In some accident cases, the fault is easy to assign. One person or company puts another life in danger through their negligence.

But there are cases where the liability isn’t so clear cut. One party may deserve most of the blame for causing an accident, and yet victims could also face some liability for their own injury.

Our team of esteemed personal injury attorneys will fight to make sure the victims of negligence are never unjustly blamed for their accidents. However, if victims must accept some legal responsibility for an accident, that won’t prevent them from collecting due compensation for their injury.

In instances where liability must be shared, our legal team will fight to make sure the percentage of blame shouldered by our client is as small as possible. This will enable an injury victim to secure a fair amount of support to aid in recovery.

COMPARATIVE NEGLIGENCE IN WASHINGTON ACCIDENT CASES

Washington follows the legal doctrine of “comparative negligence” when determining fault in an accident where more than one person shares responsibility. Comparative negligence means, for example, that two drivers who both committed traffic errors and collided can divide the liability for the accident.

Washington is a “pure” comparative negligence state. This means that one party could be forced to accept any amount from 1% up to 99% of the blame, and the remaining party or parties would assume the rest of the liability.

COMPARATIVE NEGLIGENCE EXAMPLES

An injured victim might not have been paying attention when walking into a hazardous area of a business. Yet, the property owner might also share in the blame for leaving a hazard for an unreasonable amount of time.

A pedestrian might cross the street outside a crosswalk and get hit by a car, but the driver might have been traveling too fast or might have been distracted by their phone.

These sorts of circumstances often create liability for both the victim and the defendants who contributed to the conditions that caused the injury. Each party could be assigned a percentage of liability. This would impact the settlement amount that the injured victim would receive. If the victim were to be 30% at fault, their award would be reduced by 30%.

INSURANCE TACTICS INVOLVING FAULT IN ACCIDENT CLAIMS

Insurance companies take advantage of any legal loopholes to benefit their annual profit margins. Insurance adjusters can pad the company’s pockets when they can get a victim to accept some blame in an accident.

Insurers may play this card even if a police accident report assigns no blame to the victim. The insurance adjuster simply hopes the victim doesn’t feel confident enough to fight back. An injury victim could, understandably, feel vulnerable after an accident and feel they must accept some fault to have any chance of earning compensation.

This “bad faith” behavior by an insurance company can reduce your settlement offer by thousands of dollars. Without a Hagens Berman personal injury attorney supporting your case, you could unknowingly fall victim to this predatory tactic.

CONTACT A SEATTLE PERSONAL INJURY ATTORNEY AT HAGENS BERMAN

You may think you were partly to blame for your accident, but you may be mistaken. Always talk with a legal professional, explain what happened, and find out just who should accept blame according to state law.

If an accident proves to be a case of shared liability, our dedicated attorneys will make sure you only have to accept a level of blame that’s fair. We will work to secure as much support as possible to shelter you during your injury recovery.

Contact the attorneys at Hagens Berman for a free and confidential case evaluation. We are ready to listen to you and immediately go to work to maximize your potential personal injury claim award.