Car accidents in California often involve complex legal issues, particularly when determining who is at fault. Unlike some states that follow a strict fault-based system, California applies a pure comparative negligence rule. This means that even if a driver is partially responsible for an accident, they can still recover damages, but their compensation is reduced based on their percentage of fault.
Understanding how comparative negligence works is crucial for car accident victims seeking compensation, as insurance companies often try to shift blame to minimize payouts.
How Comparative Negligence Works in California
Under California’s pure comparative negligence system, each party involved in an accident is assigned a percentage of fault. This percentage directly impacts how much compensation they can recover. For example, if you are found 20% at fault in an accident and your total damages amount to $100,000, you can still recover $80,000 (after a 20% reduction). If you are 60% at fault, you can still pursue compensation, but your recovery would be reduced to $40,000 (after a 60% reduction).
This differs from modified comparative negligence, used in some other states, where a plaintiff cannot recover damages if they are 50% or more at fault. In California, even if you are 99% at fault, you can still seek 1% of your damages.
Proving Fault in a Car Accident
Since fault is crucial in a comparative negligence claim, gathering evidence is essential. Insurance companies and courts look at various factors to determine each party’s degree of responsibility. Key evidence includes:
- Police Reports: Official accident reports often contain crucial details about the crash, including any traffic violations.
- Witness Statements: Testimonies from bystanders, passengers, or other drivers can help establish fault.
- Traffic Camera and Dashcam Footage: Video evidence can clearly show how the accident occurred.
- Accident Reconstruction: Experts may be used to analyze vehicle damage, skid marks, and road conditions to determine fault percentages.
Common Scenarios Where Comparative Negligence Applies
Many car accident cases in California involve shared fault, such as:
- Rear-End Collisions: While the rear driver is usually at fault, the front driver may share liability if they suddenly braked without reason or had non-functioning brake lights.
- Intersection Accidents: If two drivers claim to have had the right of way, both may share responsibility.
- Lane Change Accidents: If both drivers fail to check blind spots before merging, liability may be divided.
- Speeding and Distracted Driving: If one driver ran a red light but the other was texting and could have reacted sooner, the fault may be split.
How Comparative Negligence Affects Insurance Claims
Insurance companies use comparative negligence to reduce claim payouts by assigning more fault to the injured party. Adjusters may argue that you were distracted, speeding, or not following traffic laws to lower their liability. Because of this, working with an experienced car accident lawyer is critical to protecting your right to fair compensation.
Local Accident Reports
If you were injured in a car accident in California, understanding comparative negligence is essential to maximizing your recovery. The nationwide car accident lawyers at Local Accident Reports can help you fight against unfair blame and negotiate for the compensation you deserve. Contact us today at (888) 657-1460 for a free consultation.