Navigating Comparative Fault In California Auto Accidents

---

What Is Comparative Fault In California Auto Accidents?

In California auto accidents, comparative fault refers to the legal principle that determines the percentage of fault assigned to each party involved in an accident. California follows a pure comparative fault system, meaning that each party’s responsibility for the accident is assessed as a percentage, and any damages awarded are reduced in proportion to the claimant’s share of fault.

For example, if you’re found to be 30% at fault for an accident and the other party is 70% at fault, you can still recover damages, but your award will be reduced by 30%. This system allows even someone who is mostly at fault to recover damages, though the amount would be significantly reduced.

In cases where both drivers may have contributed to the collision by attempting to change lanes simultaneously, the court or jury would evaluate the actions of each party and assign a percentage of fault to each. The final compensation each party can receive would then reflect their degree of fault.

What Are The Differences Between Pure And Modified Comparative Fault?

The key difference between pure comparative fault and modified comparative fault lies in how they handle a plaintiff’s share of responsibility in an accident:

Under pure comparative fault, a plaintiff can recover damages even if they are partially at fault for the accident, regardless of the percentage of fault. For example, if the plaintiff is 30% at fault, they can still recover 70% of the damages. This applies even if the plaintiff is 99% at fault—they can still recover 1% of their damages.

On the other hand, modified comparative fault has a threshold, typically either 50% or 51%. If the plaintiff’s fault exceeds this threshold, they are barred from recovering any damages. In a 50% modified comparative fault system, if the plaintiff is 50% or more at fault, they cannot recover damages. In a 51% modified comparative fault system, the plaintiff can only recover damages if they are 50% or less at fault.

Put a little more succinctly, in pure comparative fault systems like California’s, plaintiffs can always recover damages, albeit at a reduced rate. In modified comparative fault systems, plaintiffs lose the right to recover if their fault surpasses the set limit.

What Evidence Can I Use To Assess Comparative Fault?

The evidence used to assess comparative fault in an accident typically includes:

Police Reports

These provide an official account of the accident, often detailing the officers’ observations and conclusions about fault.

Photographs

Images of the accident scene, vehicle damage, road conditions, and injuries help paint a clear picture of what happened.

Witness Testimony

Statements from people who saw the accident can provide valuable insight into the actions of both parties.

Measurements

Skid marks, vehicle positioning, and distances can be analyzed to determine speeds and impact points.

Expert Testimony

Accident reconstruction experts may be used to provide professional analysis of how the accident occurred and who is at fault.

Surveillance or Dashcam Footage

Video evidence from nearby cameras or dashcams can offer a clear view of the events leading to the accident.

How Can I Challenge An Unfair Fault Determination?

The best course of action to take when challenging an unfair determination of fault is to take the matter to court, where you can present your case to a jury. Here’s how the process typically works:

Review The Evidence

Go over the evidence used in the original determination, be it police reports, photos, or witness statements. As you do, identify any inaccuracies, missing information, or areas where fault may have been incorrectly assigned.

Gather Additional Evidence

Collect any new or previously overlooked evidence that supports your claim. This could include new witness testimony, accident reconstruction experts, or additional photos and videos of the accident scene.

Consult Legal Representation

It’s wise to consult with an attorney who specializes in auto accident cases. They can help you build a strong case and challenge the insurance company’s findings.

File A Lawsuit

If negotiations with the insurance company fail, you can file a lawsuit to take the case to trial. During the trial, you will present all evidence, including expert testimony, to demonstrate that the fault determination was incorrect or unfair.

Let The Jury Decide

The jury will review the evidence and decide whether the original fault determination was fair. If they find in your favor, the percentage of fault assigned to you can be reduced, which will increase your compensation.

What Impact Does Comparative Fault Have On Insurance Claims?

Comparative fault significantly influences how insurance claims are handled. When an insurance company evaluates a claim, they assess the degree of fault assigned to each party involved in the accident. If they determine that the claimant—the injured party—holds any responsibility, they may attempt to reduce their payout proportionally or deny the claim altogether.

If you’re found partially at fault, the insurance company will likely reduce the settlement amount by your percentage of fault. For instance, if you’re 30% at fault and the total damages are $100,000, you’d only receive $70,000. Insurance companies often use comparative fault as a leverage point to lower their offer. They might push for a low settlement, arguing that the claimant’s share of fault justifies a reduced payout.

Disagreements over fault often lead to lawsuits. If the parties can’t reach an agreement, the case may proceed to court, where a jury will determine each party’s level of fault.

Still Have Questions? Ready To Get Started?

For more information on Comparative Fault In California Auto Accidents, a free initial consultation is your next best step. Get the information and legal answers you are seeking by calling (626) 385-6303 today.

Get Help Now