AI tools usually work like this: you enter details about the crash and your injuries, and the tool returns a rough number based on patterns from past cases. That can provide clarity—but it can also oversimplify what actually drives value in real disputes.
In Anderson, insurers often scrutinize:
- Where the crash occurred (intersection vs. open roadway, visibility, lighting, traffic control)
- Whether the rider’s injuries match the reported mechanism
- How quickly treatment began and whether medical notes describe objective findings
- Evidence availability—and whether it supports the narrative you’re giving
If your situation involves uncertain fault, delayed symptom documentation, or gaps in medical records, an AI estimate can end up too low or too high. The number isn’t “wrong” mathematically—it’s just not seeing the same evidence an adjuster will.


