Accident Evidence Dossier & Attorney Consultation Desk

Organize chronological incident events, log medical/vehicle losses, compare insurance coverage limits, and generate tailored attorney consultation questions. All records remain 100% private in your local browser.

✓ Zero Server Upload ⚖ Client Preparation Framework 📄 Printable Dossier Export

👁 Chronological Evidence Dossier & Analysis

Synthesized evidence ledger with calculated insurance coverage gap
Export Dossier (.TXT)
Total Documented Losses
$18,450
Med: $9,650 • Auto: $8,800
Adverse BI Coverage Deficit
-$0
Adverse BI: $15,000 vs Med: $9,650
Consultation Urgency
HIGH
Disputed fault + Underinsured risk

Chronological Chain of Events

Chronologically sorted by event date
Dossier synchronized. 6 chronology events loaded.

When Should You Consult a California Auto Incident Lawyer?

Clear criteria to evaluate whether self-handling a property claim suffices, or if legal representation is vital to protect against medical debt liens and adverse adjuster tactics.

1. Disputed Liability or Amber Light Collisions

California follows pure comparative negligence (NLG v. County of Los Angeles). Even if an adverse insurer claims you were 20% or 30% at fault for not braking fast enough or entering an intersection, that directly cuts your recovery. An attorney subpoenas signal timing data, dashcams, and nearby surveillance before it loops over.

2. Bodily Injury Exceeding Statutory Minimums

California's historic minimum bodily injury liability was just $15,000 per person ($30k per accident), recently adjusted under SB 1107. A single ambulance ride and ER evaluation can exhaust this limit. When injuries exceed the at-fault driver's policy, a lawyer must coordinate UIM claims and negotiate hospital hospital lien reductions.

3. Recorded Statements & Early Release Traps

Adverse adjusters often call within 48 to 72 hours asking for a "quick recorded statement" or offering a $500 to $1,500 nuisance check in exchange for signing a general release. You are not legally required to provide a recorded statement to the adverse driver's insurer, and signing a release forfeits rights to future medical care.

Understanding California Auto Accident Damage Ledgers and Underinsured Motorist Offset Calculations

How do adverse liability limits, first-party Medical Payments, and California statutory underinsured motorist offsets interact when organizing accident losses?

This interactive preparation desk tallies chronological expenses across medical treatment, auto body repairs, and incidental losses to evaluate exposure against insurance policy limits. Under California law, bodily injury claims operate under strict setoff rules rather than cumulative coverage stacking, and statutory minimums have evolved under Senate Bill 1107. The desk maps entered incident facts to specific claim risks—such as the six-month deadline for municipal entities—to help drivers prepare structured records before consulting an attorney.

The workbench operates purely as a local client-side organizational aid and does not substitute for formal legal analysis. It models simplified arithmetic offsets without accounting for hospital lien perfection under California Civil Code § 3040, comparative fault reductions under NLG v. County of Los Angeles, health insurance subrogation rights, or mandatory arbitration timing under Insurance Code § 11580.2.

Try a worked example

In the left panel under '2. Policy Limits', notice the adverse bodily injury limit is set to $15,000 while the preset medical bills total $9,650, showing an adverse BI deficit of $0. If you switch to '3. Add Event' and log an additional medical event of $10,000 (raising medical damages to $19,650), the desk immediately updates the 'Adverse BI Coverage Deficit' card to -$4,650 and adds a red-flagged consultation question addressing Underinsured Motorist (UIM) protocol.

California Underinsured Motorist (UIM) Statutory Offset and Non-Stacking

Under California Insurance Code § 11580.2(p)(4), the maximum liability of an insurer providing underinsured motorist coverage cannot exceed the insured's UIM limits minus the amount paid by or on behalf of the legally liable party. California explicitly prohibits inter-policy and multi-vehicle stacking pursuant to § 11580.2(q). California Insurance Code § 11580.2

Furthermore, § 11580.2(p)(3) mandates that underinsured motorist coverage does not apply until bodily injury liability policy limits across all liable vehicles have been completely exhausted through formal payment of judgments or settlements. California Insurance Code § 11580.2

California Minimum Financial Responsibility Limits Under SB 1107

California Senate Bill 1107 amended Vehicle Code §§ 16056, 16430, and 16451, establishing that effective January 1, 2025, minimum liability requirements increased from $15,000/$30,000/$5,000 to $30,000 for injury or death of one person, $60,000 for injury or death of two or more persons, and $15,000 for property damage per accident. California SB 1107 (Chapter 717, Statutes of 2022)

Public Entity Presentation Timelines

When a crash involves a city, county, school district, or state department vehicle or roadway defect, California Government Code § 911.2(a) requires presentation of a written tort claim not later than six months after the accrual of the cause of action, well ahead of the general two-year personal injury limitation statute. California Government Code § 911.2

Sources and further reading

Coverage arithmetic, model limits, and question-state behavior

Read the explanation

This saved accident preparation desk uses hypothetical entered records and simplified arithmetic, not verified insurance coverage or legal advice. The sample medical costs are forty-eight fifty, sixteen hundred, and thirty-two hundred dollars, totaling nine thousand six hundred fifty. The property estimate is eighty-eight hundred, so total entered damages are eighteen thousand four hundred fifty. Lowering the opposing bodily injury limit from fifteen thousand to five thousand makes the coverage-gap card show a forty-six hundred fifty dollar deficit. Yet the ledger subtracts both that limit and five thousand of Med-Pay, so its simplified medical exposure remains zero. The two outputs answer different arithmetic questions, not a verified payout determination. Keep the medical total fixed at nine thousand six hundred fifty and the opposing limit at five thousand. Changing Med-Pay from five thousand to one thousand makes ledger medical exposure thirty-six hundred fifty. At zero Med-Pay it becomes forty-six hundred fifty. Adding a hypothetical one hundred dollar other expense raises the total exposure to forty-seven hundred fifty. The gap card stays forty-six hundred fifty throughout because it ignores Med-Pay and other expenses. The source also leaves the UIM limit out of this exposure equation, and its property calculation subtracts the opposing property limit without applying the displayed collision deductible. These are source-model limits, not statements about real policy coordination or entitlement. Consultation question checkboxes are presentation state. Marking a question discussed changes that card appearance, but any recomputation rebuilds the question list with unchecked inputs. The text dossier includes every generated question, regardless of whether it was marked discussed. Likewise, consultation priority is a simple branch rule. The default sample is High because disputed liability and a requested statement are both enabled. Turning those off with no arithmetic deficit returns Moderate. A government-entity checkbox takes precedence and displays Urgent, including a source-authored deadline claim. That deadline is not verified here. Use the outputs to understand the saved tool, and ask a qualified professional about the actual facts and applicable rules.

Enjoy this tool? Build your own with Super