CALL 916-777-7777
Youtube Facebook-f X-twitter Linkedin-in

How Damage to Vehicles Could be Evidence in an Injury Claim

Posted on behalf of Arnold Law Firm in
two-guys-crash-gray-and-red-carsDamage to vehicles involved in a collision can provide information about how that accident occurred. After a car accident, your attorney may consult with an industry expert to inspect the damage to the vehicles involved in the collision. Getting this information can provide valuable insight into how the crash may have happened and who may have been at fault. Below, the Sacramento car accident lawyers of Arnold Law Firm discuss how information about vehicle damage may be used in a personal injury claim. We invite you to contact our legal team today for a free consultation. We can review the specifics of your claim and evaluate whether you may be eligible to pursue compensation for your injuries.

Areas of the Vehicle to Examine

Several areas of a vehicle involved in a collision may reveal useful supporting evidence about the accident, including:
  • Body damage caused by the collision
  • Wheels and tire condition
  • Doors
  • Fenders
  • Engine
  • Hood
  • Trunk
  • Steering system
  • Braking system
  • Seatbelts and restraint systems
Photos may provide useful details about what may have happened in a car crash. If possible, capture images of the vehicles from various angles at the scene of the accident. Include pictures of the road conditions, damaged guardrails, intersection signals or other elements that may have contributed to the collision. Do not worry about taking too many photos. Your attorney will sort through the evidence to determine which images are most useful. Your attorney may also have a licensed mechanic inspect the engine and other internal systems for more information about damage to your vehicle.

What Damage Could Reveal About the Crash

The location and measurements of physical damage each vehicle sustained may help to establish important details about the collisions, such as:
  • Whether an accident happened because of operator failure or if it was due to a mechanical issue with one of the vehicles.
  • Whether the other driver was distracted. An intersection accident example can be damage to the middle of your car, not your front fender, suggesting no attempt to avoid the crash.
  • If a car pulled out in front of you and you swerved to the right to avoid it, but still hit the car, your vehicle would have damage to the left front corner or left front side.
  • If the other car has damage to the right front corner, that may indicate the other driver pulled right in front of oncoming traffic.
Depending on the extent and location of the recovered evidence, vehicle damage can also be useful in proving what did not happen. This type of information is especially helpful when there are contradictory accounts about the accident.

Get Help from a Trusted Lawyer

If you have been injured in a car accident, it may be beneficial to have an experienced attorney on your side. If we represent you, our Sacramento car accident lawyers at the Arnold Law Firm are prepared to conduct an in-depth investigation to build a strong case. Schedule a free, no obligation consultation with one of our experienced lawyers today and learn whether you may be eligible to pursue compensation for your injuries. There are no upfront fees and we are only paid if we recover compensation for you.

Call (916) 777-7777 or complete our Free Case Review form.

Settlement - $3,767,000

Truck Accident

A 20-year-old man who had been married for just 12 days left home on his way to work. He was driving on Pleasant Grove Road in Sutter County in the early morning when he came upon a slow-moving truck. As he pulled out to pass the truck, the truck driver turned left in front of him. The young man attempted to steer back into his lane but his vehicle struck an un-flagged piece of metal extending from the back of the truck. He died in the resulting crash.

Expert witnesses brought in by the Arnold Law Firm proved that the truck, owned and operated by a hauling firm, should never have been on the highway that morning. Specifically, the rear and side turn signals did not work and the rear-view mirror was in a poor state of adjustment at the time of the collision. As a result, the driver, who had failed to properly inspect the vehicle before setting out that morning, couldn’t see the young man’s vehicle as it attempted to pass.

The poor condition of the truck, its lack of maintenance and the manner in which it was operated were found to be substantial factors in causing the collision that killed the young man. The testimony also established that the man had been making a lawful pass at the lawful speed limit and acted reasonably when he attempted to avoid the collision.

The man’s 20-year-old widow was awarded $3,767,000.77, his parents were awarded $185,131 and the family was reimbursed $11,899 in funeral expenses. Though money is a poor substitute for a young man’s life, this verdict demonstrates that drivers who endanger the lives of others will be held accountable for their actions.