GuidePersonal injuryPublished 5 min read
How to write a policy-limits demand letter in California
How to write a California policy-limits demand letter: confirming limits, the parts of the letter, damages under Howell, liens, delivery and the deadline.
By the PlaintiffStack team
A policy-limits demand offers to settle a claim for the full amount of the at-fault party's liability coverage. It is the right letter when liability is reasonably clear and the client's damages plainly exceed the coverage. It does two jobs at once: it asks for the money that is there, and it puts the carrier on notice that refusing a reasonable offer within limits may expose it to the whole judgment. California has recognized that exposure since Crisci v. Security Ins. Co. (1967) 66 Cal.2d 425.
A pre-suit demand with a deadline on an auto, homeowner or commercial premises policy is also a time-limited demand under Code of Civil Procedure sections 999 to 999.5, and has to meet that chapter's requirements. The CCP 999 guide has the checklist. This guide covers the letter itself. It is general information, not legal advice.
Before you draft: the three facts it rests on
A policy-limits demand is only as strong as three facts. Confirm each before anyone writes a word.
- The limits. Get the bodily injury limits in writing from the carrier. For auto policies issued or renewed on or after January 1, 2025, California's minimum liability limits are $30,000 per person and $60,000 per accident for bodily injury (Vehicle Code 16056); older policies may still carry the earlier $15,000 and $30,000 minimums. Look for other coverage too: umbrella or excess policies, a second vehicle's policy, an employer's policy if the driver was working, and the client's own underinsured motorist coverage.
- Liability. The police report, scene and vehicle photos, witness statements, and the carrier's liability acceptance if there is one.
- Damages above the limits. The specials alone, or the specials together with a credible account of general damages and future care.
Check for other claimants as well. A per-accident limit is shared by everyone hurt in the crash, and a demand for the per-person limit when several people were injured should account for them.
The parts of the letter
| Section | What it contains | Where it comes from in the file |
|---|---|---|
| Opening and label | Whom you represent, the insured, the claim number, and a statement that this is a time-limited demand under CCP 999.1 | Retainer, the carrier's acknowledgment |
| The offer | A clear offer to settle all claims for the limits, including satisfaction of all liens, for a complete release of the insureds | Coverage confirmation, lien list |
| Deadline and acceptance | The expiration date and time, how to accept, the method of transmission | Calendar |
| Facts of the loss | Date, location, how it happened, why the insured is at fault | Police report, photos, statements |
| Injuries and treatment | Every known injury and the course of care by provider and date | Medical chronology |
| Specials | Past medical expenses, future care, lost earnings | Billing ledger, wage records |
| General damages | Pain, limits on daily life, what the client can no longer do | Client interview, records, photos |
| Enclosures | An index of the records and bills enclosed | Records file |
Keep the offer in one short paragraph near the top, in plain words. The rest of the letter supports it; it shouldn't qualify it.
Building the damages section
Past medical expenses. Under Howell v. Hamilton Meats & Provisions, Inc. (2011) 52 Cal.4th 541, a plaintiff whose care was paid by insurance recovers no more than the amounts paid or still owed, not the higher billed amount a provider agreed to write down. Carriers apply that rule when they value a demand, so the specials figure should separate billed charges from amounts paid for insured care. Care provided on a lien, where the client still owes the full bill, is treated differently; note which providers treated on a lien. See Howell damages and specials.
Future care. Use the treating physician's recommendations in the records: a surgical consult, injections, ongoing therapy. A future-care figure with no recommendation behind it is easy to discount.
Lost earnings. An employer's wage verification, pay stubs or tax returns, and the dates off work tied to the records that took the client off work.
General damages. Concrete and specific: what the client did before the crash and can't do now, in the client's words and the records' words. See general damages.
Every number should trace to a page the carrier can find in the enclosures. The settlement calculator helps check whether the specials and the realistic range clear the limits.
Handling liens in the offer
Section 999.1(b) requires the offer to include the satisfaction of all liens. Before sending, list every lienholder you know of:
- Hospital liens noticed under Civil Code 3045.3.
- Medi-Cal, which must be notified within 30 days after a claim or action is filed (Welfare and Institutions Code 14124.73).
- Medicare conditional payments, which Medicare can recover from the entity that receives a settlement (42 U.S.C. 1395y(b)(2)).
- Health plan, ERISA plan and provider liens.
The usual approach is a statement that the client will satisfy all liens from the settlement proceeds. Carriers often ask for Medicare's status before paying, so start that process early. The lien reductions guide covers each type.
Delivering it and calendaring the deadline
- Send it to the insurer's designated address on the Department of Insurance list, or to the adjuster handling the claim (CCP 999.2(a)). Many firms send to both.
- Give at least 30 days from transmission by email, fax or certified mail, or 33 days by mail (CCP 999.1(a)). Give more when the records are long.
- Keep proof of transmission with the letter.
- Calendar the expiration and a reminder a week before.
- If the carrier asks for more information, answer in writing. A request for information or an extension is not by itself a rejection (CCP 999.3(b)). If the carrier declines, it must say so in writing, with its basis, before the demand expires (CCP 999.3(c)).
Why policy-limits demands fail
- The limits weren't confirmed, and the demand asked for the wrong number.
- The injuries described don't match the enclosed records, or a key record is missing.
- The specials total uses billed amounts the carrier will discount under Howell, with no explanation.
- A treatment gap or prior injury is left for the carrier to find. Address it in the letter.
- The release or the lien term is vague.
- The window was too short to review the records enclosed, and the carrier says so in writing.
Drafting a policy-limits demand in PlaintiffStack
PlaintiffStack's demand letter tool writes a policy-limits demand in the firm's voice from the case's own documents, on the firm's letterhead. Every fact cites the page it came from, so the attorney can check the injury list against the records in minutes. Facts the file doesn't contain are marked as fields to fill rather than guessed, and every change is a suggestion the reviewer accepts or dismisses.
The tool works from the treatment chronology and the missing records report, so gaps in the file show up before the letter does. Agents read searchable PDFs, Word and text files; scanned or faxed records aren't read yet, because there is no OCR. Each tool shows an estimated cost before it runs. After the demand goes out, a morning check flags offers and demands about to expire. See Draft and the personal injury page.
Questions firms ask
A written offer to settle an injury claim for the full amount of the at-fault party's liability coverage, usually sent when liability is clear and damages exceed the limits. In California, a pre-suit version with a deadline must also meet CCP 999.1.
If it is a time-limited demand under CCP 999, at least 30 days from transmission by email, fax or certified mail, or 33 days by mail. Firms often give longer when the enclosed records are extensive.
CCP 999.1(g) requires reasonable proof, which may include medical records or bills, sufficient to support the claim. Enclosing the records and bills the letter relies on, with an index, is the safest practice.
Howell v. Hamilton Meats (2011) limits recovery of past medical expenses to amounts paid or still owed, not billed amounts a provider agreed to write down. Carriers value demands that way, so separate billed from paid amounts.
Yes, for a time-limited demand under the statute. CCP 999.3(c) requires the insurer to notify the claimant in writing of its decision and the basis for it before the demand expires.
Sources
- Code of Civil Procedure section 999.1
- Code of Civil Procedure section 999.2
- Code of Civil Procedure section 999.3
- Vehicle Code section 16056
- Howell v. Hamilton Meats & Provisions, Inc. (2011) 52 Cal.4th 541
- Crisci v. Security Ins. Co. (1967) 66 Cal.2d 425
- Civil Code section 3045.3
- Welfare and Institutions Code section 14124.73
- 42 U.S.C. 1395y(b), Medicare secondary payer
General information about California and federal rules, not legal advice. Rules change and every case turns on its facts: check the statute and your own analysis before relying on a date or a figure.
Related
- Personal injury settlement calculatorFree tool
- Medicare lien procurement cost calculatorFree tool
- PlaintiffStack vs EvenUpComparison
- PlaintiffStack vs PrecedentComparison
- PlaintiffStack vs SupioComparison
- California time-limited demands: the CCP 999 requirements checklistGuide
- How to build a medical chronology for a personal injury caseGuide
- Medical lien reductions in California: hospital, Medi-Cal, Medicare and ERISAGuide
- How much does AI demand letter software cost? 2026 prices and modelsBuyer's guide
- California medical records request laws: Evidence Code 1158 and H&S 123110Guide
- California personal injury statute of limitations: deadlines by claim typeGuide
- California Government Claims Act: the six-month claim deadlineGuide
Run this work on one record. Thirty minutes, on your own case types.