Who’s Liable in a Self Driving Car Accident?

Defining Autonomous Vehicles & Their Impact on Liability

Autonomous vehicles (AVs), or driverless cars, are rapidly moving from futuristic concepts to real-world technology. Utilizing a complex blend of artificial intelligence (AI), machine learning, and sensors, AVs navigate roads with varying degrees of human involvement. The Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) defines automation levels from 0, where a human fully controls the vehicle in the driver's seat, to 5, where no human intervention is required, encompassing various types of automated driving systems. This shift in control not only promises safer and more efficient transportation but also introduces new challenges in determining liability when accidents occur.

As these vehicles operate on public roads, traditional notions of liability based on driver error must evolve. Responsibility now potentially extends to manufacturers, software developers, and even service providers. For example, if an AV operating in full automation mode fails to detect a pedestrian due to a software flaw, the liability may rest with the software developers or the vehicle manufacturer. Conversely, in semi-autonomous modes (SAE Levels 2-3), liability may still partially lie with the human operator, depending on their responsiveness to system alerts.

The rapid development of AV technology has far outpaced the evolution of regulatory frameworks, leaving a legal grey area. Federal agencies like the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) provide broad guidance, but specific liability regulations vary by state, complicating the legal landscape for manufacturers and operators alike. As more AVs integrate into traffic, understanding liability across these varied scenarios is essential not just for legal clarity, but for public trust in autonomous technology.

Current Legal Framework & Challenges

The regulatory landscape for AVs involves both federal guidelines, mainly for safety, and state-specific laws on traffic and liability, which vary significantly. The NHTSA sets federal standards like the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSS), which outline minimum safety requirements for vehicles, but state authorities govern how AVs can operate on public roads.

This split has led to varying state regulations for how autonomous vehicles can operate on their roads, which creates significant discrepancies. For example, California has established rigorous testing requirements for AVs, mandating that manufacturers submit reports on any collisions or disengagements that occur during testing. States like Arizona, on the other hand, have adopted a more permissive approach, encouraging AV testing with fewer restrictions. This inconsistency can lead to varying liability outcomes depending on where an accident occurs.

These regulatory differences complicate liability assessments in AV accidents, especially when AVs cross state lines. Standards from SAE International and cybersecurity guidelines from the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) provide guidelines that help shape how liability is assessed when accidents occur, and help outline the security protocols manufacturers should follow to protect AV systems from breaches. Adherence to these standards can influence liability, as failure to meet them may constitute negligence.

For example, a software flaw that doesn’t adhere to cybersecurity protocols could implicate developers in an accident.

Who Are the Liable Parties in Driverless Car Accidents?

Assigning liability in accidents involving driverless cars is far more complex than with traditional vehicles. Autonomous vehicles introduce a web of potentially responsible parties, each playing a crucial role in how the vehicle operates. Liability may rest with manufacturers, software developers, human operators, or even the owners of the vehicle, depending on the circumstances of the crash.

Manufacturers

In the case of autonomous vehicles, car companies bear significant responsibility under product liability laws. These laws hold manufacturers accountable if a defect in the vehicle’s design, manufacturing, or components causes an accident. Autonomous vehicles are sophisticated systems that rely on a range of sensors, cameras, and AI-driven software to navigate the road. If a system component, such as a sensor, fails to detect an obstacle or if a design flaw causes the vehicle to misinterpret road conditions, the manufacturer may be liable for resulting damages.

Product liability cases involving AVs can fall under three main categories:

• Design defects: These may involve claims that a design flaw made the vehicle inherently unsafe, like a braking system that cannot handle certain weather conditions
• Manufacturing defects: This includes situations where the vehicle deviates from its intended design, such as a miscalibrated sensor that impacts vehicle navigation
• Failure to warn: Accidents caused by the lack of adequate instructions or warnings regarding the AV’s limitations or proper usage could impact user expectations and vehicle handling

Successfully claiming product liability requires demonstrating that the defect existed at the time of sale and that it directly caused the crash. This process can be complicated by the technical nature of autonomous vehicle technologies and the need for expertise to establish a link between the defect and the accident.

Software developers

The software in driverless cars is the core mechanism that enables them to navigate and make real-time decisions. This software integrates AI and machine learning to achieve vehicle automation, allowing the vehicle to interpret sensor data and respond to its environment. However, as with any software, bugs and unforeseen interactions with real-world conditions can lead to errors. If a software glitch or failure results in an accident, the software companies or developers could be held liable, particularly if the software did not perform as intended or if known vulnerabilities were not addressed.

In some instances, accidents have occurred when AVs failed to recognize pedestrians, cyclists, or traffic signals. For example, the fatal Uber crash in Arizona in 2018, where a pedestrian was fatally struck by a self-driving car, raised questions about the software’s ability to detect and respond to unexpected obstacles. In this instance, the role of human oversight and software limitations were both scrutinized, raising questions about where the responsibility lay. Liability in such cases often hinges on whether the software met industry standards and whether there were adequate protocols in place to handle foreseeable challenges on the road.

Human operators and overridden systems

While autonomous vehicles are designed to reduce human intervention, most currently available models still require the presence of a human operator, particularly those at SAE Levels 2 and 3. In these scenarios, human operators are expected to take control if the system encounters a situation it cannot handle. This shared responsibility between the human driver and the vehicle’s autonomous system introduces a layer of complexity when assigning liability.

If an accident occurs and evidence suggests the human operator behind the steering wheel could have taken action to prevent it, the operator may share liability. Questions of liability in these cases often focus on whether the AV system provided adequate warnings, if the operator responded in a reasonable time, and if they were attentive to the system’s alerts. If the AV gave sufficient warning and the driver failed to intervene, the liability might rest with the operator. Conversely, if the system did not provide adequate notice or malfunctioned, the car manufacturer or software developer might bear responsibility.

Owners and maintenance providers

In some cases, liability might also extend to the vehicle owner, especially if the accident resulted from improper maintenance. For example, if an owner neglects to install a crucial software update, and this oversight leads to a malfunction and accident, the owner could be held partially liable. Maintenance providers who service AVs also bear responsibility if their negligence in performing repairs or updates leads to operational failures.

As the technology progresses, the legal system will likely face further challenges in defining the boundaries of responsibility among these parties. Clear standards and uniform regulations will be essential to guide liability determinations and help all stakeholders understand their roles and responsibilities in this evolving landscape of driverless cars.

Insurance Policies & Driverless Vehicles

Traditional car insurance policies centered on human error are inadequate for AVs, which shift insurance liability toward product defects, system malfunctions, and potential risks involving third parties. Insurers are developing new policies for AVs, including specialized coverage for risks like cyber threats and technical failures. Some companies offer policies for vehicles with advanced driver assistance systems (ADAS), covering AV-specific risks, such as software malfunctions and cybersecurity breaches. However, fully autonomous vehicles still present a challenge, as insurers have yet to fully develop comprehensive plans for all possible liabilities.

For AV owners, understanding these policy changes is crucial, as conventional coverage may not protect against incidents stemming from technology failures. Traditional auto insurance, focused on personal liability policies, often falls short in covering risks like software malfunctions or cybersecurity breaches, prompting a need for supplemental cyber or product liability insurance.

Consulting with insurers about AV-specific risks, such as sensor failures or software issues, can clarify how coverage applies. Some insurers now offer policies detailing how liability is assigned when accidents occur in autonomous mode, potentially involving third-party claims against manufacturers or software developers. As AV technology evolves, insurance policies must adapt, balancing reduced human error risks with new technological challenges, fundamentally changing risk assessment for both policyholders and providers.

How Can an Attorney Assist You in an AV Accident Case?

Accidents involving AVs are uniquely complex, requiring a grasp of both technology and evolving regulations. As demonstrated by incidents like the Arizona Uber crash and various Tesla Autopilot cases, legal debates over software limitations and human oversight are frequent. Here’s how a specialized attorney can help:

• Determining liability: In AV accidents, liability may involve multiple parties, including vehicle manufacturers, software developers, and potentially even government entities, if regulatory failures contributed. A skilled attorney can untangle these complexities, pinpoint the responsible parties, and build a strong case by assessing the unique aspects of each incident
• Navigating insurance claims: Autonomous vehicle incidents often require navigating a maze of insurance policies that may not fully account for AV-specific risks. Legal guidance is crucial to understanding which coverages apply, ensuring that claims address potential product liability and technology failures, rather than just traditional driver error. An experienced attorney can help maximize available compensation by identifying all applicable policies and leveraging specialized knowledge of AV-related claims
• Gathering and interpreting evidence: Unlike typical accidents, AV crashes involve a wealth of technical data, from vehicle logs and sensor data to potential software diagnostics. An experienced legal team with AV expertise can secure these resources and work with technical experts, such as accident reconstructionists and AI specialists, to interpret this information accurately. This comprehensive approach is essential to establish fault, substantiate claims, and ensure a thorough understanding of how the vehicle’s systems contributed to the accident

In complex AV accidents, knowledgeable legal representation is essential for navigating these emerging challenges, securing fair compensation, and understanding rights in an evolving regulatory environment. And it all starts with a free, no-obligation legal consultation to assess your case.

Final Thoughts

As autonomous car technology progresses toward widespread adoption, understanding liability in autonomous vehicle accidents becomes more complex. The landscape is shifting, with the 'duty of care' extending beyond just drivers to include autonomous car makers, software developers, and even insurance companies adapting to cover new risks. With changing laws and technological advancements, determining who is accountable for AV accidents can be challenging.

This evolving reality underscores the importance of staying informed and seeking the right guidance. At YourAccident.com, we know navigating this landscape can be stressful and confusing. That’s why we don’t just leave you at the end of the guide. We’re here to help connect you with a trusted lawyer from our network of legal professionals. Our platform ensures you receive expert advice tailored to your case, whether you’re facing disputes over liability, dealing with a low settlement offer, or needing guidance on your rights.

By connecting you with the right accident and personal injury lawyer, we aim to support you through every step, so you can focus on recovery while legal experts handle the rest. Reach out today for personalized support and take the first step toward securing your financial future. Be sure to browse through our help guides and articles to keep you informed on your road to recovery.