Skip to content 
You know what happened.
Another driver pulled into your lane. Ran the light. Stopped suddenly. Turned without looking.
Then the insurance company calls.
They’ve investigated the accident, they tell you.
And according to them, you were partly responsible.
Maybe they say you were speeding.
Maybe you should have reacted faster.
Maybe you were following too closely.
Maybe you could have avoided the crash.
Suddenly, an accident you thought was straightforward has become an argument about fault.
So what happens now?
First, don’t panic.
Being accused of sharing responsibility for a Missouri car accident does not automatically mean you cannot recover compensation.
Missouri follows a system known as pure comparative fault. In a personal injury case, responsibility can potentially be divided among the people involved, and an injured person’s compensation can be reduced according to that person’s percentage of fault.
Understanding what that means and, equally importantly, who gets to decide your percentage of fault, can make an enormous difference when dealing with an insurance company after a crash.
What Is Comparative Fault?
Comparative fault recognizes something fairly intuitive:
Not every accident is 100% one person’s fault.
Sometimes several people make mistakes.
Missouri uses a pure comparative fault system for personal injury cases.
Under that system, an injured person’s own fault does not necessarily prevent recovery. Instead, the person’s damages can be reduced according to the percentage of fault attributed to them.
Here’s a simplified example.
Suppose your total damages are determined to be:
$100,000
And you are determined to have been:
20% at fault
Your recovery could be reduced by 20%, leaving:
$80,000
The math itself is straightforward.
The difficult part is determining whether you actually bear 20% of the responsibility in the first place.
Can I Recover If I Was More Than 50% at Fault in Missouri?
Potentially, yes.
This is one of the defining features of a pure comparative fault system.
Some states use modified comparative fault rules that can completely prevent a plaintiff from recovering once that person’s share of fault reaches a particular threshold.
Missouri’s pure comparative fault system works differently.
Even when an injured person bears a substantial portion of the responsibility, recovery is not automatically barred solely because that percentage exceeds 50%.
Instead, compensation can be reduced according to the percentage of fault assigned.
For example, if someone suffered $100,000 in damages but was determined to be 60% at fault, the remaining recovery could potentially be $40,000.
Of course, real cases involve much more than a calculator.
Fault itself has to be established with evidence.
The Insurance Adjuster Does Not Get the Final Word
This may be the most important thing to understand.
An insurance adjuster can claim that you were partly at fault.
That does not make the percentage official.
Insurance companies investigate accidents and make liability assessments when deciding what they believe a claim is worth.
But their determination is not the same thing as a court judgment.
If an adjuster tells you:
“We believe our driver was 70% responsible, but you were 30% responsible.”
You are allowed to ask:
Based on what evidence?
Maybe there is evidence supporting shared fault.
Maybe there isn’t.
Either way, you don’t have to simply accept the insurance company’s percentage because someone said it confidently over the phone.
Why Would an Insurance Company Try to Put Some Fault on Me?
Because fault affects money.
If an insurance company can establish that you share responsibility for the accident, the amount it may ultimately owe can be reduced.
Consider the difference:
A $200,000 claim with no comparative fault:
$200,000
A $200,000 claim with 25% fault attributed to the injured person:
$150,000
That’s a $50,000 difference.
So when fault is disputed, even seemingly small percentages can matter considerably.
This doesn’t mean every insurance company automatically invents comparative fault.
Sometimes there is legitimate evidence that more than one person contributed to an accident.
But it does mean you should understand that the insurance company has a financial interest in its liability determination.
What Can Be Used to Determine Fault After a Car Accident?
Fault should be based on evidence.
Depending on the accident, relevant evidence may include:
- Police reports
- Photographs of the accident scene
- Vehicle damage
- Dashcam footage
- Surveillance video
- Traffic-camera footage
- Witness statements
- Skid marks
- Road conditions
- Traffic signals
- Cellphone records
- Vehicle data
- Accident reconstruction evidence
- Statements from the drivers
The more serious or disputed the accident, the more important a thorough investigation may become.
Does the Police Report Decide Who Was at Fault?
Not necessarily.
Police reports can be valuable evidence.
An officer may document:
- Driver statements
- Witness information
- Road conditions
- Vehicle locations
- Visible damage
- Citations
- Observations at the scene
But a police report does not automatically make the final legal determination of fault in a personal injury claim.
The officer may not have witnessed the collision.
Additional evidence may emerge later.
Video may surface.
Witnesses may provide more information.
Vehicle data may contradict someone’s account.
Treat the police report as an important piece of evidence, not necessarily the final chapter.
What If I Received a Traffic Ticket?
A citation can matter, but receiving a ticket does not automatically answer every question about civil liability.
Traffic enforcement and personal injury liability are related but distinct issues.
Imagine two drivers collide at an intersection.
One receives a citation.
Further investigation may still reveal that the other driver was also speeding, distracted, or otherwise contributed to the collision.
Comparative fault looks at the conduct that contributed to the accident and resulting injuries.
The entire picture matters.
Common Ways Insurance Companies May Argue You Shared Fault
“You Were Speeding”
An insurer may argue that although its driver made a mistake, your speed prevented you from avoiding the collision or increased its severity.
Evidence such as vehicle data, video, witnesses, and accident reconstruction may become important.
“You Were Following Too Closely”
Rear-end crashes are often assumed to be automatic fault for the rear driver.
But circumstances matter.
What happened immediately before the collision?
Did another vehicle abruptly enter the lane?
Were brake lights working?
Was there a chain-reaction collision?
The mechanics of the crash should be investigated.
“You Were Distracted”
The insurer may claim you were:
- Using your phone
- Adjusting navigation
- Talking to passengers
- Looking away from the road
Again, allegations need evidence.
“You Failed to Take Evasive Action”
Sometimes insurers argue that an injured driver could have:
- Braked sooner
- Swerved
- Slowed down
- Otherwise avoided the crash
That argument needs to account for what a driver realistically had time to perceive and do.
Hindsight has excellent reflexes.
Real people driving real vehicles do not get to freeze the accident and select the perfect response from a menu.
“You Made an Unsafe Lane Change”
Lane-change collisions frequently produce conflicting stories.
One driver says:
“They came into my lane.”
The other says exactly the same thing.
Physical evidence, photographs, witnesses, and video can become particularly important.
“You Didn’t Use Your Turn Signal”
Failure to signal may become relevant if it contributed to how the collision occurred.
But again, the question is not simply whether someone made a mistake.
It is whether that conduct contributed to the accident and, if so, to what degree.
What If I Said “I’m Sorry” at the Accident Scene?
People apologize after accidents for all kinds of reasons.
They’re shaken.
They’re worried someone is hurt.
They’re trying to calm the situation.
Sometimes “I’m sorry” means:
I’m sorry this happened.
Not:
I accept complete legal responsibility for this collision.
That said, statements made after an accident can become evidence.
Don’t compound the problem by continuing to speculate about fault with insurance adjusters.
Stick to facts.
Be Careful With Recorded Statements
This connects directly to something we’ve discussed before: the insurance adjuster calling after your accident.
A recorded statement may include questions such as:
“How fast were you going?”
“When did you first see the other vehicle?”
“How far away were you?”
“Did you brake?”
“Could you have swerved?”
“Were you distracted?”
Those questions may sound like routine fact-gathering.
But your answers may later become part of the insurer’s argument that you contributed to the crash.
Tell the truth.
But don’t guess.
If you don’t know your exact speed, don’t invent one.
If you don’t know how many feet separated the vehicles, don’t estimate simply because the adjuster wants a number.
“I don’t know” can be an accurate answer.
What If I Already Gave a Recorded Statement?
Don’t panic.
People frequently speak with insurers before talking to an attorney.
Tell your attorney what happened and, if possible, provide information about:
- When the statement occurred
- Which insurance company took it
- Who conducted the interview
- What you remember being asked
- Whether the conversation was recorded
Your lawyer can evaluate how the statement may affect the claim.
What If the Other Driver Is Lying?
Unfortunately, accidents sometimes produce two completely different stories.
You say the light was green.
They say theirs was green.
You say they changed lanes.
They say you did.
This is precisely why independent evidence matters.
An attorney may look for:
- Witnesses
- Nearby businesses with cameras
- Dashcam footage
- Traffic-camera evidence
- Vehicle damage patterns
- Electronic vehicle data
- Photographs
- 911 recordings
- Statements made at the scene
A liability dispute becomes much stronger when it can move beyond one person’s word against another’s.
What If There Were Several Vehicles?
Comparative fault becomes even more important in multi-vehicle crashes.
Responsibility may potentially be allocated among multiple drivers.
Missouri also has specific rules governing how responsibility for a judgment is allocated among defendants. Under current Missouri law, a defendant found 51% or more at fault may face joint and several liability under specified circumstances, while a defendant below that threshold is generally responsible for the percentage of the judgment attributed to that defendant, subject to statutory exceptions.
For the injured person, the important takeaway is simpler:
Do not assume there is only one responsible party because there was only one initial impact.
Multi-vehicle accidents deserve a full investigation.
What If I Wasn’t Wearing a Seat Belt?
This is another place where assumptions can get people into trouble.
Under current Missouri law, in an action involving the ownership, common maintenance, or operation of a motor vehicle, failure to wear a safety belt is not considered evidence of comparative negligence.
Missouri law treats seat-belt evidence differently in certain claims involving the design, manufacture, distribution, or sale of a motor vehicle.
So if someone casually tells you:
“You weren’t wearing a seat belt, so the accident was partly your fault.”
That is not an accurate description of Missouri’s comparative-fault rule for an ordinary motor-vehicle negligence case.
What If My Injuries Were Worse Because of Something I Did After the Accident?
That can raise a different legal issue: mitigation of damages.
An injured person generally has a responsibility to take reasonable steps to avoid unnecessarily worsening damages.
Insurance companies may argue that someone:
- Ignored medical advice
- Failed to attend treatment
- Continued activities against restrictions
- Failed to follow up with specialists
- Otherwise allowed a condition to worsen
That is different from saying you caused the accident itself.
It may relate to the extent of damages rather than liability for the collision.
Follow reasonable medical recommendations and document why treatment is delayed if circumstances outside your control create a gap.
What If I Had a Pre-Existing Injury?
A pre-existing condition is also different from comparative fault.
Maybe you had an old back injury.
Then a car accident makes it substantially worse.
The insurance company may argue about which symptoms came from the accident and which existed beforehand.
But having an imperfect spine before someone crashes into you does not mean you were “at fault” for the collision.
Medical causation and accident liability are different questions.
Can Comparative Fault Affect Settlement Negotiations?
Absolutely.
If the insurance company believes you share responsibility, that position will likely affect its settlement evaluation.
Suppose you and the insurer agree that the total damages are $150,000.
But the insurer claims you were 30% responsible.
Its evaluation may effectively become:
$150,000 minus 30% = $105,000.
But what if you believe the evidence supports only 5% fault?
Or none?
That disagreement can become a major part of settlement negotiations.
What Happens If We Can’t Agree About Fault?
Sometimes the dispute can be resolved through additional evidence and negotiation.
Sometimes it can’t.
If the insurance company refuses to make a fair offer because of a disputed liability assessment, filing a personal injury lawsuit may become necessary.
During litigation, both sides can obtain evidence through discovery.
Witnesses can be deposed.
Experts may analyze the accident.
And if the case ultimately goes to trial, fault can be determined by the trier of fact based on the evidence presented.
As we’ve explained in our guide to how long a Missouri personal injury case takes, disputed liability is one factor that can extend the timeline.
Should I Accept Some Fault Just to Get the Claim Settled?
Not simply because an adjuster asks you to.
There may be cases where the evidence genuinely supports shared responsibility.
There may also be cases where the insurer’s proposed percentage is debatable or unsupported.
The question should be:
What does the evidence show?
Not:
What percentage would make this claim go away fastest?
Before accepting a settlement based on comparative fault, understand how the insurer reached its conclusion and what that reduction means for your total recovery.
What Should You Do If an Insurance Company Says You Were Partly at Fault?
- Don’t Argue on the Phone
You don’t need to win the case during one conversation with an adjuster.
- Ask Why
Ask what evidence supports the insurer’s determination.
- Don’t Guess
Avoid estimating speed, distance, timing, or other facts you don’t actually know.
- Preserve Evidence
Save photographs, videos, messages, insurance correspondence, and witness information.
- Get the Police Report
Review what was documented at the scene.
- Write Down What You Remember
Record your recollection while events are still fresh.
- Continue Appropriate Medical Treatment
A liability dispute doesn’t make your injuries disappear.
- Talk to a Personal Injury Attorney
If fault is disputed, the difference between the insurance company’s version and what the evidence actually supports can have a substantial financial impact.
Frequently Asked Questions About Comparative Fault in Missouri
Can I recover compensation if I was partly at fault for a Missouri car accident?
Potentially, yes. Missouri follows pure comparative fault. An injured person’s damages may be reduced according to the percentage of fault attributed to that person rather than automatically barred because some fault exists.
What does 20% at fault mean?
If you are found 20% responsible, your recoverable damages may generally be reduced by 20%. For example, $100,000 in damages reduced by 20% would leave $80,000.
Can I recover if I was 51% at fault?
Missouri’s pure comparative fault system does not automatically bar a plaintiff’s recovery merely because the plaintiff’s share of fault exceeds 50%. The plaintiff’s recovery may instead be reduced according to the percentage of fault assigned.
Does the insurance company decide my percentage of fault?
The insurer can make its own liability determination for purposes of evaluating and negotiating the claim, but its assessment is not automatically the final legal determination.
Does a police report determine fault?
A police report can be important evidence, but it does not necessarily make the final determination of civil liability.
Can the insurance company blame me because I wasn’t wearing a seat belt?
For an ordinary Missouri motor-vehicle negligence action arising from the ownership, common maintenance, or operation of a vehicle, Missouri law states that failure to wear a seat belt shall not be considered evidence of comparative negligence.
What if both drivers made mistakes?
Missouri’s comparative fault system allows responsibility to be allocated based on each party’s contribution to the accident. The effect on recovery depends on the percentage of fault ultimately attributed to the injured person.
Should I give a recorded statement if fault is disputed?
Be cautious. Recorded statements can become evidence in the insurer’s liability evaluation. Before providing one, understand who is requesting it, whether you are required to provide it, and how your answers could affect your claim.
Being Blamed Doesn’t Mean the Insurance Company Is Right
Insurance companies use percentages.
People live with what those percentages mean.
Twenty percent can mean thousands of dollars.
Thirty percent can mean tens of thousands.
And in a serious injury case, an unsupported allocation of fault can dramatically affect what an insurer is willing to pay.
So if an insurance company tells you that you were partly responsible for your Missouri car accident, don’t assume your claim is over.
And don’t assume their percentage is carved into stone.
Ask questions.
Preserve evidence.
Understand how Missouri comparative fault works.
And make sure the facts, not simply the insurer’s financial interest, determine what happens next.
At The Pottenger Law Firm, we help people injured in Missouri car accidents investigate what happened, deal with insurance companies, evaluate disputed liability, and pursue compensation for their injuries.
Learn more about our Car Accident Services and Personal Injury Practice Areas, or contact The Pottenger Law Firm to discuss your case.
