In California, including Pasadena, you can still pursue compensation for an accident even if you were partially at fault. The state follows a pure comparative negligence system, which means your compensation is reduced by your percentage of fault, not eliminated entirely. This system is designed to ensure that injured people can still recover the portion of damages caused by someone else’s negligence.
For anyone navigating this situation after a car crash, pedestrian injury, or other accident, understanding how fault is evaluated can help you make informed decisions moving forward.
Understanding Fault in Pasadena Accidents
Many people assume that if they contributed in any way to their accident, they’re automatically disqualified from recovering damages. In California, that is not the case. Pasadena accident claims—whether they involve traffic collisions, motorcycle wrecks, pedestrian injuries, bicycle accidents, or unsafe property conditions—are governed by California state law, not a special city-specific rule.
The core takeaway is simple: partial fault does not automatically prevent you from seeking compensation.
But how is fault actually determined? How does your percentage affect your settlement? And what should you expect when dealing with insurers who may try to shift blame onto you?
This guide breaks down everything you need to know in clear, straightforward language.
California Is a Pure Comparative Negligence State
California uses a system called pure comparative negligence, a rule established by the state’s Supreme Court in Li v. Yellow Cab Co. of California (1975). Under this rule, each party is responsible for damages according to their percentage of fault.
This means:
- If you were 20% at fault, your compensation is reduced by 20%.
- If you were 60% at fault, you can still recover 40% of your damages.
- Even if you were 99% at fault, you may still pursue 1% of your damages.
Many states cut off victims from recovering anything if they are 50% or more responsible. California does not.
This rule applies to:
- Car accidents
- Truck accidents
- Motorcycle collisions
- Bicycle and pedestrian crashes
- Rideshare incidents
- Slip-and-fall injuries
- Negligent property maintenance
- Dog bites
- And more
This legal structure is part of what makes California one of the most plaintiff-friendly states for accident victims.
Why Comparative Negligence Matters in Pasadena Accident Cases
Comparative negligence exists because accidents are rarely black-and-white.
Multiple factors may contribute, including:
- Speeding
- Distracted driving
- Unsafe lane changes
- Poor lighting
- Weather conditions
- Mechanical defects
- Failing to yield
- Inattention by pedestrians or cyclists
- Property owners failing to fix hazards
Because accidents often involve shared responsibility, California’s system ensures that victims can still pursue compensation for the part of the accident that wasn’t their fault.
This is especially important in California car crashes, which are common sources of dispute. If your case involves a vehicle accident, Tedford & Associates has a full practice area dedicated to helping Pasadena crash victims understand their options.
Examples of Partial Fault in Real-World Accident Scenarios
To understand how this works, here are common situations where an injured person may share fault—but can still pursue a claim:
Car Accident Scenarios
- You were hit by a speeding driver, but you were turning without signaling.
- A distracted driver rear-ended you, but your brake lights were malfunctioning.
- Another driver ran a red light, but you were distracted when entering the intersection.
Pedestrian or Bicycle Accidents
- A driver hit you in a crosswalk, but you stepped into the street while distracted.
- You were biking against traffic when a car made an unsafe turn.
Slip-and-Fall Accidents
- You slipped on a spill in a store, but you were wearing footwear with poor traction.
- A property owner failed to fix a dangerous step, but you were looking at your phone when walking.
Premises Liability Claims
- A loose railing caused a fall, but you leaned on it more forcefully than expected.
The key point: shared responsibility is common, and partial fault does not erase someone else’s negligence.
How Fault Is Determined in an Accident Claim
Fault allocation is not random, nor is it entirely controlled by insurance adjusters. Determining fault involves a detailed analysis of evidence and behavior.
Key Evidence Used to Evaluate Fault
- Police reports
- Eyewitness statements
- Traffic camera footage
- Surveillance video
- Photos of the accident scene
- Vehicle damage patterns
- Medical records
- Phone records (in distracted driving cases)
- Expert accident reconstruction
Insurers will attempt to use this evidence—sometimes selectively—to reduce payout. This is why many accident victims in Pasadena choose to work with legal counsel before providing statements or accepting settlement offers.
Understanding California’s Duty of Care
California’s negligence laws are based on a simple principle found in the California Civil Code: every person must use ordinary care in their actions to avoid causing injury to others.
For Drivers
Drivers must:
- Pay attention to the road
- Maintain control of their vehicle
- Obey traffic laws
- Adjust driving for weather and traffic conditions
Failure to follow these responsibilities can be considered negligence.
For Pedestrians
Pedestrians must:
- Use crosswalks when available
- Follow pedestrian signals
- Check for oncoming vehicles
However, even if a pedestrian makes a mistake, drivers still have an obligation to exercise due care.
For Property Owners
Property owners must:
- Regularly inspect their property
- Repair hazards
- Place warning signs
- Maintain safe walkways
Neglecting these responsibilities can lead to liability—even if the injured person was partly careless.
How Your Percentage of Fault Affects Damages
In California, damages typically fall into two categories:
1. Economic Damages
These are tangible financial losses, such as:
- Medical bills
- Lost wages
- Property damage
- Out-of-pocket expenses
- Future medical care
Even if you are partially at fault, California law allows you to recover the portion attributed to the other party.
2. Non-Economic Damages
These include:
- Pain and suffering
- Emotional distress
- Loss of enjoyment of life
- Disability or disfigurement
Your ability to recover these damages also depends on your percentage of fault.
Example
If your total damages (economic + non-economic) were $200,000 and you were found 30% at fault:
- You can still pursue $140,000
- The other party is responsible for their 70% share
This proportional system helps ensure fairness, even in complex situations.
How Insurance Companies Handle Partial Fault
Insurance companies are financially motivated to assign as much fault to you as possible. Some common strategies include:
- Twisting statements you make during calls
- Using selective photos to shift blame
- Arguing your injuries pre-existed the crash
- Highlighting small mistakes to reduce payout
- Claiming your actions “contributed significantly”
- Suggesting your case is weak because of shared fault
It is not uncommon for insurers to assign 20% to 40% fault to an injured person simply to reduce their payout—even when the facts don’t support that.
This is why legal representation can be valuable. A law firm with trial experience, like Tedford & Associates, understands how insurers attempt to manipulate fault percentages and can push back using evidence, expert analysis, and strong advocacy.
What if Multiple Parties Share Fault?
Accidents often involve more than two people or entities:
- Multiple drivers
- Employers of commercial drivers
- Vehicle manufacturers in defect cases
- Property owners and maintenance contractors
- Rideshare companies
- Government agencies (e.g., roadway hazards)
California law allows fault to be divided among all responsible parties. Even if you are partially at fault, other parties may share responsibility for:
- Unsafe road design
- Negligently maintained vehicles
- Dangerous property conditions
- Poorly marked construction zones
- Inadequate lighting
- Traffic signal malfunctions
The total damages are then apportioned based on each party’s share of responsibility.
Why Being Partially at Fault Should Not Stop You From Taking Action
Many accident victims in Pasadena hesitate to pursue a claim because they believe:
- “My mistake means I have no case.”
- “The insurance company said I was mostly at fault.”
- “I apologized at the scene, so I must be responsible.”
- “I was distracted for a second—I guess that makes it my fault.”
These assumptions are often incorrect.
Important facts to remember:
- Apologizing does not determine fault.
- Your initial impression of the accident may be incomplete.
- Police reports can have errors.
- Insurance assessments are not final.
- Evidence may show the other party was far more responsible.
Even if you did contribute to the accident, California’s system is designed to recognize degrees of responsibility—not eliminate your claim outright.
Statute of Limitations in Pasadena Accident Claims
Most personal injury claims in California must be filed within:
Two years from the date of the injury.
Missing this deadline can prevent you from pursuing compensation. This makes early evaluation important, especially in partial-fault cases where evidence can fade quickly.
If your accident involved a government vehicle or government-maintained property, you may face a much shorter six-month deadline under California’s Government Claims Act.
The Role of a Pasadena Personal Injury Attorney in Partial Fault Cases
Partial-fault cases are uniquely complex because:
- More evidence is needed
- Liability is heavily disputed
- Insurers position themselves aggressively
- Fault percentages can drastically change settlement value
Tedford & Associates is particularly well-positioned for these cases because:
- They have 30+ years of experience handling complex liability scenarios.
- They are trial attorneys, not settlement mills—insurers behave differently when they know litigation is possible.
- They understand the local courts, insurance adjusters, and Pasadena legal environment.
- They conduct thorough investigations, including accident reconstruction when necessary.
- They are skilled in presenting comparative negligence cases to juries and judges.
When Should Someone Consider Reaching Out for Help?
People in Pasadena often seek help when:
- An insurer claims they were partially or mostly at fault
- Liability is unclear or disputed
- They were injured in a multi-vehicle crash
- A pedestrian or cyclist was involved
- The injuries are serious or long-term
- Medical bills are increasing
- The insurer is pressuring them to settle quickly
- Their recorded statements are being used against them
Understanding California’s comparative negligence system is a start, but navigating it alone can be overwhelming.
Conclusion
California’s pure comparative negligence system ensures that injured people can still seek compensation, even when they share some responsibility for the accident. Being partially at fault does not mean you have no claim. It simply means the compensation is adjusted according to your percentage of fault.
If you were involved in an accident in Pasadena and you’re unsure how your actions may affect your case, learning your rights early can make a meaningful difference. Tedford & Associates has decades of experience helping injured people navigate disputed liability and partial-fault cases, offering guidance backed by trial-tested strategies.
If you want to understand how California’s comparative negligence laws may apply to your situation, you can reach the firm at (626) 790-1066 for more information.
Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For legal guidance tailored to your specific situation, consult a licensed attorney.