stated separately and tied to documented limitations, and the overall demand figure would be set with negotiating room in mind. The numbers are illustrative only and do not represent any actual case value, which depends on the specific injuries, evidence, and coverage.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the purpose of a car accident demand letter in Georgia?
It opens settlement negotiations by setting out liability, itemizing damages with supporting documentation, stating a specific demand figure, and imposing a response deadline.

How does a policy limits demand create bad-faith exposure?
Under OCGA 33-4-7, an insurer that unreasonably refuses a clear and complete demand to settle within policy limits when liability is plain may face exposure for a later verdict exceeding those limits.

Did SB 68 change how a demand should present medical bills?
Yes, indirectly. Under OCGA 51-12-1.1, the amounts actually paid for care are admissible alongside billed charges, so billed charges alone may not be the figure used to determine the reasonable value of medical specials.

Is there a deadline an insurer must meet to respond to a demand?
There is no universal statutory response deadline, but a well-drafted demand sets its own reasonable deadline, commonly around 30 days, after which the offer is withdrawn.

Sources and Legal Authorities

• OCGA 33-4-7 (bad-faith failure to settle within policy limits; Holt demand line of cases)
• OCGA 51-12-1.1 (SB 68; reasonable value of medical care; amounts paid admissible; causes of action arising on or after April 21, 2025)
• OCGA 9-10-184 (SB 68; anchoring of noneconomic-damages figures; applies to pending cases)
• OCGA 9-15-16 (SB 68; no double recovery of attorney fees) and OCGA 13-6-11 (bad-faith/stubbornly-litigious fees, still applicable in tort)

Disclaimer

This article is general legal information about Georgia car accident demand letters, not legal advice, and it is not provided by a law firm. Bad-faith exposure for failure to settle within policy limits is governed by OCGA 33-4-7, and SB 68 (effective April 21, 2025) changed the medical-damages, anchoring, and attorney-fee rules; laws change over time. Anyone with a specific question should consult a licensed Georgia attorney about the particular facts.