Can I File a Claim if I’m at Fault in an Accident?

Many people assume that being at fault — or partially at fault — in an accident automatically bars them from seeking compensation. In Pennsylvania, that assumption is not accurate. The Commonwealth applies a modified comparative negligence system that allows injured parties to recover damages even when they share responsibility for an accident, subject to an important threshold.

Pennsylvania’s Modified Comparative Negligence Rule

Under Pennsylvania’s comparative negligence law, codified at 42 Pa. C.S. § 7102, an injured plaintiff can recover compensation as long as their percentage of fault does not exceed the fault of the defendant or defendants. Specifically, you can recover damages if you are found to be 50% or less at fault for the accident. If your share of fault exceeds 50%, you are barred from recovering any compensation from the other parties.

When fault is apportioned and the plaintiff is found partially at fault, their recoverable damages are reduced by their percentage of responsibility. For example, if a jury determines your total damages are $100,000 but finds you 30% at fault, your recovery is reduced by 30% and you receive $70,000. The remaining 70% of fault is assigned to the defendant, who is responsible for paying the reduced amount.

How Fault Is Determined

Fault in a Pennsylvania personal injury case is a factual question determined by the jury — or by the judge in a bench trial. Both sides present evidence about what happened, including witness testimony, accident reconstruction analysis, police reports, physical evidence, and expert opinions. The jury then assigns percentages of fault to each party involved. In multi-vehicle accidents or cases involving multiple defendants, fault may be distributed among several parties simultaneously.

Common Scenarios Where Shared Fault Arises

Shared fault claims arise in a wide variety of accident types common in Erie County and across Pennsylvania:

• Car accidents: A driver who ran a red light may still have a claim if the other driver was speeding and the speed contributed to the severity of the crash.
• Slip and fall cases: A person who was not paying attention to where they were walking may still recover against a property owner who failed to correct a known hazard.
• Motorcycle accidents: A motorcyclist not wearing a helmet may have their damages reduced if the head injury was worsened by the lack of protective gear, though Pennsylvania’s helmet law exemptions complicate this analysis.
• Construction accidents: A worker who violated a safety protocol may still have a claim against a contractor who created an unreasonably dangerous condition.

The Role of Insurance Adjusters in Assigning Fault

Insurance adjusters routinely attempt to assign a high percentage of fault to claimants in order to reduce or eliminate their liability. These fault assignments are not binding — they are the insurer’s litigation position, not a legal determination. A jury can and often does reach very different conclusions about comparative fault than an insurance company’s internal evaluation. This is one reason why accepting an early settlement offer without understanding the full picture of fault allocation can significantly undervalue a legitimate claim.

Evidence That Affects Fault Allocation

The strength of your claim under Pennsylvania’s comparative negligence system depends heavily on the quality of the evidence available. Surveillance footage, dashcam recordings, cell phone records, eyewitness accounts, and expert accident reconstruction can all shift or confirm fault percentages. Preserving this evidence promptly after an accident is critical, as physical evidence can be lost and memories fade quickly.

Joint and Several Liability Considerations

Pennsylvania’s comparative negligence rules interact with the state’s joint and several liability statute. In cases involving multiple defendants, the rules governing which defendant is responsible for paying which portion of the damages depend on each defendant’s percentage of fault and the nature of the damages involved. This can significantly affect how and from whom a plaintiff can collect a judgment.