Resources

Short answer: The fault percentage an adjuster assigns you is an internal negotiating position, not a legal finding — nobody has decided anything. California is a pure comparative negligence state under Li v. Yellow Cab Co. (1975) 13 Cal.3d 804, so you recover your damages minus your share even at 90% fault, and under CACI No. 405 the defense carries the burden of proving your percentage — you do not have to disprove it. In practice, moving a $150,000 claim from a 40% reduction to a 10% reduction is worth $45,000. Call Sky Law Group at (844) 475-9529 — Hablamos Español.

The call usually comes eight to twelve days after the crash, and it is always friendly. The adjuster has “completed their liability review.” They are “accepting responsibility on behalf of our insured” — and then, in the same breath, “assigning 35% comparative fault to your client.” The number arrives with the calm authority of a lab result.

It is not a lab result. It is an opening offer wearing a lab coat.

Where That Percentage Actually Comes From

An adjuster handling a bodily injury claim out of Orange, Santa Ana, or a regional hub in Brea is not reconstructing your collision. In the first thirty days they typically have four inputs, and every one of them is weaker than it sounds:

1. The traffic collision report — specifically the “Primary Collision Factor” box and the narrative on the CHP 555 or the Orange PD equivalent.
2. Your recorded statement, if you gave one, transcribed and keyword-searched.
3. Their insured’s version, taken by phone within 48 hours, usually before you were out of the ER at UCI Medical Center on The City Drive or Providence St. Joseph on W. Stewart Drive.
4. A liability decision tool — Colossus, Claim IQ, or a carrier-built equivalent — that converts those inputs into a suggested fault split and a suggested reserve.

That is the whole file. No reconstruction expert, no EDR download, no scene visit, no signal-timing data from the City of Orange, no canvass for the doorbell camera on the corner. The 35% is a machine output built from a hearsay document and a five-minute phone call.

The Document They Are Quoting Cannot Be Handed to a Jury

This is the part almost nobody tells injured people, and it is the single most useful thing on this page.

Under California Vehicle Code § 20013, an accident report “shall not be used as evidence in any trial, civil or criminal, arising out of an accident.” Beyond the statute, the responding officer’s conclusion about who caused the crash is inadmissible opinion built on hearsay — in the overwhelming majority of Orange County collisions the officer arrived after it was over and is repeating what two rattled people told them at the curb.

So the adjuster is anchoring a five- or six-figure reduction to a document that, if this case were tried in the Central Justice Center on W. Santa Ana Boulevard, the jury would never see. Officers get fault wrong regularly, and they are not required to be right — a collision report is a police administrative record, not an adjudication. When a demand letter says that out loud, with the citation, the tone of the negotiation changes.

Pure Comparative Negligence: The Math, Not the Vibe

California abandoned the old all-or-nothing contributory rule in Li v. Yellow Cab Co. Your recovery is reduced by your share and never eliminated by it. That principle sits underneath everything on our California comparative negligence pillar, but here is what the percentage is worth in dollars on a real Orange County file:

Full case value	At 10% fault	At 25% fault	At 40% fault	Cost of 40% vs 10%
$25,000 soft tissue	$22,500	$18,750	$15,000	$7,500
$85,000 herniated disc, injections	$76,500	$63,750	$51,000	$25,500
$150,000 fracture with hardware	$135,000	$112,500	$90,000	$45,000
$400,000 cervical fusion	$360,000	$300,000	$240,000	$120,000
$1,200,000 traumatic brain injury	$1,080,000	$900,000	$720,000	$360,000

Nothing about the injury changed across those columns. A phone call changed. That is why carriers open with a number instead of a question — the percentage is the cheapest lever they own, and unlike disputing your MRI, it costs them nothing to assert.

One Number Does Not Reduce Everything Equally

Under Civil Code § 1431.2 (Proposition 51), defendants are jointly liable for your economic damages — medical bills, lost earnings — but only severally liable for non-economic damages according to their own share of fault. In a multi-vehicle pileup on the 22 near the Orange Crush, that distinction decides whether a thinly insured defendant’s share of your pain and suffering is collectible at all. It also means a lazy fault split can quietly strip value from the largest component of a serious claim.

The Burden Is Theirs, and They Know It

Comparative fault is an affirmative defense. Under CACI No. 405, the defendant must prove that you were negligent and that your negligence was a substantial factor in causing your own harm. An adjuster asserting 35% in a phone call has proven nothing. They are hoping the assertion functions as proof because it was said confidently.

You can make them show their work. In a first-party claim — your own uninsured motorist, underinsured motorist, or MedPay coverage — 10 CCR § 2695.7(b)(1) requires the insurer to deny or reduce in writing and to list the factual and legal basis for every reason given. In a third-party claim against the at-fault driver’s carrier, the governing standard is Insurance Code § 790.03(h)(13), which makes it an unfair practice to fail to promptly provide a reasonable explanation of the basis for a denial or a compromise offer. Third-party claimants have no private right of action for those violations after Moradi-Shalal v. Fireman’s Fund (1988) 46 Cal.3d 287 — but a written demand for the basis, with a copy to the Department of Insurance in the file, produces a remarkable amount of clarity. Most of the time the honest answer is “the police report,” and we are back to § 20013.

The Recorded Statement Is Where the Percentage Is Manufactured

Adjusters are trained to harvest three specific things, and none of them sound dangerous in the moment:

• “I didn’t see him.” Truthful. Also the raw material for a failure-to-keep-a-proper-lookout argument.
• “I’m sorry.” Reflexive human decency, later quoted as an admission.
• “I’m okay, just sore.” Said at hour six, quoted at month nine against a herniation diagnosed at week three.

On the apology: Evidence Code § 1160 makes expressions of sympathy or benevolence about another person’s pain, suffering, or death inadmissible as an admission of liability. The statute has a real limit — a statement of fault bundled into the apology stays admissible. “I’m so sorry you’re hurt” is protected. “I’m sorry, I was looking at my phone” is not. Adjusters rarely volunteer that distinction.

You are not legally required to give the other driver’s insurer a recorded statement at all. You have obligations to your own carrier under your policy’s cooperation clause; you have none to theirs.

Fault Theories That Move the Number Back

Comparative fault is a two-way argument, and it is usually under-argued on the victim’s side. The evidence that shifts percentages in Orange County cases:

• Negligence per se, Evidence Code § 669. If the other driver violated a statute designed to prevent this kind of harm — CVC § 22350 basic speed, § 21703 following too closely, § 21453 red light, § 22107 unsafe turn or lane change, § 21801 left turn across traffic — a presumption of negligence arises and they carry the burden of rebutting it. Our rear-ended at a red light analysis walks through how that presumption works in practice.
• EDR “black box” data, which typically holds five seconds of pre-impact speed, throttle, and brake application — and which can be overwritten or lost when the vehicle is released from the tow yard. This is the most common evidence casualty in Orange County claims, and it happens in the first two weeks.
• Signal timing and intersection geometry from the City of Orange or Caltrans at places like Chapman & Glassell, Tustin & Katella, or Katella & Main.
• Commercial video along Chapman Avenue and around the Outlets at Orange, most of it on a 14- to 30-day overwrite cycle.
• Third parties the adjuster never looked for — a rideshare driver logged into an app, an employer whose driver was on an errand, a vehicle owner who lent the car to someone they should not have. That last one can add an entire uncapped layer of liability, as we cover in hit by a borrowed car. Every defendant added is a defendant to whom fault can be apportioned away from you.

Two Honest Caveats

Not every fault argument against you is manufactured. California recognizes the seat belt defense (Franklin v. Gibson (1982) 138 Cal.App.3d 1015) to reduce damages for injuries a belt would have prevented. And under Civil Code § 3333.4 (Proposition 213), an uninsured driver generally cannot recover non-economic damages at all, regardless of fault. Knowing which arguments are real is how you refuse the rest credibly.

The Clocks That Do Not Care About the Percentage

Arguing about 35% for a year is a very expensive way to run out of time. CCP § 335.1 gives you two years for personal injury. If a public entity contributed — a City of Orange vehicle, an OCTA bus, a Caltrans roadway defect on the 55 or the 22 — Government Code § 911.2 gives you six months to file an administrative claim, and § 945.4 bars the lawsuit if you did not. The California statute of limitations page covers the tolling exceptions. Where a death is involved, wrongful death claims run on their own track, and conduct rising to conscious disregard for safety can open punitive damages, which comparative fault does not reduce the same way.

The Bilingual Edge — and Why It Matters Specifically Here

Fault percentages are built out of words, which makes this the single most language-sensitive stage of a claim. We regularly see recorded statements taken from Spanish-speaking claimants in English “because they said it was fine,” or through an untrained bilingual relative. Nuance dies there: “no lo vi venir” becomes “I wasn’t looking,” and a courtesy apology becomes an admission. At Sky Law Group the attorney reviewing your statement reads it in the language you gave it in — not a translator relaying it secondhand. Our office is at 303 W. Katella Ave., Orange, CA 92867, and we handle car accident claims and serious brain injury cases across Orange, Anaheim, Santa Ana, Irvine, Costa Mesa, Huntington Beach, Garden Grove, Fullerton, Tustin, Mission Viejo, Lake Forest, Newport Beach, Buena Park, and Westminster. Rideshare collisions get the same treatment.

Free OC Accident Checklist: Text CHECKLIST to (844) 475-9529 and we’ll send our bilingual 48-hour after-crash checklist — no commitment, no spam, the same list we give our clients.

What to Do This Week

Do not accept the percentage, do not argue with it on the phone, and do not sign anything. Ask for the fault determination in writing with the factual basis stated. Get the collision report and read the narrative rather than the box. Send a preservation letter for the EDR data and any nearby video before the overwrite window closes. Then let someone whose job is the burden of proof under CACI No. 405 explain to the carrier why 35% is a number, not a finding.

Call Sky Law Group at (844) 475-9529. No fee unless we win. Hablamos Español.

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I still recover money if the adjuster says I was partly at fault?

Yes. California is a pure comparative negligence state under Li v. Yellow Cab Co. (1975) 13 Cal.3d 804. Your damages are reduced by your percentage of fault, never eliminated by it — a plaintiff found 90% at fault still recovers 10% of their damages.

Is the adjuster’s fault percentage legally binding?

No. It is an internal claim-handling position taken by an interested party. Fault is decided by a jury, or by settlement, and until then the percentage is a negotiating anchor with no legal force.

Who has to prove I was partly at fault?

The defense does. Comparative fault is an affirmative defense — under CACI No. 405 the defendant must prove both that you were negligent and that your negligence was a substantial factor in causing your own harm. You are not required to prove you were faultless.

Can the police report be used against me in court?

Generally no. Vehicle Code § 20013 provides that an accident report shall not be used as evidence in any civil or criminal trial arising out of the accident, and the officer’s fault opinion is typically inadmissible hearsay besides, since the officer did not witness the collision.

Does saying “I’m sorry” at the scene mean I admitted fault?

Not by itself. Evidence Code § 1160 makes expressions of sympathy about another person’s pain, suffering, or death inadmissible as an admission of liability. The exception matters: a statement of fault attached to the apology — “sorry, I was speeding” — remains admissible.

Do I have to give the other driver’s insurance company a recorded statement?

No. You have no contractual relationship with the at-fault driver’s carrier and no obligation to be recorded by them. Your own policy’s cooperation clause is different and does generally require you to cooperate with your own insurer.

How much is each percentage point of fault actually worth?

One point of your gross case value. On a $150,000 claim, each percentage point is $1,500, so moving from 40% to 10% is worth $45,000. On a $1,200,000 brain injury claim the same 30-point move is worth $360,000.

Can I make the insurance company explain the fault percentage in writing?

You can demand it. For first-party claims such as UM, UIM, or MedPay, 10 CCR § 2695.7(b)(1) requires a written statement of the factual and legal basis for any denial or reduction. For third-party claims, Insurance Code § 790.03(h)(13) sets the standard, though Moradi-Shalal v. Fireman’s Fund (1988) 46 Cal.3d 287 means a third-party claimant cannot sue directly for the violation.

What evidence most often lowers my fault percentage?

EDR “black box” download, intersection video, signal-timing records, independent witnesses, and a statutory violation by the other driver that triggers the negligence-per-se presumption under Evidence Code § 669. Most of that evidence has a short shelf life measured in days or weeks.

Does comparative fault reduce my medical bills and my pain and suffering the same way?

Your total award is reduced by your percentage, but collection differs. Under Civil Code § 1431.2, defendants are jointly liable for economic damages and only severally liable for non-economic damages in proportion to their own fault, which matters when one defendant is underinsured.

I wasn’t wearing a seat belt. Does that end my claim?

No, but it can reduce it. California recognizes the seat belt defense under Franklin v. Gibson (1982) 138 Cal.App.3d 1015, and the defense must prove which injuries a belt would actually have prevented — a much narrower showing than adjusters usually suggest.

A city vehicle or an OCTA bus was involved. Does the fault dispute change my deadline?

It shortens it dramatically. Government Code § 911.2 requires an administrative claim against a public entity within six months, and § 945.4 bars the lawsuit if that claim was never filed — regardless of how strong your fault argument is. The ordinary two-year deadline under CCP § 335.1 does not save you.