Adopt fairer system of accountability

North Carolinians need and deserve a fair civil-justice system, but the insurance industry thinks otherwise. Right now, insurance lobbyists are trying to derail a bipartisan effort to make our system more just for people hurt in accidents -- which, after all, could mean you and me.

North Carolina is one of only four states clinging to contributory negligence, a harsh and outdated way of denying compensation to people hurt in accidents. Under "contrib," even if you are only 1-percent responsible for an accident, you cannot recover damages from someone 99-percent responsible. This means headaches and heartbreak for accident victims. It also means that insurance companies can avoid paying legitimate claims.

Comparative fault, the fairer system used in 46 states, allows people to recover damages from those most responsible for causing an accident. It's a common-sense approach that results in quicker settlements and just outcomes. The overwhelming number of states successfully using comparative fault tells you that policy-makers, courts and consumers around the country find it a much better system. Moreover, no comparative-fault state ever switched back to contrib.

In essence, comparative fault works the way our parents taught us the world should work -- it makes sure the people most responsible for accidents are also the most accountable. Contributory negligence works the wrong way. It allows people responsible for accidents to duck accountability.

Across the state, there are examples of parents and children, sons and daughters hurt in an accident and left hanging by contrib. Consider this scenario: You're following a logging truck with unsecured logs in its truck bed. You and the truck are both traveling five miles per hour over the speed limit. Suddenly, a large log rolls out of the truck. Your car hits the log and flips over. You are severely injured. Who pays for your injuries and your car?

With contrib, North Carolina's antiquated system, the insurance company pays you nothing. With comparative fault, you would receive compensation you deserve, reduced by 10 percent for your share of the fault.

This approach is sensible and straightforward. The rub, however, is the insurance industry. It's not attacking comparative fault's logic. Instead, the insurance industry says it will use the change to raise our rates. The N.C. Department of Insurance, however, is not likely to let such a move fly given that the facts indicate we can have a better system and maintain low rates.

The 15 states with the nation's lowest rates, according to a recent study, all use comparative fault. Regional comparisons, though, are most helpful when studying rates, and again, comparative fault proves to be the smart choice. After neighboring states converted to comparative fault, rates increased at a slower pace than in North Carolina.

South Carolina did away with contributory negligence and adopted comparative fault in 1991; Tennessee in 1992. Both states had rates higher than North Carolina before they changed. After the change, the gap between South Carolina and North Carolina closed from 29.4 percent in early 1991 to 2.6 percent in early 2009.

The difference between Tennessee and North Carolina fell from 19.4 percent to 5.4 percent. After moving to comparative fault, according to Pinnacle Actuarial Resources, increases in premiums slowed significantly in South Carolina and Tennessee while North Carolina's contrib premiums climbed at a steeper rate.

The study proves what the vast majority of states well know -- comparative fault is a fairer system that will not increase auto-insurance rates. It's no wonder, then, that House Bill 813, the legislation to make the change, enjoys support from both sides of the aisle. Because we could all be hurt in an accident, we all need a fair system of responsibility and accountability.

David Pishko is a Winston-Salem attorney and president of the N.C. Advocates for Justice.

The Journal welcomes original submissions for North Carolina Voices on local, regional and statewide topics. Essay length should not exceed 750 words. The writer should have some authority for writing about his or her subject. Our e-mail address is Letters@wsjournal.com. You may also mail a typed essay to Letters to the Journal, P.O. Box 3159, Winston-Salem, NC 27102. Please include your name and address and a daytime telephone number.