What is Washington’s “Comparative Fault” Rule?

After a car accident, it’s natural to think of the situation in simple terms: one driver was right, and the other was wrong. But in the eyes of the law, reality is often more nuanced. What if one driver ran a stop sign, but the other driver was texting? What if someone made an illegal U-turn, but the other person was speeding? Accidents are frequently the result of a series of small mistakes made by more than one person.

This is where a critical piece of Washington State law comes into play: the Comparative Fault rule.

Instead of a harsh, all-or-nothing system, Washington uses this doctrine to assign a percentage of fault to each party involved in an accident. This rule is the foundation for determining how much compensation you can receive, and it’s a favorite tool of insurance companies looking to reduce their payouts. Understanding exactly how it works is essential for protecting your right to a fair settlement.

Useful Information for You: In a Nutshell

• Fault Can Be Shared: Washington law recognizes that more than one person can be at fault for an accident.¹
  
   
• It’s a “Pure” Comparative Fault State: This is great news for accident victims. It means you can recover damages even if you were partially at fault, no matter your percentage of blame.²
  
   
• Your Compensation is Reduced by Your Fault Percentage: Your final settlement or award is simply reduced by your assigned percentage of fault.³ For example, if you are 20% at fault, you can recover 80% of your total damages.⁴
  
   
   
• Insurance Companies Use This to Their Advantage: An insurer’s goal is to shift as much blame as possible onto you, even a small amount, to save money.
• Evidence is Your Best Defense: The best way to fight an unfair allocation of fault is with strong, objective evidence like a police report, photos, and witness statements.⁵
  
   

Washington’s System: “Pure” Comparative Fault Explained

There are different types of comparative fault systems, and Washington has adopted the most victim-friendly version: pure comparative fault.⁶

Here’s what that means: Your ability to recover compensation is not barred, regardless of how much you were at fault. Even if you were found to be 99% responsible for an accident, you could still theoretically recover 1% of your damages from the other party.⁷

Let’s use a real-world example in Tacoma:

• You are driving on Pacific Avenue and are hit by a driver who runs a red light. You suffer injuries and your car is damaged. Your total damages (medical bills, lost wages, vehicle repair) amount to $50,000.
• The other driver is clearly mostly at fault. However, an investigation reveals you were driving 5 mph over the speed limit at the time of the crash.
• The insurance companies or a jury determines that the other driver was 90% at fault, but that your speeding contributed to the severity of the crash, making you 10% at fault.

Under Washington’s pure comparative fault rule, you are still entitled to compensation. Your total damages of $50,000 will simply be reduced by your 10% share of the fault ($5,000). You would be able to recover $45,000.

How Insurance Companies Leverage This Rule

This rule is the primary battleground in most insurance negotiations. The at-fault driver’s insurance adjuster knows that every percentage point of fault they can successfully pin on you directly reduces the amount their company has to pay.

They will scrutinize your every action to build a case for your partial fault. They will ask questions like:

• “Were you paying full attention?”
• “Did you brake as soon as you saw the other car?”
• “Were you listening to the radio or talking on the phone (even hands-free)?”

Their goal is to get you to admit to a small mistake that they can then use to assign you a percentage of the blame.

Why Evidence is Your Strongest Shield

The best way to protect yourself from an unfair allocation of fault is with overwhelming, objective evidence that proves the other driver was entirely, or at least primarily, responsible. This is why the steps you take at the accident scene are so critical:

• A police report provides an officer’s impartial assessment.
• Photos of the scene can clearly show the positions of the cars and the point of impact.
• Witness statements provide a neutral, third-party account of what happened.⁸
  
   

Without strong evidence, it can become a “he said, she said” argument, which is exactly what the insurance company wants.

Don’t assume you have no claim just because you think you might have made a minor error. In Washington, the law is on your side to ensure you can still receive a fair recovery. If you’ve been injured in an accident in the Tacoma area and the other party is trying to shift the blame, search the Car Accident Lawyer Directory Tacoma. Compare profiles and reviews of experienced local attorneys who understand the nuances of comparative fault and can build the strongest possible case to minimize your percentage of fault and maximize your compensation.

References

• Revised Code of Washington (RCW 4.22.005) – Effect of contributory fault:This is the official state law that codifies the “pure comparative fault” rule in Washington State, serving as the legal foundation for all shared-fault claims.

  https://app.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=4.22.005

• Washington State Pattern Jury Instructions (WPI 11.01) – Contributory Negligence/Fault:The official instruction that explains to a jury how they must apply the comparative fault rule when determining damages in a trial.

  https://www.courts.wa.gov/superiori/pattern_jury_instructions/WPI%2011.01%20Contributory%20Negligence%20-%20Fault%20-%20Definition.pdf