Many people are shocked to learn that even after suffering injuries in a slip-and-fall accident, an insurance company may try to shift the blame onto them. You should never lose sight of the fact that an insurance company is a for-profit enterprise, and the less they pay for you, the better off it is for them. Their profits literally come from making things worse for you.
What does “open and obvious” mean?
Property owners must take reasonable steps to keep their property safe. When they raise an “open and obvious” defense, they argue that the hazard was easy to see and that visitors could have avoided it. Instances may include:
- A large spill in a store aisle
- A cracked or uneven sidewalk
- A wet floor with warning signs nearby
- Boxes or clutter blocking a walkway
Insurance companies often raise this argument early when they review a slip-and-fall claim. However, simply labeling a condition as open and obvious does not automatically answer questions about responsibility. The facts surrounding the accident, the condition of the property and the actions of the people involved can all play a role in evaluating a claim.
Does an obvious hazard automatically prevent recovery?
A visible hazard does not automatically prevent an injured person from seeking compensation because Kentucky follows a comparative fault system. Courts may examine the actions of everyone involved and determine how responsibility should be shared. In some cases, a property owner may still bear part of the responsibility even when a hazard was visible.
That can make a significant difference when determining the compensation available after an accident. The outcome often depends on the specific facts of the case.
Why details matter in these cases
Slip-and-fall cases rarely depend on a single fact. Lighting conditions, foot traffic, warning signs and property maintenance can all affect how a court views the accident.
A hazard may seem obvious at first glance, but the surrounding circumstances often matter just as much. Looking beyond a simple “open and obvious” argument may help injured individuals understand who may share responsibility and how Kentucky law applies to their situation.