Scalli | Murphy Law > Blog > Massachusetts Insurance Company Tactics: How Insurers Deny or Lowball Your Claim

Massachusetts Insurance Company Tactics: How Insurers Deny or Lowball Your Claim

By Christopher Murphy, Esq., Managing Partner at Scalli Murphy Law | Updated February 2026

After more than 25 years of representing car accident and personal injury victims in Massachusetts, I have seen insurance companies use the same tactics over and over again to reduce the value of legitimate claims. These are not random mistakes or oversights. They are deliberate, documented strategies designed to pay you as little as possible, regardless of the severity of your injuries.

Massachusetts has some of the strongest consumer protection laws in the country, including specific statutes that prohibit unfair insurance claim practices. Understanding both the tactics insurers use and the legal tools available to fight back is essential if you have been injured and are dealing with an insurance company.

Tactic 1: The Quick Settlement Offer

Within days of your collision, an adjuster may call you with a settlement offer. The amount may sound reasonable when you are dealing with a damaged car, medical bills, and missed work. But these early offers are designed to close your claim before the full extent of your injuries is known.

The problem is that many injuries, particularly brain injuries, herniated discs, and soft tissue injuries, take weeks or months to fully present. If you accept a quick offer and sign a release, you permanently give up your right to seek additional compensation, even if you later need surgery or develop chronic pain.

In my experience, early insurance offers are almost always a fraction of what the case is ultimately worth. The $62,500 soft tissue settlement we referenced in our settlement guide started with an insurance company offer of just $18,000.

Tactic 2: The Recorded Statement Trap

Adjusters will ask you to provide a recorded statement, often framing it as “routine” or “required to process your claim.” It is neither. You are not legally required to give a recorded statement to the at-fault driver’s insurance company.

The adjuster’s goal during a recorded statement is to get you to say things that can be used against you later. Common techniques include asking leading questions designed to get you to minimize your injuries (“You’re feeling better now, right?”), asking about your activities before the collision to suggest you were distracted or at fault, and asking about prior injuries or medical conditions to set up a pre-existing condition defense.

Everything you say is recorded and becomes a permanent part of your claim file. If your symptoms worsen after the statement, the insurer will point to your earlier recorded words to argue your injuries are not as serious as you claim.

Tactic 3: The Blanket Medical Authorization

After a collision, the insurance company will send you a medical authorization form and ask you to sign it so they can “verify your injuries.” The form they send, however, is typically worded to give them access to your entire medical history, with no time limits and no restriction to the injuries from your collision.

The purpose is to comb through years of medical records looking for any prior complaint, even a minor one, that they can use to argue your current injuries are pre-existing rather than caused by the collision. A sore back mentioned to your doctor five years ago becomes their argument that your herniated disc is not new.

You should only sign specific, time-limited authorizations that cover treatment related to your collision. An attorney can provide the insurer with the records they are entitled to without exposing your entire medical history.

Tactic 4: Deliberate Delays

Some insurers intentionally drag out the claims process to pressure you into accepting a lower settlement. Common delay tactics include ignoring phone calls and emails, “losing” paperwork and requesting the same documents repeatedly, transferring your claim to a new adjuster (sometimes more than once), and taking months to respond to settlement demands.

The strategy is straightforward: the longer the process takes, the more financial pressure builds. Medical bills pile up. You cannot repair or replace your car. Lost wages compound. Eventually, many claimants accept whatever is offered simply to end the ordeal.

Under Massachusetts law, this kind of delay can constitute a violation of M.G.L. c. 176D, Section 3(9), which specifically prohibits failing to promptly acknowledge communications and failing to adopt reasonable standards for prompt claim investigation.

Tactic 5: The “Independent” Medical Examination

If your claim involves significant injuries, the insurer may require you to attend an Independent Medical Examination, commonly called an IME. Despite the word “independent,” the examining doctor is chosen and paid by the insurance company.

The IME doctor’s job is to find reasons to minimize your injuries. Documented tactics include observing you in the waiting room and parking lot to catch behavior inconsistent with your claimed limitations, conducting a brief examination designed to produce a report favorable to the insurer, and concluding that your injuries are less severe than your treating physician believes or that you have reached “maximum medical improvement” and no longer need treatment.

In Massachusetts, an unfavorable IME report can result in the insurer cutting off your PIP (Personal Injury Protection) payments for ongoing treatment, forcing you to either stop treatment or pay out of pocket.

Insurance companies also station investigators in IME parking lots to film you walking to and from the appointment, looking for any movement that contradicts your injury claims.

Tactic 6: Claim Valuation Software

Many major insurers use automated software programs, the most well-known being Colossus, to calculate settlement offers. These programs analyze diagnostic codes and treatment data to generate a claim value, but they are designed to systematically undervalue claims.

Adjusters can manipulate the output by entering lower-value diagnostic codes, marking your prognosis as “resolved” even when your records show ongoing treatment, and excluding high-value settlements from the benchmark database. The software is particularly poor at valuing pain and suffering, emotional distress, and other non-economic damages that do not have a simple dollar figure attached to them.

More than half of all insurance claims in the United States are processed through Colossus or similar systems. If the adjuster’s offer seems disconnected from the severity of your injuries, software-generated valuation is likely the reason.

Tactic 7: The Pre-Existing Condition Defense

One of the most common tactics is arguing that your injuries existed before the collision. If you have ever mentioned back pain, neck pain, headaches, or any other complaint to a doctor at any point in your life, the insurer will use it to argue that your current injuries are not new.

Massachusetts law directly addresses this through the eggshell plaintiff doctrine, established in Wallace v. Ludwig, 292 Mass. 251 (1935). Under this rule, a defendant is responsible for all injuries caused when their negligence combines with a pre-existing condition to cause greater harm. If a collision aggravates a prior condition or makes a dormant condition symptomatic, the at-fault driver is liable for the full extent of the resulting injury.

Additionally, under M.G.L. c. 175, Section 108, an insurer must provide “documented evidence of specific instances of actual treatment or observation” of the pre-existing condition before denying a claim on that basis. A vague reference to a prior complaint is not enough.

Tactic 8: Social Media Surveillance

Insurance companies actively monitor claimants’ social media accounts. Adjusters and investigators review Facebook, Instagram, TikTok, and other platforms looking for photos, videos, or posts that they can use to contradict your injury claims.

A photo of you smiling at a family gathering can be used to argue you are not in pain. A vacation photo posted during your treatment period can be presented as evidence that your injuries are not limiting your activities. Even posts that have nothing to do with physical activity can be taken out of context.

In one documented Massachusetts case, an insurer used gym workout posts during settlement negotiations, even though the claimant’s own doctor had recommended exercise as part of physical therapy. In another, a woman injured on I-495 posted Disney World photos months after knee surgery, which the insurer used to minimize her claim.

The safest approach while your claim is open: do not post on social media about your activities, your injuries, or your case. Adjust your privacy settings and ask family members not to tag you in photos.

Tactic 9: Exploiting Comparative Negligence

Massachusetts follows a modified comparative negligence rule under M.G.L. c. 231, Section 85. If you are found 51% or more at fault, you recover nothing. Even below that threshold, your recovery is reduced by your percentage of fault.

Adjusters exploit this by framing questions during recorded statements and conversations to get you to accept partial blame. They may argue you failed to take evasive action, were following too closely, were distracted, or violated a traffic law. Even a small admission of fault gives the insurer leverage to reduce your settlement by 20%, 30%, or more.

This is one of the most important reasons to speak with an attorney before talking to the insurance company. Seemingly innocent statements can be used to shift fault in ways that dramatically reduce your compensation.

Your Rights Under Massachusetts Law

Massachusetts has powerful laws designed to protect injury victims from these exact tactics. If you believe an insurer is acting in bad faith, you have legal options that carry serious consequences for the insurer.

M.G.L. c. 176D: Unfair Claim Settlement Practices

Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 176D, Section 3(9) defines 14 specific unfair claim settlement practices that insurers are prohibited from engaging in. The most commonly violated provisions include:

Failing to settle promptly when liability is reasonably clear (Section 3(9)(f)), the most frequently invoked provision
Failing to promptly acknowledge communications (Section 3(9)(b))
Failing to adopt reasonable standards for prompt investigation (Section 3(9)(c))
Refusing to pay claims without a reasonable investigation (Section 3(9)(d))
Compelling claimants to file lawsuits by offering substantially less than ultimately recovered (Section 3(9)(g))
Failing to provide a reasonable explanation for claim denials (Section 3(9)(n))

M.G.L. c. 93A: The Consumer Protection Remedy

When an insurer violates Chapter 176D, the injured person can pursue a claim under M.G.L. c. 93A, Section 9, Massachusetts’ consumer protection statute. The process requires sending a written demand letter to the insurer describing the unfair practice. The insurer then has 30 days to make a reasonable written settlement offer.

If the insurer fails to respond reasonably, the penalties are severe:

Double or triple damages: If the court finds the violation was willful or knowing, it must award at least double and up to triple the actual damages
Mandatory attorney’s fees: The prevailing claimant recovers reasonable attorney’s fees and costs, one of the few Massachusetts claims where this is guaranteed

What Bad Faith Costs Insurers: Real Massachusetts Cases

In the landmark case Rhoades v. AIG Domestic Claims, Inc., 461 Mass. 486 (2012), the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court awarded $22 million in 93A damages against AIG for bad faith failure to settle a trucking accident case. AIG knew liability was clear but delayed offering policy limits for two years. The original jury verdict was $9.4 million. The SJC doubled it under Chapter 93A.

This case established that 93A damages are calculated on the full underlying judgment, not merely the interest lost during the delay. The message to insurers is clear: bad faith in Massachusetts carries catastrophic financial exposure.

How to Protect Yourself

Based on the tactics described above, here are the most important steps to protect your claim:

Do not give a recorded statement without first consulting an attorney. You are not required to provide one to the at-fault driver’s insurer.
Do not sign a blanket medical authorization. Only authorize release of records specific to your collision-related treatment.
Do not accept a quick settlement offer. Early offers are almost always far below the true value of your claim, especially before the full extent of your injuries is known.
Do not post on social media about your collision, your injuries, or your activities while your claim is open.
Document everything. Keep records of all communications with the insurance company, including dates, times, and what was discussed.
Follow your doctor’s treatment plan. Gaps in treatment are one of the primary tools insurers use to devalue claims.
Consult a personal injury attorney before communicating with the insurance company. Represented claimants consistently recover significantly more than those who handle claims on their own.

Frequently Asked Questions

Do I have to give a recorded statement to the insurance company after an accident in Massachusetts?

No. You are not legally required to give a recorded statement to the at-fault driver’s insurance company. Adjusters may tell you it is routine or required, but it is not. Anything you say in a recorded statement becomes a permanent part of the claim file and can be used to reduce or deny your claim. Consult a personal injury attorney before agreeing to any recorded statement.

What is insurance bad faith in Massachusetts?

Insurance bad faith in Massachusetts occurs when an insurer violates M.G.L. c. 176D, Section 3(9), which defines 14 specific unfair claim settlement practices. Common violations include failing to settle when liability is reasonably clear, unreasonable delays in processing claims, and offering substantially less than what the claim is worth. Victims can pursue bad faith claims under M.G.L. c. 93A, which provides for double or triple damages plus attorney’s fees.

What can I do if my insurance claim is denied in Massachusetts?

If your personal injury insurance claim is denied in Massachusetts, you can file a complaint with the Massachusetts Division of Insurance, send a 93A demand letter to the insurer (which gives them 30 days to respond with a reasonable offer), and pursue a bad faith lawsuit if the denial was unreasonable. An attorney can evaluate whether the denial violates Massachusetts consumer protection laws.

Should I sign a medical authorization form from the insurance company?

No. Insurance companies often send broad medical authorization forms that give them access to your entire medical history, not just records related to your collision. This allows them to search for prior complaints to argue your injuries are pre-existing. You should only sign specific, time-limited authorizations that cover treatment related to your collision, and only after consulting with an attorney.

Can the insurance company spy on me in Massachusetts?

Yes. Insurance companies can legally hire private investigators to conduct surveillance in public places. They also monitor social media accounts including Facebook, Instagram, and TikTok. Investigators may film you at your home (from public areas), at medical appointments, and at IME exams. Anything you post online or do in public can be used to challenge your injury claims.

What are the penalties for insurance bad faith in Massachusetts?

Under M.G.L. c. 93A, if a court finds that an insurer’s violation of the unfair settlement practices law was willful or knowing, it must award at least double and up to triple the actual damages. The court must also award reasonable attorney’s fees and costs. In the landmark case Rhoades v. AIG, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court awarded $22 million in 93A damages for bad faith failure to settle a trucking accident case.

About the Author

Christopher Murphy, Esq. is the Managing Partner of Scalli Murphy Law in Everett, Massachusetts. Attorney Murphy has represented personal injury victims across Massachusetts since 1999 and has been recognized as a Massachusetts Super Lawyer in Personal Injury. He has helped thousands of clients and families recover compensation from insurance companies after car accidents, premises liability incidents, wrongful death cases, and other personal injury claims.

Contact Scalli Murphy Law

If an insurance company is pressuring you to accept a low offer, delaying your claim, or denying coverage you believe you are entitled to, we can help. Scalli Murphy Law has over 30 years of experience fighting insurance company tactics and holding insurers accountable under Massachusetts law.

Call 617-387-7000 or 1-833-933-HELP for a free consultation. There is no fee unless we recover for you.

Related Resources:

Share This Page: