How is Fault Determined in a Head-On Collision?

There is no more terrifying type of car accident than a head-on collision. The combined force of two vehicles moving toward each other creates a catastrophic impact, often resulting in the most severe and life-altering injuries. In the aftermath of such a traumatic event, the question of fault might seem straightforward, but it requires a careful and methodical investigation.

Unlike some other accident types, the starting point for determining fault in a head-on crash is very clear. There is an extremely strong legal presumption that the driver who crossed the centerline and entered the lane of oncoming traffic is the one at fault.

However, this is a “rebuttable presumption.” This means that while the driver who left their lane is considered negligent, there are rare and specific circumstances where they may be able to argue that other factors caused the crash. Understanding how this presumption works is key to any head-on collision claim.

Useful Information for You: In a Nutshell

• The Driver Who Crosses the Centerline is Presumed at Fault: In Washington State, there is a very strong legal presumption that the driver who leaves their designated lane and enters oncoming traffic is negligent and liable for the collision.
• This is a Very Strong Presumption: It is very difficult for a driver who has crossed the centerline to avoid being found at fault.
• Rare Exceptions Can Exist: Fault can be shifted or shared if the driver who crossed the line can prove they did so due to a sudden medical emergency, to avoid a different hazard, or were forced out of their lane by another vehicle.
• Evidence is Crucial: Proving an exception requires powerful evidence. Physical evidence from the scene, vehicle data, witness testimony, and expert analysis are critical.
• These Cases Involve Serious Injuries: Due to the severity of head-on collisions, the resulting claims for damages are often very high and aggressively defended by insurance companies.

The Foundation of Fault: Crossing the Centerline

The law in Washington State (RCW 46.61.100) requires vehicles to be driven on the right half of the roadway. When a driver crosses the double yellow line or the median and enters a lane of opposing traffic, they are violating this fundamental rule of the road. This violation is a direct breach of their duty to drive with reasonable care and is considered primary evidence of negligence.

For the person who was hit while lawfully driving in their own lane, the case is typically very strong. They had the right-of-way and the right to assume that other drivers would not suddenly appear in their path.

The Rare Exceptions: When the At-Fault Driver Might Have a Defense

While the presumption of fault is strong, the driver who crossed the centerline has the right to argue that they were not negligent because an unforeseen circumstance forced them to do so. These defenses are difficult to prove.

Commonly argued (but rarely successful) exceptions include:

• Sudden Medical Emergency: The driver claims they suffered an unforeseeable and sudden medical event, like a heart attack or seizure, that caused them to lose control of the vehicle. This requires extensive proof from medical records that the event was truly sudden and not related to a known, pre-existing condition.
• Avoiding a Hazard: The driver claims they swerved to avoid a deer, a pedestrian, or a large piece of debris on the road. The key here is whether this action was “reasonable.” Swerving into a lane of oncoming traffic is an extremely dangerous maneuver and may not be considered a reasonable alternative to hitting the hazard.
• The “Phantom Vehicle”: The driver claims another, unidentified vehicle forced them out of their lane. Without dashcam footage or a credible, independent witness to corroborate this story, this is nearly impossible to prove.
• Mechanical Failure: The driver claims a sudden tire blowout or steering failure caused them to lose control. This would require an expert mechanical inspection to prove the failure was sudden and not the result of poor vehicle maintenance.

How Fault is Proven in a Head-On Crash

The investigation will focus on proving which vehicle crossed the centerline and why.

• Physical Scene Evidence: The final resting positions of the cars, the location of skid marks and debris, and gouges in the pavement are critical for pinpointing the area of impact.
• Vehicle “Black Box” Data: Many modern cars have Event Data Recorders (EDRs) that can provide crucial information about speed, braking, and steering inputs in the seconds before the crash.
• Expert Testimony: Accident reconstruction experts are often used in these serious cases to analyze all the physical evidence and provide a scientific opinion on how the crash occurred.

Head-on collisions result in the most devastating injuries and the most complex legal claims. The insurance companies involved will conduct an aggressive investigation to try to shift even a small percentage of the blame.

If you or a loved one has been injured in a head-on collision in the Tacoma area, you need an advocate with the resources to fight back. Search the Car Accident Lawyer Directory Tacoma to find and compare trusted local attorneys who have the expertise to hire reconstruction experts and prove your case.

References

• Revised Code of Washington (RCW 46.61.100) – Keep right except when passing, etc.:

  The official state law that establishes the fundamental duty for drivers to remain on the right half of the roadway.

  https://app.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=46.61.100

• Washington Pattern Jury Instructions (WPI 70.01) – Right of Way—Deception:

  This instruction explains a driver’s right to assume that other drivers will obey the law (e.g., stay in their own lane), which is a key concept in head-on collision cases.

  https://www.courts.wa.gov/superiori/pattern_jury_instructions/WPI%2070.01%20Right%20of%20Way%20-%20Deception.pdf