Comparative Fault in California: How Shared Blame Affects Personal Injury Compensation
- Under California’s pure comparative fault system, you can pursue compensation even if you are partly to blame for an accident.
- Although compensation is reduced based on your percentage of fault, it is often still worth pursuing a claim.
- The experienced personal injury attorneys at OakTree Law help clarify fault, challenge unfair insurance assessments, and handle your case with ZERO up-front fees.
Many Californians make a big—and potentially costly—mistake when it comes to understanding available compensation after an accident. They think that if they are partially at fault for the incident, they aren’t entitled to a settlement. But under California’s comparative negligence rules, victims can pursue compensation, even if they played a role in what happened.
Here’s what you need to know about California accident fault laws.
What Is Comparative Negligence in California?
Comparative negligence (also called comparative fault) is a legal rule used to divide responsibility when two or more people are at partial fault in a personal injury claim. Instead of assigning blame to one person, fault is shared based on each party’s actions.
California follows something known as a pure comparative fault system. That means you can pursue compensation despite being assigned a significant portion of the blame. Even if you are primarily responsible for a shared fault car accident, you may still have a claim based on your percentage of fault in a car accident in California.
How Comparative Fault Affects Settlements
So, does partial fault reduce your settlement under California accident fault laws? Yes, it does. Each party in the accident receives proportional damages based on their assigned fault percentage. For example:
- If your total damages are valued at $100,000
- And you are found 20% at fault
- You are eligible for reduced compensation—20% less than the full damages
In a 50/50 fault accident in California, each party has a 50% apportionment of damages available. And even if you are held 99% responsible for what occurred, you can still claim 1% of your damages.
Examples of Shared Fault
If you’re shouldering a lot of the blame and wondering, “Can I still get compensation if I was partially at fault for an accident?”, it can help to look at some common examples where liability apportionment comes into play.
Car Accidents
Imagine a shared fault car accident—one driver was speeding, and the other made an unsafe lane change. Both actions contributed to the crash.
Following California comparative negligence, each driver carries a percentage of fault, and neither driver is automatically prevented from pursuing a claim.
Slip and Fall Accidents
A shopper slips and falls on a wet grocery store floor while looking at his phone. If the store failed to place warning signs around the spill, that could constitute a breach of its duty of care, because businesses must keep their premises reasonably safe for customers.
The shopper’s injury must also be linked to that breach. This is known as causation in negligence law. However, because the shopper was distracted and not watching where he was walking, his own conduct may have contributed to the fall. Under California accident fault laws, both parties can share responsibility for the accident.
Common Misconceptions About Shared Fault
Whether you have been injured in a:
- Car accident
- Bus, motorcycle, or truck accident
- Bike or pedestrian accident
- Slip and fall or other property incident
- Dog bite or animal attack
It’s easy to misunderstand how California’s comparative fault rules apply to your situation. You might think:
“If I am mostly at fault, it’s not worth pursuing a claim.”
Not necessarily. Between property damages, medical care, lost wages, and other accident damages, your financial losses may be significant. Even recovering a reduced percentage can be helpful.
“I admitted fault, so I have no case.”
Fault is assessed based on evidence, not on a single statement. Acknowledging fault does not automatically prevent you from pursuing compensation.
“The insurance companies will decide fault fairly.”
Insurance companies are the ones who make the payouts in accident claims. So, in a car accident with both drivers at fault, who pays in California often becomes a question of how much each insurer will pay. Insurers often try to shift the negligence allocation so their portion of the settlement is reduced.
The Impact of Shared Fault on Your Settlement
In a shared fault car accident or other incident, your share of the blame directly impacts the reduction of your settlement. While California’s comparative negligence system doesn’t eliminate your right to seek damages, insurance companies have a financial incentive to shift as much of the fault to the “other” party/parties as possible.
Under California accident fault laws, fighting to make sure you receive a fair and accurate apportionment of fault is critical to securing a just and appropriate settlement.
When Speaking With an Attorney Can Help
Accidents and their aftermath can be overwhelming. Questions about fault, compensation, and what steps to take next make a difficult situation even more stressful.
Seeking guidance from a trusted legal team can help you confidently assess whether to pursue a case and ensure you are doing what you should to protect your interests. Dealing with insurance companies, understanding the nuances of California’s comparative fault rules, and making informed decisions can feel much more manageable with an experienced attorney by your side.
If you’ve been injured in an accident, schedule your FREE case evaluation with OakTree Law. Our team has secured over $500 million in relief for clients throughout Southern California. Let us help you move forward with clarity and confidence.