Can an Insurance Adjuster’s 20% Fault Finding Defeat Your Maryland Injury Claim?
Potentially, but the adjuster’s percentage is not the legal test. Maryland follows contributory negligence rather than comparative fault. If the defendant establishes that an injured person’s own negligence legally contributed to causing the accident or injury, the defense may bar recovery entirely. An insurance company does not establish that defense merely by saying the injured person was 20% responsible.
The central questions are what the insurer says you did wrong, whether that conduct was negligent, and whether it actually contributed to the injury-producing accident. These questions matter because insurance companies can use contributory-negligence allegations to deny injury claims or substantially affect settlement negotiations.
Video Chapters: Maryland Contributory Negligence
- 0:00 — What if the adjuster says you were partly at fault?
- 0:11 — Maryland contributory negligence versus comparative fault
- 1:45 — Two ways an adjuster may allege contributory negligence
- 2:15 — What conduct does the insurer say you committed?
- 3:56 — Why the alleged negligence must cause or contribute to the accident
- 5:07 — Who has the burden of proving contributory negligence?
- 5:53 — The narrow Last Clear Chance doctrine
- 6:14 — Why an adjuster’s 20% fault allegation can be significant
- 6:38 — When the evidence supports challenging the denial
Does Being 20% at Fault Mean You Lose 20% of Your Compensation in Maryland?
No. Maryland does not generally use comparative-fault percentages to reduce recovery in ordinary negligence claims. If a contributory-negligence defense is established, it may bar the negligence claim completely, even when the defendant’s negligence also contributed to the accident.
An adjuster may refer to 10%, 20%, or 40% fault as part of a claims evaluation or settlement negotiation. Those percentages do not replace the legal requirements of contributory negligence.
| Issue | Comparative-Fault System | Maryland Contributory Negligence |
|---|---|---|
| Partial fault | May reduce damages according to the jurisdiction’s rules. | Can bar recovery when the defense is legally established. |
| 20% fault allegation | May produce a percentage reduction, depending on the state. | The adjuster’s percentage is not the legal standard or a judicial finding. |
| Controlling question | How fault is allocated under that jurisdiction’s law. | Whether the injured person’s negligent conduct legally contributed to the injury. |
For the fuller doctrinal discussion, see Maryland Contributory Negligence After a Car Accident.
What Are the Two Different Ways an Insurer May Allege Contributory Negligence?
The insurer may contend either that the injured person principally caused the accident or that the injured person contributed to an accident primarily caused by someone else.
When the Insurer Says You Caused the Accident
The carrier may deny that its insured was responsible and assert that your own driving caused the collision. The initial analysis must evaluate both drivers’ conduct and determine whether the available evidence supports the insurer’s version.
When the Insurer Says Its Driver Caused the Accident but You Contributed
The insurer may acknowledge substantial responsibility by its insured while arguing that you also acted negligently. That allegation is particularly significant in Maryland because a legally established contributory-negligence defense may defeat the negligence claim rather than merely reduce damages by an assigned percentage.
The question in either situation is not how emphatically the claims adjuster assigns blame. It is whether the evidence supports the particular factual and legal position being asserted.
Why Must the Insurer Establish That Your Alleged Negligence Actually Contributed to the Accident?
Because negligent conduct that did not legally contribute to the accident or injury ordinarily does not establish contributory negligence.
Suppose the insurance company alleges that you were speeding before another driver entered your path. That allegation requires more analysis than identifying a speed-limit violation. The relevant issues may include the timing of the other driver’s movement, stopping distance, visibility, reaction opportunity, vehicle positions, and whether the alleged speed contributed to causing the collision.
Similarly, a claim that a driver was distracted, changed lanes improperly, or failed to obey a traffic control must be evaluated in relation to the actual accident. Evidence of unrelated misconduct is not automatically proof that the misconduct contributed to the injuries.
This is the distinction between an accusation of carelessness and proof of contributory negligence.
What Evidence Matters When the Insurance Company Blames You for a Crash?
The evidence should address the particular act the insurer alleges and whether that act contributed to the accident. General accusations of fault are not a substitute for reconstructing what happened.
| Insurance Allegation | Evidence to Evaluate | Causation Question |
|---|---|---|
| Speeding | Video, vehicle evidence, roadway measurements, impact locations, and witness accounts. | Did the speed contribute to causing the collision? |
| Improper turn or lane change | Lane configuration, vehicle damage, photographs, video, signals, and witness testimony. | Did the alleged maneuver contribute to the accident? |
| Failure to obey a traffic signal | Signal sequencing, intersection video, witness accounts, and vehicle movements. | Which vehicle entered the intersection unlawfully, and how did that affect the collision? |
| Distraction or texting | Available lawful evidence, testimony, video, timing, and relevant records. | Was there distraction, and did it contribute to the event? |
| Failure to maintain a lookout | Sightlines, visibility, distances, reaction time, video, and witness accounts. | Was there a reasonable opportunity to observe and respond to the hazard? |
Some fault allegations will be supported by the evidence. Others may not survive a close examination of the circumstances. The necessary analysis depends on the actual collision, not merely on the label selected by the adjuster.
Who Has the Burden of Proving Contributory Negligence in Maryland?
The defendant asserting contributory negligence bears the burden of proving that affirmative defense. It is not enough to identify a possible mistake or make a general claim that the injured person shares responsibility.
If the dispute proceeds into litigation, the defense must be supported by evidence sufficient to establish the legally required negligent conduct and causal relationship. The injured person separately bears the burden of proving the negligence claim against the defendant.
An adjuster’s written claim determination can influence negotiations and may result in a denial. It is not itself a court finding, and it does not relieve the defendant of the burden associated with the affirmative defense.
What Happens When an Insurance Company Denies a Claim Based on Contributory Negligence?
A denial may be challenged when the facts and applicable law support a good-faith basis to contest the insurer’s position. That begins with identifying the exact alleged conduct and examining whether the evidence establishes the defense.
How I Evaluate the Insurer’s Fault Position
- Identify the accusation. Determine what the insurance company says the injured person did wrong.
- Examine the proof. Compare the carrier’s position with witness testimony, scene evidence, photographs, video, vehicle evidence, and other relevant materials.
- Test causation. Evaluate whether the alleged conduct actually contributed to causing the accident or injury.
- Determine the next procedural step. When the insurer maintains a disputed position and the evidence supports a challenge, assess negotiation or initiating litigation against the legally responsible parties.
Litigation changes the process for resolving disputed facts. The parties may use discovery, testimony, documents, expert evidence where appropriate, and court procedures to test the competing accounts. If the case proceeds to trial, the appropriate judge or jury determines disputed issues within the governing legal framework.
Most cases resolve without trial. But a claim should not be evaluated solely by accepting an adjuster’s conclusion when there is evidence supporting a legitimate challenge.
This is part of my One Fight approach to injury and insurance litigation: identify the insurer’s resistance, develop the relevant proof, and pursue an appropriate resolution through negotiation or litigation.
Can Maryland’s Last Clear Chance Doctrine Affect a Contributory-Negligence Defense?
Sometimes. Last Clear Chance is a narrow, fact-dependent doctrine, not a general exception whenever an injured person is accused of partial fault.
The analysis concerns whether the evidence supports a later, distinct opportunity for the defendant to avoid the injury after the earlier negligence. The sequence of events, timing, visibility, and realistic opportunity to respond are important.
For additional discussion, read What Is Maryland’s Last Clear Chance Doctrine?
Why Can Speaking With a Lawyer Matter When an Adjuster Alleges Partial Fault?
Because the insurer’s accusation may become the basis for denying the claim or substantially changing its settlement position. The evidence necessary to evaluate that accusation may include photographs, recordings, witnesses, roadway conditions, vehicle damage, and the chronology of the collision.
Some evidence may become harder to obtain as time passes. The useful question is what evidence remains available and whether it supports or contradicts the insurer’s position.
I evaluate disputed-fault cases with particular attention to Maryland contributory negligence, causation, the available evidence, and whether litigation would be justified.
Frequently Asked Questions About Partial Fault in Maryland
Can I recover compensation if the adjuster says I was 20% at fault?
Possibly. The adjuster’s percentage does not itself establish contributory negligence. The controlling questions involve the injured person’s conduct, whether it was negligent, and whether it legally contributed to causing the injury.
Does Maryland subtract 20% from an injury settlement?
Maryland does not generally apply comparative-fault percentages to reduce recovery in ordinary negligence cases. Settlement offers may reflect litigation risk, but that is different from a legal rule automatically reducing damages by the adjuster’s percentage.
What if the other driver was mostly responsible?
The degree of comparative blame is not ordinarily the deciding question in Maryland. Even where another driver was primarily negligent, the injured person’s own causally contributing negligence may establish a defense that bars recovery.
Does speeding automatically defeat an injury claim?
No. A speeding allegation requires an examination of the circumstances, including whether the alleged speed contributed to the collision or injury. A traffic violation unrelated to the injury-producing event does not automatically prove contributory negligence.
Does the insurance company have the final word on fault?
No. It may determine its claim position and what it will voluntarily offer. If a viable dispute proceeds through litigation, disputed issues can be tested under court procedures and decided by the appropriate factfinder.
Is Last Clear Chance available in every contributory-negligence case?
No. It is narrowly applied and depends on particular facts involving the sequence of events and a later opportunity to avoid the injury.
Can a contributory-negligence allegation justify contacting a lawyer?
Yes, particularly when there are significant injuries and the insurer is denying liability or materially reducing its settlement position. The lawyer’s task is to evaluate the evidence and determine whether the insurer’s position has a sound factual and legal basis.
Video Transcript: Insurance Adjuster Says You Were Partly at Fault
The transcript below is edited for punctuation and obvious automated-caption errors while preserving the substance of the supplied recording. It covers the supplied material through approximately 7:24. The final sentence of the supplied transcript was incomplete and is not reproduced as a completed statement.
Read the timestamped video transcript
0:00
What if a claims adjuster says you were partly at fault for causing a motor vehicle accident?
0:06
That analysis doesn’t really matter in Maryland.
0:11
Maryland does not follow comparative fault. In a state that follows comparative fault, the relative degrees of responsibility between the drivers are weighed against each other and balanced out.
0:20
There’s typically a setoff allowing the less at-fault driver who’s injured to recover from the more at-fault driver.
0:27
That’s not the law in Maryland. The law in Maryland is simple.
0:38
If an injured person caused or contributed to an accident, even in a slight way, they get nothing. It’s not a situation where their recovery is offset by their degree of fault.
0:47
It’s rather an all-or-nothing proposition. Either they get a financial recovery or they don’t.
0:59
This is one of the reasons that contributory negligence remains an extraordinarily powerful tool available to insurance companies and claims adjusters to deny a case and also to influence the negotiations by arguing that a case could be denied outright if contributory negligence is found.
1:21
In a comparative fault jurisdiction, it’s relatively common for an insurance company to take the position that although their insured person was 60% responsible for the accident, the injured person was 40% responsible, and those degrees of fault should be balanced out and operate to reduce the recovery for the injured person.
1:45
There are two scenarios where a savvy claims adjuster might insert a contributory negligence allegation into a case or a negotiation.
1:54
The first is straightforward. The injured person caused the accident.
2:00
The second is more nuanced. Although primary responsibility perhaps rests with the other insured driver, the allegation is that the injured person contributed in some fashion to the happening of the event.
2:15
That’s where my analysis starts. What is the claims adjuster saying the injured person did wrong? Were they speeding?
2:24
Did they fail to adhere to the command of a traffic control device? Did they make an unsafe or improper lane change or turn? Were they operating under the influence? Or were they texting while driving?
2:40
Certainly, all of these examples, if upheld after a court trial and a judicial finding, would be sufficient to bar a claim on contributory negligence grounds.
2:49
However, an insurance company or a claims adjuster saying those facts exist is not the same as a judge or a jury determining that those facts exist. When it comes to contributory negligence, insurance companies and claims adjusters don’t have the last word on the case. Judges and juries do.
3:14
To be sure, in Maryland automobile accident cases, negligence is a hot-button term. A plaintiff has to prove the other driver was negligent in order to have a financial recovery for their injuries, but it is a two-edged sword.
3:22
If their own conduct caused or contributed to the accident in even the slightest fashion, they receive nothing.
3:37
It is not uncommon for a claims adjuster to say, “Your client was negligent, therefore the claim is denied based on contributory negligence.”
3:45
The reality is that’s not the legal test. The legal standard that would be employed in such claims is different.
3:56
In order for a successful contributory negligence defense to be sustained, the proponent must prove that the negligence they allege on the part of the injured person actually caused or contributed to the accident.
4:13
It’s not enough, for example, to say your client was speeding, therefore they get nothing.
4:21
Speeding would only matter if it was a factor in causing the crash that ultimately injured the person. Where the hypothetical and alleged speeding occurred either before or after the accident, the causation element is absent.
4:39
As in any disputed case, the evidence is key. A notation in a claims file by a claims adjuster that says the plaintiff caused or contributed to the accident or was 20% at fault in the accident doesn’t matter.
4:55
The evidence matters, and where the evidence is sufficient to overcome the contributory negligence denial, litigation is the next appropriate step.
5:07
Under Maryland law, a contributory negligence defense is an affirmative one. The insurance company or the very good lawyers that they ultimately hire to try their cases in court have what’s known as the burden of proof.
5:23
It’s not enough for a claims adjuster to say the other party was negligent. They have to go about the business of proving that in court or the defense fails.
5:35
In Maryland, contributory negligence is a defense frequently posited by claims adjusters and insurance companies. It’s powerful. If it’s upheld after litigation in a court trial, it operates to completely bar the plaintiff’s claim.
5:53
It is a harsh doctrine, but it is not absolute. There is a narrow exception to contributory negligence discussed in another video called the Last Clear Chance doctrine.
6:07
It’s a narrow exception, rarely found or applied in the appellate cases, but one that exists in Maryland.
6:14
If an adjuster says you were 20% at fault for an accident, this could be a trap. This is certainly the start of a contributory negligence allegation.
6:23
Remember, in Maryland, percentages don’t matter. It’s an all-or-nothing proposition.
6:30
Either there was an accident that was caused or contributed to by the plaintiff or there was not.
6:38
When an insurance company denies or seeks to severely limit your financial recovery, arguing contributory negligence, the next step is an analysis of the evidence.
6:47
Where that analysis leads to the conclusion that an insurance company or the lawyers they hire to represent their interests in court will not be able to prove contributory negligence exists, a challenge is appropriate.
7:01
Here a lawsuit is filed against the appropriate parties and a court, a judge or a group of jurors is asked to determine the facts of the case.
7:16
This determination would include not only whether or not the alleged act of contributory negligence occurred, but whether it caused or contributed to the injury-causing event, the accident, in some way.
The Adjuster Says You Were Partly at Fault. The Evidence May Tell a Different Story.
An allegation of contributory negligence can affect the entire value of a Maryland car accident injury claim. But the insurer must be able to support its position when the defense is tested under the applicable legal standards.
I am Eric T. Kirk. I handle Maryland injury claims involving disputed liability, insurance-company denials, and lowball valuations. Litigation is the path to defeating insurance resistance to full, fair value for your case. Where the evidence supports a challenge to the insurance position, I take it to court.
Contact me for a complimentary case analysis concerning your accident, the injuries sustained, and the insurance company’s fault allegation.
No result, recovery, or litigation outcome is guaranteed. Contacting the firm does not establish an attorney-client relationship. Representation begins only after a matter is accepted and a written agreement is signed. Do not submit confidential or time-sensitive information through the general website form.
