Why the first number is rarely the real number
Insurance adjusters routinely open negotiations with a conservative figure, expecting a counteroffer. Accepting that first offer typically closes the claim permanently — there's generally no going back to ask for more later, even if additional injuries or costs surface afterward.
Two separate levers, often blurred together
In a Michigan car accident claim, an adjuster genuinely has two distinct arguments available, and it's worth keeping them straight. The first is fault percentage: push your share above 50%, and your noneconomic damages are barred under MCL 600.2959. The second, entirely separate, is the serious impairment threshold: argue your injury doesn't meet that standard, and noneconomic damages are unavailable regardless of fault — even at 0% fault for the accident itself.
The threshold argument doesn't need a high fault number
This is the one worth watching for: an adjuster doesn't need to argue you were at fault at all to deny pain and suffering on a car accident claim. If they can argue your injury doesn't meet the "objectively manifested impairment" standard under MCL 500.3135, that alone keeps noneconomic damages off the table — a genuinely different argument from a fault dispute, and one that can surface even in a clear liability case.
High fault doesn't zero out the whole claim
On the other side, it's worth remembering that even a high fault percentage doesn't end a Michigan claim the way it would in most other 51%-bar states. Economic damages keep being paid, just reduced, however high the fault percentage climbs — so a first offer of $0 total, premised purely on a high fault allocation, isn't automatically the correct number even in a genuinely high-fault scenario.
The baseline still applies
None of this changes the ordinary approach to a first offer: compare it against a complete, well-documented account of your actual damages before deciding whether to accept or counter, since the decision is generally final once made.