Can I recover compensation if I was partly responsible for a truck crash?
After a serious truck accident, fault is not always completely one-sided. Maybe you were driving slightly over the speed limit. Perhaps you changed lanes shortly before the collision, were distracted for a moment, or made another mistake that contributed to the crash. At the same time, the truck driver may have been speeding, following too closely, driving while fatigued, or operating a commercial vehicle unsafely.
If that describes your situation, being partly responsible does not necessarily prevent you from recovering compensation. California follows a comparative fault system that allows an injured person to pursue damages even when that person shares responsibility for the accident. The amount recovered, however, can be reduced according to the percentage of fault assigned to the injured party.
For people hurt in commercial vehicle collisions in Fontana and throughout San Bernardino County, determining those percentages can become one of the most important—and most heavily disputed—parts of a claim. An experienced Fontana truck accident lawyer can investigate the evidence and challenge attempts to place more blame on you than the facts support.
California Uses Pure Comparative Negligence
California’s approach to shared fault comes from the state’s pure comparative negligence doctrine. The California Supreme Court adopted this system in Li v. Yellow Cab Co., replacing the older rule that could completely bar someone from recovering damages merely because they contributed to an accident.
Under comparative negligence, responsibility for an accident can be divided among the people or companies whose conduct contributed to the resulting injuries. A victim’s compensation is then reduced according to his or her percentage of responsibility.
For example, suppose a truck accident causes $200,000 in recoverable damages. If the evidence ultimately establishes that the injured driver was 20% responsible and the trucking defendants were 80% responsible, the driver’s recovery could be reduced by 20%, leaving $160,000.
Importantly, California uses a pure comparative negligence system. Unlike states that prohibit recovery once someone reaches a particular percentage of fault, California permits recovery even when an injured plaintiff bears a substantial share of responsibility. California’s comparative fault principles are reflected in the state’s civil jury instructions, including instructions addressing a plaintiff’s own negligence.
More information about California’s current civil jury instructions is available through the Judicial Branch of California.
How Shared Fault Can Arise in a Truck Accident
Commercial truck crashes often involve competing allegations about what each driver did in the seconds leading up to impact. A trucking company’s insurer may argue that the passenger vehicle driver contributed to the collision by:
- Speeding;
- Following the truck too closely;
- Changing lanes without adequate clearance;
- Driving in a truck’s blind spot;
- Failing to yield;
- Entering traffic abruptly;
- Driving while distracted; or
- Failing to react quickly enough to changing traffic conditions.
Those allegations do not automatically establish fault. They are claims that should be tested against the physical evidence, witness accounts, electronic data, photographs, roadway conditions, and the actions of the commercial driver.
That distinction matters because trucking defendants have a financial reason to shift responsibility. Every additional percentage of fault successfully assigned to an injured person can reduce the amount the defendants may ultimately have to pay.
The Truck Driver May Have Violated Safety Rules Even If You Made a Mistake
A driver’s mistake should not distract from investigating what the truck driver and trucking company were doing before the collision.
Commercial vehicles present risks that ordinary passenger vehicles do not. Tractor-trailers can weigh many times more than a typical car, require substantially more distance to stop, and have significant blind spots. Drivers and motor carriers are therefore subject to extensive safety requirements.
A truck accident investigation may uncover evidence involving:
- Excessive speed;
- Unsafe following distance;
- Driver fatigue or hours-of-service violations;
- Distracted driving;
- Improper lane changes;
- Inadequate driver training;
- Unsafe hiring or retention practices;
- Brake, tire, lighting, or other maintenance problems;
- Overloaded or improperly secured cargo; or
- Pressure from a carrier or dispatcher to meet an unrealistic delivery schedule.
The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration maintains federal regulations governing numerous aspects of commercial motor vehicle operations, including driver qualifications, hours of service, vehicle inspection, maintenance, and cargo securement.
A seemingly minor mistake by a passenger vehicle driver therefore does not answer the larger question of why the crash occurred.
Fault Percentages Are Not Automatically Established at the Scene
Drivers sometimes assume that something written in a police report permanently determines liability. It does not.
A responding officer may document observations, statements, citations, roadway conditions, and an initial assessment of the collision. That report can become important evidence, but a civil truck accident claim can involve a much broader investigation.
Evidence may include:
- Truck electronic control module or engine data;
- Electronic logging device records;
- Dash-camera or surveillance footage;
- Cellphone records;
- GPS and fleet-management data;
- Driver qualification records;
- Maintenance and inspection documents;
- Dispatch communications;
- Photographs of vehicle damage and skid marks;
- Witness statements; and
- Accident reconstruction analysis.
That evidence can tell a much different story than the one presented immediately after a crash.
Be Careful About Accepting the Insurance Company’s Version of Fault
One of the more difficult issues after a truck accident is that an injured person may be discussing liability with an insurer before all of the relevant evidence has even been obtained.
An adjuster might say that you were “mostly at fault” or suggest that a particular driving decision makes your claim weak. That assessment is not a binding legal determination.
In a high-value truck accident claim, assigning fault is directly tied to how much the insurer or trucking company may be required to pay. A statement made casually during an early phone call can also become part of the insurer’s effort to argue that you share responsibility.
For that reason, it is generally wise to avoid guessing about speeds, distances, timing, or exactly what you could have done differently when speaking with an opposing insurer. The available evidence should be evaluated before conclusions are drawn.
What Compensation Can I Recover If I Share Fault?
The categories of damages potentially available do not disappear merely because you contributed to the collision. Depending on the circumstances, a truck accident claim may include compensation for losses such as:
- Emergency treatment and hospitalization;
- Surgery and rehabilitation;
- Future medical care;
- Lost wages;
- Reduced future earning ability;
- Pain and suffering;
- Emotional distress;
- Disability or physical impairment; and
- Other accident-related losses.
The key issue is that the overall award can be reduced according to the injured person’s established percentage of responsibility.
Consider a more significant truck accident resulting in $750,000 in damages. If the injured driver is determined to have been 10% responsible, the potential recovery attributable to those damages could be reduced by $75,000. If that driver’s share of responsibility rises to 30%, the reduction becomes $225,000.
In cases involving catastrophic injuries, relatively small changes in fault percentages can therefore represent substantial amounts of money.
More Than Two Parties May Share Responsibility
Truck accident cases also differ from many ordinary vehicle collisions because responsibility may extend beyond the two drivers.
Depending on how the crash occurred, potentially responsible parties can include:
- The commercial truck driver;
- The trucking or motor carrier company;
- A company responsible for loading cargo;
- A maintenance or repair contractor;
- A vehicle or component manufacturer; or
- Another driver who contributed to the collision.
Investigating every potentially responsible party is particularly important when the defense claims that the injured person caused part of the accident. Evidence may show that several separate acts of negligence combined to create the dangerous situation.
What If I Think I Was Mostly Responsible?
You should not necessarily assume that your own assessment of the accident is legally correct.
People involved in traumatic collisions often remember only portions of what happened. A driver might know that he or she changed lanes shortly before impact but have no way of knowing that the truck driver had already exceeded permitted driving hours, was looking at a phone, or failed to brake despite having several seconds to react.
Likewise, someone may assume responsibility because an insurer confidently says the accident was his or her fault.
Liability should be determined from evidence—not from an injured person’s immediate impression of a chaotic event.
Preserving Evidence Can Be Especially Important in a Shared-Fault Case
Commercial trucking companies routinely generate records that may help establish how and why a collision occurred. Some information may eventually be overwritten, deleted in the ordinary course of business, or otherwise become difficult to obtain.
When liability is disputed, promptly identifying and preserving relevant evidence can be crucial. Depending on the case, an attorney may seek records involving the truck’s electronic systems, driver logs, dispatch communications, inspection history, maintenance, company policies, and onboard camera footage.
The goal is not simply to prove that the truck driver made a mistake. It is to reconstruct the collision accurately enough to determine how much responsibility should actually be assigned to each party.
Do Not Wait Too Long to Investigate a California Truck Accident
California also imposes filing deadlines on personal injury lawsuits. Under California Code of Civil Procedure § 335.1, an action for injury caused by another person’s wrongful act or neglect is generally subject to a two-year limitations period. Certain claims and circumstances can involve different or shorter deadlines.
The practical reason to act promptly can be just as important as the legal deadline. Trucking evidence, surveillance video, witness memories, and electronic records may become harder to obtain as time passes.
Talk to Banner Attorneys About a Fontana Truck Accident
If a trucking company or insurer claims that you were partly responsible for a collision, that does not mean your case is over. California law allows fault to be divided among multiple parties, and the percentage assigned to you can have a major effect on the value of your claim.
At Banner Attorneys, our legal team can investigate how the collision occurred, identify potentially responsible parties, preserve relevant trucking evidence, and challenge unsupported attempts to shift blame onto you.
If you were injured in a commercial truck accident in Fontana or elsewhere in Southern California, contact Banner Attorneys to discuss your case and the options that may be available to you.
Frequently Asked Questions About Shared Fault in California Truck Accidents
Can I recover money if I was 50% responsible for a truck accident in California?
Potentially, yes. California follows pure comparative negligence, meaning an injured person can still recover compensation even when he or she shares substantial responsibility for a crash. The recovery is generally reduced according to the percentage of fault assigned to that person.
What if the truck driver’s insurance company says the accident was my fault?
An insurance company’s liability determination is not necessarily the final word. Fault can be evaluated using physical evidence, electronic truck data, video footage, witness testimony, driver records, and other information obtained during an investigation.
Can both the truck driver and trucking company be responsible?
Yes. Depending on the facts, liability may involve the driver as well as the motor carrier or other companies involved in the truck’s operation, maintenance, or cargo. Truck accident cases sometimes involve several responsible parties.
Will a traffic ticket prove that I was responsible for the crash?
Not automatically. A citation may become relevant evidence, but fault in a civil injury claim depends on the complete circumstances surrounding the accident. Other evidence may show that the truck driver or another party also contributed significantly to the collision.
Should I give the trucking company’s insurer a recorded statement if fault is disputed?
It is wise to be cautious. Statements about speed, distance, timing, distraction, or what you believe you could have done differently may later be used in arguments about comparative fault. You may want to speak with an attorney before providing a detailed recorded statement to an opposing insurer.
Client Review
“I cannot say enough about Brian Banner and his law firm! He took such great care of us. I would highly recommend Brian and his law firm for anyone that has been in an accident.”
––Heather B., YELP REVIEW