Comparative negligence

In plain English: comparative negligence is a rule that reduces your compensation by the percentage of the accident that was your fault. If you're found 20% responsible, your award is cut by 20%.

A simple example

The main versions in the US

• Pure comparative negligence: you can recover something even if you were mostly at fault. At 90% to blame, you still recover 10%. California and New York use this approach.
• Modified comparative negligence (50% bar): you recover nothing if you're 50% or more at fault.
• Modified comparative negligence (51% bar): you recover nothing if you're more than 50% at fault. This is the most common version.
• Contributory negligence: a handful of places, including Alabama, Maryland, North Carolina, Virginia and Washington, D.C., can bar recovery if you were even slightly at fault. See contributory negligence.

In the UK and Canada

England, Wales and the Canadian provinces use apportionment, which works like pure comparative negligence, but the term used is "contributory negligence". Not wearing a seatbelt is the classic example: in England, courts have long reduced damages, typically by up to 25%, when a seatbelt would have prevented or reduced the injuries.

How fault percentages are decided

By the evidence: the police report, photos, vehicle damage, witnesses, dashcam or CCTV, and traffic rules. Insurers often start negotiations by claiming you share some of the blame, because every percentage point comes straight off what they pay. Don't agree to a fault split on the phone.

Related: comparative vs contributory negligence · fault · negligence.

Related terms