Motorcyclists face a persistent bias in insurance claims: adjusters often assume recklessness before reviewing any evidence, and shifting fault onto the rider is one of the most direct ways to reduce a payout.
Comparative fault in California means a claimant’s recovery is reduced by their percentage of fault rather than being barred outright. That framework gives insurers an incentive to inflate a motorcyclist’s share of fault, since even a modest increase in assigned negligence can significantly lower the settlement.
At Salamati Law, our Los Angeles motorcycle accident lawyers examine the evidence in every case, challenge fault allocations built on assumptions rather than facts, and fight for your right to fair compensation for your losses.
What Is Comparative Fault Under California Law?
California follows a pure comparative fault rule, established by a 1975 California Supreme Court decision, Li v. Yellow Cab Co. It replaced the state’s older, harsher approach that barred any recovery if a plaintiff was even slightly at fault.
Under pure comparative fault, you can still recover damages even if you share some of the blame. Instead of an all-or-nothing outcome, your compensation is reduced by your percentage of fault. If you were found 30% responsible for a crash and your damages totaled $100,000, you could still recover $70,000.
How Comparative Fault Affects Motorcycle Accident Claims
This rule carries particular weight for motorcyclists, who, as noted, face a persistent bias toward assumed fault regardless of what the evidence shows. Insurers may automatically assume the rider was speeding, lane splitting unsafely, or riding without a helmet.
Some of these assumptions collapse once the evidence is presented. Lane splitting, for example, is legal in California under Vehicle Code Section 21658.1, and the California Highway Patrol publishes its own safety guidelines for the practice rather than treating it as inherently reckless. Lawful conduct under the statute isn’t, on its own, evidence of negligence.s up paying the damages award.
How Insurance Companies Use Fault Arguments Against Motorcyclists
Under pure comparative fault, a rider’s payout is reduced by whatever percentage of fault gets assigned to them. This gives insurers a direct financial incentive to push that percentage as high as possible.
Recorded statements taken in the days after a crash are a common vehicle for this. Adjusters use them to lock in language that can later be characterized as an admission, before the rider has reviewed the police report or consulted an attorney.
A fault percentage that an insurer proposes in a claim isn’t a legal finding. It becomes binding only through a settlement the claimant agrees to or a determination by a judge or jury.
What Evidence Determines Fault in a California Motorcycle Accident?
Fault is determined by evidence, not assertion. Under California’s civil jury instructions (CACI 405 and 406), a jury weighing comparative fault relies on the same categories of evidence that govern any negligence case.
Police reports, witness statements, photographs, video from the scene, and physical evidence such as skid marks or vehicle damage all factor into that analysis. Medical records matter as well, both to establish the extent of the injuries and to rebut any argument that a pre-existing condition, rather than the crash, caused the harm being claimed.
Early Preservation of Evidence Is Important
The earlier this evidence is gathered, the harder it becomes for an insurer’s fault assessment to hold up. Witness accounts fade, footage is deleted on standard retention cycles, and physical evidence at the scene does not last. However, we move quickly to preserve what the case needs, because an unfair allocation of fault often depends on gaps in the record that early documentation closes.
What looks like partial fault at the outset can often be substantially reduced once that evidence is in place.
Schedule a Free Consultation
At Salamati Law, we work with injured motorcyclists throughout Los Angeles. We review the accident details, gather evidence, and push back against fault arguments that don’t line up with the facts. Schedule a free, no-obligation consultation. No fee unless we win. Se habla español.
