If A Driverless Car Crashes, Who's Liable?

[marmar]

(NPR) Some number of years from now, the technology may exist for cars to drive themselves. This could save thousands of lives a year (90 percent of fatal car accidents involve human error).

But getting the technology right won't be enough. Governments and courts will have to figure out lots of new legal and regulatory issues. One key question: If a driverless car crashes, who's liable?

"It's absolutely the case that after the first accident involving an automated vehicle, there will be an automated ambulance chaser following," says Robert Hartwig, President of the Insurance Information Institute.

The auto industry is aware of the legal risk. "We have great exposure as an industry in terms of product liability," says Dan Gage, of the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers. "And I think as an industry ... most of us suspect that there will always be someone in that driver's seat." ..................(more)

The complete piece is at: http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2013/03/08/173766352/if-a-driverless-car-crashes-whos-liable

[ChairmanAgnostic]

1. I loves me my products liability cases. Yummy.

First, the auto manufacturer
Second, the software designer
Third, the driver of the vehicle (misuse, deliberate damage or negligent care of their vehicle)
Fourth, the entity that provides local traffic and road conditions to the car's computer
Fifth, the hardware manufacturer
Sixth, if one exists, the Otto-Drive installer

As I said, Yummy!

[kentauros]

3. Yeah, but I STILL want all cars automated.

I want to be able to get where I'm going without the inevitable (and all too frequent) near-misses from all the twittering twits!

Is that too much to ask of the automotive companies?

[AngryAmish]

4. I have been thinking about this for a long time

The way I figure it there needs to be:

1. Data recorders with about 15 minutes of memory. This is cheap.

2. Government approved self-driving systems (with legal safe harbor for manufacturers if the system is government approved).

2. Nationwide no fault insurance system.

So how do we get there? Insurance companies are going to fight like mad against nationwide no fault. So are trail lawyers.

Politically it doesn't get done.

[MindPilot]

15. About that "black box" data recorder...

We need some serious legal clarification about who owns that data, and what the process to access will be. Currently accessing black box data after an accident brings up some 5th amendment issues.

[AngryAmish]

18. Not really

You have no right to hide it from the police. They need to get a subpoena or permission, tho. Same as a diary or a computer.

[MindPilot]

20. Actually it is.

A panel of experts assembled in Southfield, Michigan to discuss this emerging controversy. Moderated by Car And Driver Editor Csaba Csere, the panel consisted of an information technology attorney, an insurance company executive, a Michigan State Police accident scene investigator, and an auto industry safety alliance executive.

snip

The consensus among the panel members is that the recording devises are here to stay and, at least so far, the owner of the automobile owns the data. What if someone other than the owner is driving during a crash, for example a renter, lessee, or fleet driver? There are issues of self incrimination and freedom from unreasonable search and seizure as well as other privacy issues that will need to be addressed as the technology advances.

There are already plenty of vehicles equipped with GPS capabilities in addition to the black boxes and that may exacerbate the controversy.

It was also agreed that it is likely, in fact inevitable, that more and more data will be recorded. Current technology would easily accommodate tons more information. NHTSA could easily require the collection of data useful to them, and other government agencies could too, including the Department of Homeland Security and the Attorney General. Now there's a scary thought!

http://www.motorists.org/black-boxes/data-ownership

[dipsydoodle]

5. Surely the insurer would be liable

and then up to them to take it up with the manufacturer.

[AngryAmish]

23. Everyone has a policy limit

In IL the limit is an absurdly low $20k. So if I'm hit by a driverless car that only has 20k in coverage and I have 750k in medical bills then I'm looking for the manufacturer, installer, coder, etc

No one will want to be a manufacturer, installer, coder etc. if a few accident will put you out of business.

[dipsydoodle]

24. In the UK

the 3rd party limit for property damage is £20 million but unlimited as far as personal injury goes. That is somewhat more than $20,000

[RKP5637]

2. K&R !!! Excellent question !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! n/t

[leftyohiolib]

6. according to norman goldman you are if it's your car and you are riding in it

[unblock]

7. i would think it would depend on the cause(s) of the accident.

if a sensor was clogged up with dirt and the owner neglected to properly clean or clear an obstruction, per the manufacturer's instructions, then i would expect the owner to be liable.

if the problem was a failure in the vehicle's systems otherwise, e.g., software bug or premature hardware failure, then i would think the manufacturer would be liable (who might then be able to sue the company the provided the defective part).


i don't see it as much different from accidents involving traditional, "manually" driven-cars. if the owner/driver did something improper, it's their fault; if the equipment failed and the owner/driver had reasonable expectation that it was working properly, then it's the manufacturer's fault.

compare with the toyota faulty accelerator or similar issues.

[RagAss]

8. Obama. Who else?

[Jamastiene]

9. That should be a DUzy.

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

27. Repeal Obama-Steer! Now!

Good one!

[talkingmime]

10. Manufacturer.

[Nye Bevan]

11. "An error has occurred. Abort, Retry, Fail?" (nt)

[Tommy_Carcetti]

12. The tree in the forest.

You know, the one that fell without any around.

He or she of course has no comment.

[MindPilot]

13. Probably the owner...same as it is now.

Doesn't matter if I'm in it or not, as the vehicle's owner I am ultimately liable for any damage my car causes. Even if somebody steals it and drives into somebody, I'm liable for the damages and injuries. That is why part of my insurance is called "liability".

[AngryAmish]

19. You are not liable if someone steals your car

Where did you get that idea?

[MindPilot]

21. My father was an adjuster and I taught traffic school.

Like someone who got hit by my stolen car is going to sue the thief.

[AngryAmish]

22. Not gonna happen

[Ikonoklast]

14. Who isn't Liable.

Who's on first.






















Liable is his agent.

[FarCenter]

16. Was the Driverless Car at fault?

[Warren DeMontague]

17. No more meta threads!!!!!

I kid, I kid.

[yawnmaster]

25. whoever loses the lawsuit. eom

[Skinner]

26. I think this is a really interesting question.

The automotive industry could create a product (computer-driven cars) that are much safer than the alternative (human-driven cars), but the safer product could open them up to greater liability.

The obvious solution? Put a human driver in control -- not because human drivers are safer, but because they can be held responsible.

So, then, would the automotive industry be somehow liable for putting a human in control? It's something of a Catch-22.