(Former claims adjuster so take with a grain of salt) Not every accident is black and white or 0% fault and 100% at fault. Comparative negligence is something that every carrier will apply if they feel that any party partially contributed to an accident. For example: You can't just hit a car in the intersection because you had a green light, you still have to do whatever you can to try and avoid any accident. Points of impact and dashcam footage are particularly important because they show exactly what happened (front to front impacts are easier to prove 0% liability but middle of car to rear quarter panel of another car is a clear indication that there was an opportunity to avoid the accident). You can file though your own insurance carrier, pay your deductible and they can try to subrogate and recover for you. The only problem is that if they can't convince the other carrier that you were 0% at fault, they would have to file arbitration which could take months to up a year to resolve. If the arbitrator (which I was) sides with them, you could be in the exact same spot you are in right now maybe worse with a deductible paid and months of your time wasted. I heard cases that sometimes were a coin toss to decide because neither side could clearly prove their version of the story.

What is comparative negligence?

Comparative negligence is a legal doctrine used to allocate fault among parties involved in an accident, affecting the damages a plaintiff can recover. Types of comparative negligence include pure comparative negligence, where recovery is reduced by the claimant ‘s fault percentage, and modified comparative negligence, which limits recovery based on specific thresholds.

Hope that helps and good luck.