QuestionI was involved in an intersection crash in Maryland. I had the stop sign but
could not see because of line of sight obstruction at the intersection. After
stopping at the stop sign and making every attempt to observe any traffic I
crossed the intersection and was struck by a speeding vehicle. I was issued a
ticket for failing to yield the right of way. The owner of the building with the
obstructions agrees there was an obstruction and has taken corrective action.
The Town Council agrees that there was an obstruction and has gone on record in
writing stating that the intersection is a danger because of the obstruction.
Two witnesses have come forward stating that they observed the entire crash and
that the other vehicle was speeding more than 30 MPH over the posted speed limit. My ticket was
dismissed and there where several news articles written in our local news papers
about the danger at this intersection because of the line of sight obstructions.
My ticket was dismissed. Yet the insurance company of the person who struck my
vehicle will not accept my claim. They state: "The State of Maryland is a
contributory negligence state. What it means is that in the State of Maryland 1%
contributory negligence is sufficient to bar you from making any claim. In this
instance, we determined that you were more than 1% contributory negligent. We
believe you were the sole proximate cause of the accident because you had a stop
sign and as such you had a greater duty of care on the public highway." I do not
agree with this because I did stop at the stop sign and yield to all vehicle
that I could see. The crash took place because my line of sight was obstructed
and the other party was speeding. Is there anything I can do at this point. Thank you.
AnswerHi Rick,
I'm sorry to learn of your predicament.
There are two types of negligence laws governing accidents and each state only uses one of the two.
The contributory negligence law is now only used by a few states. Under this law, you have no legal right of recovery from the other party if you can be found to be between 1% and 49% at fault.
The majority of the states use the comparative negligence law. Under this law, a degree of fault is established against each driver (in cases when it's not clear that one party was 100% at fault) and each party is entitled to collect that percentage of damage and injury from the other, whether it be 80/20 or 50/50.
I have been a licensed insurance broker in California since 1964.
My state was contributory negligence until the mid 1970's when it switched to comparative negligence law, so I have worked under both systems.
If you carry collision coverage, you can have your own company repair your vehicle, less your deductible.
The only way that you are going to be able to collect from the other party is to prove that he was 51% at fault. Although you have amassed a great deal of information and have two witnesses, I seriously doubt that you can convince a judge to assign 51% fault to the other driver.
If you decide to pursue the matter, then file a claim in small claims court and have the two witnesses served to appear. Attorneys are allowed in small claims court in Maryland and the opposing insurance company will provide free attorney representation to their insured.
You will need to hire an attorney to represent you.
This will be an expensive undertaking on your part with your chances of winning being slim to none. Although justice is not served, I suggest that you drop the matter and move on.
Your energies would be better spent lobbying your state representative and state senator to change the law to comparative negligence.
I hope you found this information to be helpful.
Your feedback by rating my answer will be appreciated.
Sincerely,
Bennie
San Francisco Bay Area
