Most AI-style tools estimate based on injury severity and a few general loss categories. That can be useful as a starting point, but Woodstock claims often hinge on details that online tools can’t reliably account for, such as:
- Where the crash occurred (turn lanes, merging areas, school-zone-adjacent routes, or commercial driveways)
- Whether the truck was hauling cargo that required special handling/documentation
- What the driver and company records say about speed, braking, and lane positioning
- How quickly you got evaluated and treated after the crash (which can matter when insurers dispute causation)
In other words: the “average” outcome is rarely your outcome. In Illinois, insurers may reduce offers if they believe fault is shared or if they argue injuries were unrelated or exaggerated. That’s why a tool can’t replace a case-specific review.


