Is there any impact of comparative negligence in car accident settlement?
The lack of comparative negligence is another legal rule that is of great importance, especially in assessing the number of car accident settlements. If you are injured in a car accident, knowledge of this principle becomes crucial. The comparative negligence system of law allows the responsibility of an accident to be split among the parties involved.
This means that whenever a driver is to some extent responsible for an occurrence of an accident, his compensation shall be proportionate to the extent of negligence. This system is different from contributory negligence where any fault on the part of the injured person will entirely effect out a recovery of damages. Comparative negligence is very important for every person involved in car accidents since it determines the amount of compensation that can be recovered.
How Is Negligence Determined?
In making a comparative negligence determination insurers and the court scrutinize the various parties to the accident. They take into account all aspects of the accident including traffic regulations, the state of the road and behavior of other individuals that were on that road prior to the occurrence of the accident. For instance, if one driver was driving at maximum speed while the other did not give way at the junction the two are both to blame. In civil cases witnesses and police stories are collected and analyzed to decide to what extent negligence should be attributed to the parties.
How does it affect the amount of compensation you get?
Comparative negligence is rather close to contributing negligence and the extent of difference is enough to affect the amount of money you may get when the car accident has been settled. Even in situations where you are partially to blame you will be expected to contribute in proportion to the percentage of blame attributed to you.
For instance, in the case whereby the total damages have been assessed at a given value and in the process of the court’s ruling you are considered to have contributed to the accident by a certain percentage, your indemnity shall be cut at that percentage. That is why control over your RLI is vital for determining the extent of possible settlement accurately.
What Are the Types of Comparative Negligence?
There are two main types of comparative negligence: There are two main categories of comparative negligence to include pure comparative negligence and modified comparative negligence. In pure comparative negligence a plaintiff can recover no matter how much the percentage of blame is his or hers.
And this means that if a person is 90% at fault in the accident he or she can claim 10% of the damages. In contrast, modified comparative negligence establishes a bar that is normally 50% or 51% for instance. If a party is determined to be more than the established sixty percent at fault, then that party will not be entitled to recovery. It would be helpful to know which type applies in your jurisdiction in order to temper or set your sights right on what one should expect or plan on in the way of a settlement.
Conclusion
Comparative negligence is one of the causes that impact car accident compensation packages. Having an insight on the working of negligence and the ways in which it affects the settlement price, can be beneficial to anybody that is involved in an accident.
Comparing the issue of comparative negligence is an issue that may not be easy to understand and appreciate by most of the people involved in the social reengineering process, however, once people take their time to seek advice and consultation on the best way to handle the case in an attempt to seek a favorable solution for the settlement process then they would be in a good position to go ahead and appreciate the means of handling the case since it is legal.
