Disputed Intersection Collision: Contributory Negligence and the UM Fallback
Two vehicles collide at a two-way stop intersection in Raleigh at dusk. The carrier's insured, A, was traveling north and faced a stop sign partially obscured by a low tree branch. Claimant B was traveling east and had no stop sign. There are no independent witnesses and no traffic camera. A tells the adjuster the sun was in his eyes and he 'may have rolled' the stop, but insists B was speeding. B's vehicle has $9,400 in damage; B claims $18,000 in soft tissue injuries and $3,200 in lost wages. A's policy has 30/60/25 liability limits, a $500 collision deductible, and UM/UIM coverage. B has no collision coverage and no health insurance, and demands payment in full from A's carrier.
1. Evaluate liability. What weight does each piece of evidence carry, and what does North Carolina contributory negligence do to B's claim if B was partly at fault?
Read the worked answer
Start with the physical evidence, not the stories.
A's negligence. The scene inspection shows a stop sign on A's approach and none on B's, which gives B the right of way. The branch obscuring the sign helps A only marginally: the obstruction was visible on approach, and A still had a duty to stop at the sign or, if he could not see it, to proceed only when it was safe. A's admission that the sun was in his eyes and that he may have rolled the stop is an admission against interest - record it verbatim, do not paraphrase.
B's alleged speeding. This needs evidence: crush and damage analysis, skid marks, post-impact positions, and whether B's damage profile is consistent with speed. Without witnesses or a camera, the adjuster should not assume speeding and should not assert it as fact. Commission the reconstruction if the amount in controversy justifies it.
Contributory negligence. North Carolina is one of the few pure contributory negligence jurisdictions: negligence by the claimant that contributes to the injury bars recovery entirely, even at 1%. So if the evidence shows B was speeding and that speed contributed, B's claim against A's policy fails - subject to the narrow last clear chance doctrine, which rarely rescues a simultaneous intersection collision. The adjuster must not invoke contributory negligence as a reflexive denial; it has to be supported by evidence the carrier can defend at trial.
2. B has no collision coverage and no health insurance. How does that affect the handling, and what should the adjuster say about B's own coverages?
Read the worked answer
B's lack of first-party coverage is not a reason for A's carrier to pay, but it explains the pressure on the file and predicts where the claim goes next.
- UM/UIM on B's own policy. North Carolina requires uninsured and underinsured motorist coverage to be offered, and it responds when the at-fault driver is uninsured or has insufficient limits. If A's carrier denies liability, B's UM carrier may still evaluate the claim; if A is 30/60 and B's damages exceed that, UIM may respond. The A adjuster should not opine on B's coverage, should not coach B toward a UM claim to close the file, and should not treat a UM payment as resolving A's exposure.
- Medical payments. If B purchased MedPay, it pays regardless of fault and B should be referred to her own carrier or agent. If she did not, her bills are her responsibility pending liability resolution.
- Subrogation. If B's UM carrier pays, it will pursue A's carrier. Reserve for it and keep the liability analysis intact so the subrogation demand is evaluated on the same facts rather than as a fresh claim.
The practical reality is that an uninsured claimant with injuries escalates to suit or a Department of Insurance complaint faster than anyone else. Document the liability analysis thoroughly and communicate the decision in writing with the factual basis attached.
3. Should the adjuster pay the $3,200 lost wages and a portion of the injury claim now to 'clear the file'? Justify the recommendation.
Read the worked answer
No. The evaluation has three separate parts and each is incomplete.
Liability. Evidence currently favors B. If a recorded statement and damage analysis rule out speeding, the adjuster should plan on placing liability with A and reserve accordingly.
Damages. $18,000 in soft tissue injury requires records, a treatment chronology, and a causation opinion - especially if there is a gap in treatment, which is common where the claimant has no health insurance and pays cash. $3,200 in lost wages requires employer verification, not a self-report; many such claims collapse to a fraction when the payroll record is pulled. The $9,400 property damage should be compared to an independent estimate or a total-loss valuation on B's vehicle.
Limits and exposure. With 30/60/25 limits and a claim that could exceed $30,000, the carrier faces excess exposure if liability is clear and it delays unreasonably. An excess judgment against A can be pursued against the carrier, and the adjuster's handling will be Exhibit A. That risk belongs in a written report to the supervisor with a reserve recommendation.
Recommended path: take B's recorded statement, obtain medical records and wage documentation, complete the reconstruction, set reserves, then make a documented offer - rather than paying a demand to make the file quiet.