The other driver is already telling a different story. At the scene of the crash, you heard them twisting the facts to the police officer. Now, a friendly-sounding insurance adjuster is on the phone, asking pointed questions designed to make you second-guess your own actions.
They suggest you might have been going a little too fast, or that you could have braked sooner. Suddenly, the fear of being blamed for an accident that was not your fault becomes a heavy weight.
This is a deliberate strategy, and how it is handled will directly impact your ability to recover compensation. This is the reality of Illinois comparative negligence, a legal rule that insurance companies use to minimize or deny claims by assigning shared fault.
The fault line
When an insurance company tries to shift blame, the situation can feel confusing and unfair. These are the foundational realities of how Illinois law treats shared fault, and they are the principles upon which your attorney will build your case.
- Illinois law has an absolute cut-off. If you are found to be 51% or more responsible for the accident, you are barred from recovering any compensation at all.
- Insurance companies are financially motivated to assign you a percentage of fault, no matter how small. Every percentage point they can pin on you reduces the amount of money they have to pay.
- Determining the correct percentage of fault is not a guessing game. It is a fact-finding mission that requires a detailed, independent investigation led by an experienced law firm.
- Anything you say to an insurance adjuster can and will be used to build a case against you. Their questions are not designed to help you, but to find admissions they can exploit.
The Insurance Adjuster's Favorite Tactic: Blame Shifting
Shortly after your accident, you will likely receive a call from the other driver’s insurance company. The adjuster may sound sympathetic and concerned for your well-being.
This is a carefully crafted illusion. Their primary job is to protect their company’s financial interests by paying out as little as possible. The most effective way for them to do this is to shift as much blame for the accident as they can onto you.
They are trained professionals in the art of conversation, using subtle questions and prompts to get you to admit to something, anything, that they can use to assign you a percentage of fault.
Common arguments used to assign you fault
An adjuster will probe for any small detail they can twist into an admission of fault. Even if the other driver was clearly negligent, the adjuster will search for ways to argue that you contributed to the collision. Their goal is to build a narrative where you are not just a victim, but a participant.
Insurance adjusters will often try to get you to agree with seemingly innocent statements. They know that these small admissions can have a big impact on your final car accident settlement. Common arguments they use to assign fault include assertions that you were:
- Driving a few miles per hour over the speed limit.
- Not paying full attention to your surroundings.
- Following the car ahead of you too closely.
- Failing to use your turn signal properly.
- Making a lane change at an inopportune moment.
These allegations are just that: allegations. They do not become facts unless they are proven with evidence. This is where a dedicated car accident lawyer steps in to dismantle their arguments and present the true story of what happened.
Illinois's Modified Comparative Negligence Rule: The 51% Bar
The reason insurance companies work so hard to assign blame is because of a specific Illinois state law. The rule that governs these situations is found in the Illinois Code of Civil Procedure, specifically 735 ILCS 5/2-1116.
This law establishes what is known as a "modified comparative negligence" system. It is a rule with a very sharp edge.
How the percentage of fault directly impacts your claim
Under this system, an injured person can still recover damages even if they are partially at fault for the accident. However, their total compensation will be reduced by their percentage of fault.
For example, if a jury determines that your total damages are $100,000, but finds that you were 20% at fault for the crash, your final recovery would be reduced by 20%, to $80,000. This is a simple mathematical reduction.
The Cliff: Being found 51% or more at fault
The most unforgiving part of this law is what is often called the "51% bar." The law explicitly states that a plaintiff "shall be barred from recovering damages if the trier of fact finds that the plaintiff's contributory fault is more than 50% of the proximate cause of the car accident add title "Six Causes of Car Accidents injury or damage."
This means that if you are found to be 51% or more responsible for the accident, you recover nothing. Zero. This is why insurance companies fight so hard over every single percentage point. Pushing you from 49% to 51% fault saves them the entire value of your claim.
How a Lawyer Proves the Other Driver's True Percentage of Fault
Given the high stakes of the 51% bar, determining the accurate percentage of fault is the central battle in many car accident cases. This is not something an injured person can or should attempt to do on their own.
It requires a swift and aggressive legal response, managed entirely by a law firm dedicated to protecting your interests. A lawyer’s job is to take control of the narrative and build a case based on undeniable facts, not on the insurance company’s self-serving fiction.
Conducting an independent crash investigation
The police report is only the beginning of the story. A dedicated law firm will launch its own independent investigation into the crash. This often involves dispatching investigators to the accident scene to take photographs, measure distances, and document road conditions and traffic control devices. This proactive evidence-gathering is a necessary step to counter the insurance company's version of events.
Analyzing all available evidence
A lawyer’s analysis goes far beyond a simple reading of the accident report. They will collect and scrutinize every piece of information that can shed light on how the crash occurred and who was truly at fault. Building a strong case requires a deep dive into all potential sources of proof.
An experienced legal team will secure and review a wide array of evidence on your behalf. This is a complex process that a lawyer will manage for you, which often includes:
- Obtaining and analyzing the vehicle’s “black box” or event data recorder (EDR) information.
- Securing and reviewing surveillance footage from nearby businesses or traffic cameras.
- Identifying and interviewing all credible witnesses to the collision.
- Subpoenaing the other driver’s cell phone records to check for distracted driving.
- Examining vehicle maintenance records to identify potential mechanical failures.
This collection of objective data is used to construct a fact-based timeline of the accident. It moves the case away from a "he said, she said" argument and into the realm of proven fact.
Hiring accident reconstruction professionals
In complex cases, a lawyer may retain an accident reconstruction professional. These are individuals, often with backgrounds in engineering and law enforcement, who use physics and advanced technology to scientifically reconstruct the crash.
They can determine vehicle speeds, points of impact, and the sequence of events with a high degree of accuracy. Their findings can provide powerful, objective testimony that dismantles an insurance company’s blame-shifting arguments.
Handling all communications with the insurance company
Once you have legal representation, your lawyer becomes your shield. They will instruct the insurance companies to direct all future communications to the law firm. This immediately stops the adjuster’s attempts to get you to make a damaging statement.
Your attorney will handle all negotiations, present all evidence, and make all legal arguments on your behalf, allowing you to focus completely on your physical and emotional recovery.
Common Scenarios Where Shared Fault Becomes an Issue
While blame-shifting can happen in any type of accident, certain scenarios are particularly prone to disputes over fault. Insurance companies are well-versed in exploiting the ambiguities of these situations.
An experienced attorney will recognize these tactics and know exactly how to counter them.
Left-turn and intersection accidents
Crashes at intersections are frequently disputed. The other driver may claim you ran a red light, failed to yield, or were speeding through the intersection. Without objective evidence like video footage or witness statements, these cases can become a credibility contest.
A lawyer’s independent investigation is designed to find that objective proof.
Rear-end collisions with complications
While there is a general presumption that the rear driver is at fault in a rear-end collision, there are exceptions that insurers love to explore. They might argue that you stopped suddenly for no reason or that your brake lights were not functioning.
A lawyer will investigate these claims to confirm they are baseless and that the fault remains with the driver who failed to maintain a safe following distance.
Parking lot and merging accidents
Parking lots are often chaotic environments with no clear traffic signals. Merging onto a highway can also lead to disputes over right-of-way. In these cases, a lawyer will use the physical evidence on the vehicles, along with any available video, to establish the points of impact and the angles of approach to prove what really happened.
Why You Should Never Admit Fault or Apologize
In the chaotic moments after a car crash, it is a natural human impulse to say, "I'm so sorry." While this is often an expression of sympathy, an insurance adjuster will seize upon it as an admission of guilt.
It is imperative to let your attorney do the talking for you. If you have already made such a statement, do not panic. A lawyer’s job is to place such statements in their proper context and build a case based on the physical evidence, not on a misconstrued expression of regret.
AI Chatbots Cannot Argue Your Case
You may find online AI tools that can define "comparative negligence" for you. But an algorithm cannot analyze the crush damage on your vehicle, question a witness about what they saw, or argue with an insurance adjuster who is trying to assign you 55% of the blame.
AI can provide definitions, but it cannot provide advocacy. For a matter this serious, you need the strategic thinking and dedicated representation of a qualified human attorney.
Contact a Chicago Car Accident Law Firm Today
The insurance company’s goal is clear: to use the complexities of Illinois’s shared fault law to pay you as little as possible. The stakes are too high to face this fight alone.
You need a powerful advocate who will take control of your case and fight to protect your right to fair compensation. Let us fight for you. The attorneys at Abels & Annes, P.C. are ready to build the strong, evidence-based case you need.
Call us now at (312) 924-7575 for your free, no-obligation consultation. We are available 24/7, and there is no fee unless you win.