Automotive

Is there a difference between 50/50 and 100% At-Fault?

  • Last Updated:
  • Jan 7th, 2018 10:17 am
[OP]
Banned
Dec 25, 2017
13 posts

Is there a difference between 50/50 and 100% At-Fault?

Essentially, I was found 100% At-Fault by Insurance & The Fault Determination Rules Of Ontario, rear ending a vehicle.
But I went to Trial & was found Not Guilty of because the vehicle stopped for the police in the middle of the intersection.

Is it worth it for me to fight the determination, from 100% down to 50/50? I haven't been able to search for a clear answer. Thanks
Last edited by MeNotBug on Jan 4th, 2018 5:10 pm, edited 1 time in total.
18 replies
Deal Guru
User avatar
Oct 5, 2008
13498 posts
7618 upvotes
Toronto
Police fault and insurance fault are 2 separate things
Sr. Member
Dec 16, 2008
980 posts
405 upvotes
Richmond Hill
A car stopped for police in the middle of intersection was rear-ended by you and you were found not guilty ?!
Deal Expert
Aug 22, 2011
35085 posts
21050 upvotes
Center of Universe
If you were found not guilty, why are you still fighting?
Deal Addict
Jul 2, 2006
1406 posts
572 upvotes
Toronto
The difference with 50% fault is that you pay only 50% of your collision deductible.
Deal Guru
User avatar
Mar 9, 2007
13685 posts
8695 upvotes
Think of the Childre…
Common sense right?
bst wrote: The difference with 50% fault is that you pay only 50% of your collision deductible.

WOULD SOMEBODY THINK OF THE CHILDREN!!!
Deal Addict
Aug 20, 2007
1922 posts
687 upvotes
Kitchener
from a rating perspective there is no difference whether its 50/50 or 100% as only claims with less than 25% at fault can not be rated for.
Deal Fanatic
Feb 17, 2007
5838 posts
2016 upvotes
Mort Réal
Depends on your province. But 50/50 mostly means insurance can ding both drivers with higher premiums, as opposed to just one at-fault driver means the other driver is less likely to see their premiums rise.
Your story doesn't mention which province and is also a bit confusing, so I will stop here.
I can't afford to buy cheap stuff. Therefore, I'm thirsty for deals on durable goods.
Sr. Member
Feb 19, 2012
904 posts
598 upvotes
Woodbridge
Being found "not guilty" doesn't mean that you aren't at fault according to the IBC rules. Many people who cause an accident aren't convicted of any traffic offence. At the end of the day, you rear-ended another vehicle which means you weren't paying attention or keeping a safe distance. Be thankful that you were found not-guilty but don't expect your insurance company to change their finding. By your own description of events you were very clearly 100% at fault.
Deal Fanatic
User avatar
Aug 11, 2008
8802 posts
1406 upvotes
Ontario
in Ontario, anything deemed over 25% at fault will be treated the same as 100% at fault.
MeNotBug wrote: Essentially, I was found 100% At-Fault by Insurance & The Fault Determination Rules Of Ontario, rear ending a vehicle.
But I went to Trial & was found Not Guilty of because the vehicle stopped for the police in the middle of the intersection.

Is it worth it for me to fight the determination, from 100% down to 50/50? I haven't been able to search for a clear answer. Thanks
RIBO LICENCED INSURANCE BROKER, over 35 years experience
Deal Fanatic
Dec 3, 2007
5672 posts
809 upvotes
Calgary
IMO, you got lucky, you could've run over someone on the road, like the police.
Deal Fanatic
User avatar
Dec 27, 2009
7106 posts
4270 upvotes
Victoria, BC
MeNotBug wrote: Essentially, I was found 100% At-Fault by Insurance & The Fault Determination Rules Of Ontario, rear ending a vehicle.
But I went to Trial & was found Not Guilty of because the vehicle stopped for the police in the middle of the intersection.

Is it worth it for me to fight the determination, from 100% down to 50/50? I haven't been able to search for a clear answer. Thanks
How could the other person be 50% at fault if they were stopped for a police car when you rear ended them?
Sr. Member
User avatar
Apr 15, 2014
937 posts
806 upvotes
Toronto, ON
Maybe stop texting while driving and you would have noticed the car right in front of you.
Please respond
Deal Addict
Nov 18, 2015
1101 posts
1304 upvotes
Waterloo, ON
CardinalComb wrote: Maybe stop texting while driving and you would have noticed the car right in front of you.
Assuming much?
I'm not even on OP side and I found this statement ridiculous...
Deal Guru
User avatar
Dec 2, 2008
12153 posts
1926 upvotes
100% at fault means the not at fault car can sue? What about a 50/50 case? Can one part sue the other?
Deal Addict
Apr 5, 2016
4794 posts
3289 upvotes
Calgary/Vancouver
But he was found not guilty so he was doing something right.
Current Fido and Rogers customer.
Ex Koodo customer.
Newbie
User avatar
Jan 5, 2018
79 posts
44 upvotes
BugMeNot
COSMIC5 wrote: in Ontario, anything deemed over 25% at fault will be treated the same as 100% at fault.
Ah I see, so in this case it would not be worth it to pursue a 100% At-Fault down to a 50% at-fault.
Unless, are settlement amounts limited by Fault Percentage?
Deal Fanatic
User avatar
Aug 11, 2008
8802 posts
1406 upvotes
Ontario
insurance companies will determine fault (in ontario) one advantage to dropping from 100 to 50 would be the amount you would have to pay out on your collision deductible
LadyBug420 wrote: Ah I see, so in this case it would not be worth it to pursue a 100% At-Fault down to a 50% at-fault.
Unless, are settlement amounts limited by Fault Percentage?
RIBO LICENCED INSURANCE BROKER, over 35 years experience

Top