Understanding Comparative Fault in Louisiana Car Accident Claims

Insurance companies look for ways to reduce payouts after a car accident, and comparative fault gives them the opening they’re looking for. Understanding comparative fault in Louisiana car accident claims helps injured people fight back. If an insurer argues that someone is partially at fault, it can lower the compensation it owes. Working with an attorney can help injured drivers challenge these claims and demand what they deserve.

What Is Comparative Fault?

Comparative fault divides liability among all involved parties based on their degree of responsibility. Louisiana follows a pure comparative fault system, meaning a person can recover damages even if they are mostly at fault. Their compensation is reduced in proportion to their fault percentage.

This system applies in car accident claims where multiple parties share blame, such as in multi-vehicle collisions or intersection crashes such as those prevalent at the intersection of O’Neal Lane and I-12 or the intersection of Nicholson Drive and West Lee Drive.

Unlike states that bar recovery if a person is more than 50% responsible, Louisiana allows claims regardless of fault percentage. This rule helps injured parties receive some compensation, even if they bear a large portion of responsibility for the accident.

How Comparative Fault Affects Compensation

A person’s percentage of fault directly affects their financial recovery. For example, if a driver is found to be 30% responsible for the accident, they can receive 70% of their total damages. This includes medical bills, lost wages, and vehicle repairs. Courts and insurance companies assign fault based on evidence like accident reports and video footage.

In some cases, liability disputes delay settlements, requiring claimants to present stronger evidence. Multi-vehicle accidents, hazardous road conditions, and unclear traffic signals often lead to complex fault determinations. Drivers should document the scene thoroughly to preserve evidence that can impact their compensation.

How Insurance Companies Use Comparative Fault

Adjusters review photo and video evidence to assess liability. They consider traffic laws, weather conditions, and vehicle damage. In Louisiana, road hazards like flooding or poor visibility can affect fault determinations. They also use certain tactics during this process, including:

• Shifting the blame. Insurers can argue that a driver could have avoided the crash, even when the other party was primarily responsible. This tactic is particularly common in Louisiana because of comparative fault. For example, an insurer might claim a driver hit by someone running a red light should have been more vigilant or reacted faster.
• Misusing evidence. Adjusters may rely on vague witness statements or incomplete police reports to increase the claimant’s fault percentage. Insurance companies often cherry-pick portions of evidence that support their position while downplaying contradictory information. They might emphasize a witness statement that mentions the driver was speeding while ignoring other statements that blame the other driver.
• Delaying, denying, and defending. Some companies delay claims, hoping a claimant will accept a lower settlement out of frustration. This strategy leverages the financial pressure many accident victims face while recovering from injuries. Insurers may request unnecessary documentation or move the claim to different adjusters. The longer the process takes, the more likely claimants become to accept unfavorable settlements.
• Disputing medical records. Insurers may claim injuries existed before the accident to minimize compensation. They often request years of prior medical records to search for any pre-existing conditions or similar complaints. Even when injuries are clearly related to the accident, adjusters may argue they are exaggerations or that treatment was excessive.

Some insurers consult accident reconstruction professionals when liability is unclear. A claimant can challenge an insurer’s decision by presenting stronger evidence, such as surveillance footage or professional testimony.

Why Do I Need an Attorney?

A skilled attorney can present evidence and argue for their client, especially for drivers who disagree with their fault percentage. They can help find new evidence to dispute the insurer’s findings, such as video footage or professional testimony.

A formal claim review may lead to an adjustment if the initial assessment was incorrect. If the insurer refuses to adjust the fault percentage, a claimant can file a case in a Louisiana district court for further review.

FAQs

Q: What Is the Comparative Fault Rule in Louisiana?

A: The comparative fault rule in Louisiana is used to divide responsibility for an accident among all involved parties. Louisiana follows a pure comparative fault system. This means a person can recover compensation even if they are mostly responsible for the accident. The amount they receive is reduced by their share of the fault. This rule applies to all personal injury and property damage claims involving shared responsibility.

Q: How Do Insurance Companies Determine Fault Percentages?

A: Insurance companies determine fault percentages based on physical evidence like police reports as well as witness statements. They analyze photos, video footage, and accident reconstructions performed by professionals. Adjusters may also use traffic laws to argue liability. In multi-vehicle crashes or bad weather conditions, they often allocate fault based on a driver’s reaction time or failure to adjust to road hazards.

Q: Can a Driver Challenge an Unfair Determination of Fault?

A: A driver can challenge an unfair determination of fault by providing new evidence. This may include additional witness statements or evidence like new video footage. A claimant can request a review from the insurance company or file a claim in court. If the insurer refuses to change the determination, legal action may be an effective option. A skilled attorney can gather proof and challenge the insurer’s conclusions.

Q: Does Comparative Fault Apply to Passengers in a Car Accident?

A: Comparative fault also applies to passengers in a car accident. If their actions contributed to an accident, then their compensation is reduced by their percentage of fault. Most passengers are not assigned fault unless they directly affect the driver’s ability to operate the vehicle safely. Actions like distracting the driver, grabbing the wheel, or failing to wear a seatbelt could all be considered contributions to an accident.

Avoid Unfair Blame

Recovering from a car accident takes time. Comparative fault laws affect how much compensation someone can receive, but they also protect injured people from losing everything over partial blame. Knowing how it works allows injured drivers to prepare for negotiations and legal proceedings. Schedule a consultation with Lee M. Schwalben, M.D., J.D., LLC, to prevent insurance companies from taking advantage of the law.