When a Property Owner Blames the Victim: How Comparative Fault Works in Florida Premises Claims

If you were injured on someone else’s property, whether it was a store, an apartment complex, a restaurant, a parking lot, or a business, you probably expected the property owner to take responsibility for your injuries. After all, they are supposed to keep their property safe, right? Unfortunately, this isn’t how many cases end up playing out in real life.

In Florida, property owners and insurance companies often try to flip the story and place the blame on the injured person. This approach is directly tied to something called comparative fault in Florida, a legal rule that can significantly impact whether you recover any compensation at all.

At Mickey Keenan, we regularly see injured people that are shocked by how quickly the fault is shifted onto them. Understanding how this law works is one of the most important steps you can take in protecting your claim.

How Comparative Fault in Florida Affects Premises Liability Claims

In March 2023, Florida passed HB 837, which significantly changed the legal standard that is used in negligence cases. Before this law was in place, Florida followed a purely comparative negligence system. Now, the state uses a modified version of comparative fault in Florida for premises liability claims.

Here’s what that means:

Under the current rule, you can only recover damages if you are found to be 50 percent or less at fault. If you are found to be 51 percent or more responsible for your injury, you lose the right to any compensation at all. This rule applies to slip and fall accidents, trip and fall cases, stairway injuries, falling merchandise incidents, negligent security claims, and parking lot accidents.

Because of this change to the law, property owners have a very strong incentive to argue that you caused your own injury. Even a small change in fault can make or break one of these cases.

Common Ways Property Owners Try to Shift Blame

Insurance companies and defense attorneys are specifically trained to look for any detail that they can use to argue comparative fault in Florida. One of the most common claims is that the injured person wasn’t paying close enough attention. They may suggest that you were looking at your phone, talking to someone, walking too fast, or carrying items that blocked your view. Even when a hazard was hidden or impossible to notice, this argument is one that is often used.

Another common defense is that the hazard was “open and obvious.” Property owners may claim that anyone would have seen the danger and avoided it. However, Florida law still requires property owners to maintain reasonably safe conditions, even when the hazards are visible.

Footwear is another frequent target of the blame. Insurance companies may argue that sandals, heels, or flip flops caused the fall rather than a slippery floor or an uneven surface. They may also claim that warning signs were present when they weren’t, or that the injured person somehow created the dangerous condition themselves.

In some cases, property owners try to argue that the injured person was in an unauthorized area, even when they were a legitimate customer in a common area of a business. All of these tactics are specifically designed to push the fault past the critical 51 percent threshold under comparative fault in Florida.

Why Strong Evidence Makes All the Difference

When a property owner blames you for your injury, the evidence that has been collected becomes your strongest protection. Surveillance footage is often one of the most powerful pieces of evidence. Video can show how long a hazard existed, whether employees ignored it, and whether any warning signs were actually present.

Lighting conditions also matter a whole lot more than many people realize. Poor lighting in stairwells, parking lots, and walkways makes hazards a lot harder to see. If lighting was inadequate, it weakens any claims that you should have noticed the danger.

Incident reports, maintenance logs, and repair requests can reveal whether a property owner knew about a hazard and failed to properly fix it. Employee and witness statements often help support what really happened, especially when they confirm that the area was unsafe or that no warnings were provided.

Experts like safety engineers can analyze flooring, stair design, lighting levels, and slip resistance. Their findings often show that even a careful person could have been injured. Medical records also play an important role by confirming that your injuries match the mechanics of the fall.

All of this evidence works together to counter unfair arguments based on comparative fault in Florida.

Why You Should Never Accept Blame at the Scene

After an accident, property managers, employees, or insurance representatives may try to get you to say something that sounds harmless but can be very damaging later. Statements like “I wasn’t paying attention” or “I should have watched my step” are often used to argue that you were mostly at fault.

Instead, stick to simple facts. Say that you fell, explain where it happened, and ask for medical help. Avoid guessing, apologizing, or assigning any blame. Even a single sentence can be used to reduce or deny your claim under comparative fault in Florida.

How Mickey Keenan, P.A. Protects Injury Victims

Our firm represents injury victims throughout Tampa Bay and across Florida. As a trusted personal injury lawyer Tampa residents rely on, we understand how aggressively insurers use fault arguments. That’s why we act quickly to preserve evidence before it disappears.

We send formal requests demanding that property owners keep surveillance footage, incident reports, cleaning logs, and maintenance records. We work with experts who can dismantle any unfair fault claims and clearly show how dangerous conditions caused the injury.

Clients work directly with a Tampa personal injury attorney who explains each step of the process in plain, easy-to-understand language. If you need a personal injury attorney Tampa FL, our approach is always hands-on and highly compassionate.

As a boutique Tampa personal injury lawyer firm, we do not treat clients like numbers. Our goal is to protect you from blame, reduce stress, and help you move forward with confidence. Many people come to us after speaking with other personal injury attorneys in Tampa because they want honesty and clear explanations without any of the jargon.

Blaming the Victim Is a Strategy, Not the Truth

Property owners rely on comparative fault in Florida because it benefits them financially, not because it reflects what actually happened. You deserve to be heard, and you deserve a fair evaluation of your case.

If you were injured on someone else’s property, don’t let an insurance company convince you that the accident was your fault. Reach out today to Mickey Keenan for a free consultation.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the meaning of comparative fault?

Comparative fault is a legal concept that looks at how much each party contributed to an accident. In Florida, your compensation is reduced by your percentage of fault, and if you are found more than 50 percent responsible, you cannot recover damages.

What’s the difference between comparative and contributory negligence?

Contributory negligence is much stricter. In states that follow that rule, being even slightly at fault can block recovery entirely. Comparative fault allows injured people to recover compensation as long as they are not more than 50 percent at fault.

What are the four types of negligence?

The four main types are gross negligence, ordinary negligence, comparative negligence, and contributory negligence. Each type affects how responsibility and damages are evaluated in a case.

What is a comparative fault indemnification?

Comparative fault indemnification refers to adjusting financial responsibility based on each party’s share of fault. In injury cases, this means compensation is reduced according to how much fault is assigned to each side.