Question regarding fault – see below
Hi everyone, I came across this post on r/legal:
https://www.reddit.com/r/legal/s/en2irGsuPh
From an insurance perspective, does it align with what the top comment states?
Or is the legal battle separate from the determination of fault?
Total Fire Loss Inquiry In the event that a home is categorized as a total loss due to fire damage,…
Rear Door Damage After Merging I was merging left with my turn signal on, as my lane was ending due…
Can a car insurance company withdraw a diminished value offer? Last year, I was rear-ended, and the insurance of the…
It seems like you’re asking about the relationship between legal determinations of fault and how insurance companies assess fault in an accident. The two processes can sometimes align, but they are not the same.
From an insurance perspective, the determination of fault usually involves an investigation into the accident, gathering evidence, and assessing the actions of those involved to see who may have been negligent. Insurers have their own criteria and guidelines for determining fault, which can vary by state and by insurer.
On the other hand, legal determinations, particularly in a courtroom setting, can involve more complicated legal principles, such as comparative negligence or contributory negligence, depending on the jurisdiction. A court may find someone partially at fault in a way that differs from how an insurance company assessed the situation.
So, while a legal fight might consider various factors and establish who is liable according to the law, an insurance determination might focus more on the specifics of the policy and how fault is defined within that context. It’s possible for an insurer to come to one conclusion while a court rules differently based on legal arguments.
If you have specific details from the post or comment you’re referring to, I could provide a more tailored response.