Start your claim

March 18th 2015

Road Traffic Accidents

Driverless cars are coming, but who’s to blame when accidents happen?

Driverless cars are coming, but who’s to blame when accidents happen?

Long-thought as something of science fiction, driverless cars are now legal on the roads of the UK. As the country establishes itself as a leader in driverless car technology, some questions still need answers – one of the most important being, who is responsible in a driverless car crash?

Long-thought as something of science fiction, driverless cars are now legal on the roads of the UK. As the country establishes itself as a leader in driverless car technology, some questions still need answers – one of the most important being, who is responsible in a driverless car crash?  How will driverless cars change the UK’s roads?  Human error is blamed for 90% of all road traffic accidents, giving driverless cars (which use computers and sensors to drive, rather than human input) the potential to make driving much safer than it is manually. This is because these cars are able to predict their surroundings much more effectively than humans by using panoramic cameras, laser imaging, and radars (amongst other things) to get a 360° view of what’s going on around them. So confident is the government in these cars’ ability to predict the road that they’re lifting a ban on tailgating to allow driverless cars to drive closer together and prevent gridlock at peak times.  This ability to be hyper-aware of their surroundings means that driverless cars, according to Matthew Strebe, CEO of Connetic, will be near impossible to crash. “Two driverless cars will never hit each other, unless a human has caused an accident that they are both involved in,” he says, before continuing to say that “[a driverless car] will rarely if ever be found to be ‘at fault’ in an accident.” But what happens when an accident is unavoidable – what does the car decide to do then?  Could there be a driverless car crash?  The number of road collisions will more than likely fall as driverless cars become more prevalent on our roads, though the issue of what a driverless car will do in a collision situation is still undecided.  Some collisions are unavoidable. A car could pull out in front of you, someone could cut across your lane or a car could take a red light into your path. In cases like this, when a collision is imminent and your only option is to hit another vehicle, humans make an emergency decision. The driverless car, however, will need to have something written into its programming telling it what to do in these situations – giving the car’s manufacturers and programmers an ethical conundrum. Which car do they make it hit?  A larger car is more likely to take the impact better than a small car, so it may seem favourable to program a driverless car to crash into the biggest car. However this would mean that larger cars would effectively be penalised for their size. Likewise smaller car owners could drive dangerously, knowing that they’re statistically less likely to be chosen. The same example can be applied across many aspects of driving – a cyclist with a helmet is more likely to survive than a cyclist without a helmet, however this could lead to fewer cyclists wearing helmets.  This selection bias is something that will have to be written into the programming of cars before they roll out the dealerships. Whether car companies opt for the least damage, or use a random generator to make collisions, is still to be decided. It’s just one of a number of ethical questions associated with taking the human element away from driving.  Who’s to blame if a crash does occur?  Whilst assigning blame in a road collision between two human drivers is already difficult enough, deciding who is at fault in a collision with a driverless car is much harder. If it was the fault of the driverless car, is it the car itself which is to blame, the passenger, the manufacturer of the car, the people who programmed the car to make that decision, the government or council for allowing the car onto the road, or another party completely?  The programmer  The car itself is unlikely to be at fault in a crash, as it will be operating on rules it was given by the programmer. The programming of the car will need to be exhaustive, giving the car instructions on what to do in every possible situation – including what to do in a crash.  As the programming will need to be signed off by the company that makes the car, then responsibility could fall to the manufacturer. The manufacturer  The manufacturer will be, as it currently is, responsible for everything it produces. We’ve seen it happen time and again – a manufacturer releases a car, they find a fault with it and have to recall all affected cars. Should a manufacturer find something wrong with the programming of a driverless car, it will ultimately be the manufacturer who bears the burden – unless of course, it’s the sensor’s fault.  The sensor manufacturers  Major car manufacturers may rely on external manufacturers to provide integral parts like sensors, radars and cameras. If a bug in one of these components causes a malfunction, then responsibility would fall on the company which made the malfunctioning equipment.  The human driver  It’s highly unlikely that a driverless car will cause a crash as they are incredibly hi-tech pieces of equipment that are able to predict other road users much more accurately than humans. They will be able to see and understand when a vehicle is slowing, indicating, setting off or pulling out and adjust accordingly. In a collision between a human driver and a driverless car, it will be both statistically and factually more likely that the human driver is responsible for the collision.  The human driver being at fault is a sentiment echoed by charity Road Peace “whilst casualties and collisions are expected to decrease, as long as some motor vehicles are being manually driven, collisions will continue.”  What’s next for driverless cars?  For the time being, driverless cars will retain the ability to have human input. There is still a steering wheel and pedals, just like in a normal car, and the passenger can take control of the vehicle by moving the steering wheel or pressing a pedal. Therefore, if the human passenger feels that the car hasn’t recognised a hazard, they can manually take action.  Accidents are predicted to drop dramatically though, making the roads safer. It’s not just on the roads that driverless cars are excelling however – they’re also showing they can push a car’s limits on the track. Stanford University used an upgraded Audi TTS on the Thunderhill Raceway in California to set a time 0.4 seconds faster than the track’s CEO – proof, if needed, that a driverless car is able to interact with the road and itself better than its human counterparts.  It’s this ability to judge performance and timing better than humans which will help lead to much higher fuel efficiency, reduced journey times and safer roads. Driverless cars will be able to interact with each other coming up to junctions and traffic lights meaning that, rather than stopping, they will be able to adjust their speeds to fit through gaps. This is fine for cars, but what about cyclists and pedestrians?  Without a stop in traffic, it could become much harder for pedestrians to cross the road. The new relationship between pedestrian and car is something that is being tested in the UK trials – something Simon Williams, spokesperson for RAC, thinks is a step in the right direction. “The announcement that testing has started is an important first step along the road to us seeing driverless cars become common place in the UK. But there is a significant way to go and the prospect of driverless vehicles entering service before the end of this decade looks ambitious.”  Many of the issues surrounding driverless cars are still undecided. As with any technology, it will doubtless be an ever-changing and adapting process, similar to the aviation industry. And, just like the aviation industry, driverless cars will soon become as commonplace and accepted as autopilot on planes – just another part of an already well-automated method of travelling in the 21st century. Until then, a lot remains to be seen about this very new, futuristic technology.Long-thought as something of science fiction, driverless cars are now legal on the roads of the UK. As the country establishes itself as a leader in driverless car technology, some questions still need answers – one of the most important being, who is responsible in a driverless car crash?

How will driverless cars change the UK’s roads?

Human error is blamed for 90% of all road traffic accidents, giving driverless cars (which use computers and sensors to drive, rather than human input) the potential to make driving much safer than it is manually. This is because these cars are able to predict their surroundings much more effectively than humans by using panoramic cameras, laser imaging, and radars (amongst other things) to get a 360° view of what’s going on around them. So confident is the government in these cars’ ability to predict the road that they’re lifting a ban on tailgating to allow driverless cars to drive closer together and prevent gridlock at peak times.

This ability to be hyper-aware of their surroundings means that driverless cars, according to Matthew Strebe, CEO of Connetic, will be near impossible to crash. “Two driverless cars will never hit each other, unless a human has caused an accident that they are both involved in,” he says, before continuing to say that “[a driverless car] will rarely if ever be found to be ‘at fault’ in an accident.”
But what happens when an accident is unavoidable – what does the car decide to do then?

Could there be a driverless car crash?

The number of road collisions will more than likely fall as driverless cars become more prevalent on our roads, though the issue of what a driverless car will do in a collision situation is still undecided.

Some collisions are unavoidable. A car could pull out in front of you, someone could cut across your lane or a car could take a red light into your path. In cases like this, when a collision is imminent and your only option is to hit another vehicle, humans make an emergency decision. The driverless car, however, will need to have something written into its programming telling it what to do in these situations – giving the car’s manufacturers and programmers an ethical conundrum. Which car do they make it hit?

A larger car is more likely to take the impact better than a small car, so it may seem favourable to program a driverless car to crash into the biggest car. However this would mean that larger cars would effectively be penalised for their size. Likewise smaller car owners could drive dangerously, knowing that they’re statistically less likely to be chosen. The same example can be applied across many aspects of driving – a cyclist with a helmet is more likely to survive than a cyclist without a helmet, however this could lead to fewer cyclists wearing helmets.

This selection bias is something that will have to be written into the programming of cars before they roll out the dealerships. Whether car companies opt for the least damage, or use a random generator to make collisions, is still to be decided. It’s just one of a number of ethical questions associated with taking the human element away from driving.

Who’s to blame if a crash does occur?

Whilst assigning blame in a road collision between two human drivers is already difficult enough, deciding who is at fault in a collision with a driverless car is much harder. If it was the fault of the driverless car, is it the car itself which is to blame, the passenger, the manufacturer of the car, the people who programmed the car to make that decision, the government or council for allowing the car onto the road, or another party completely?

The programmer

The car itself is unlikely to be at fault in a crash, as it will be operating on rules it was given by the programmer. The programming of the car will need to be exhaustive, giving the car instructions on what to do in every possible situation – including what to do in a crash.

As the programming will need to be signed off by the company that makes the car, then responsibility could fall to the manufacturer.
The manufacturer

The manufacturer will be, as it currently is, responsible for everything it produces. We’ve seen it happen time and again – a manufacturer releases a car, they find a fault with it and have to recall all affected cars. Should a manufacturer find something wrong with the programming of a driverless car, it will ultimately be the manufacturer who bears the burden – unless of course, it’s the sensor’s fault.

The sensor manufacturers

Major car manufacturers may rely on external manufacturers to provide integral parts like sensors, radars and cameras. If a bug in one of these components causes a malfunction, then responsibility would fall on the company which made the malfunctioning equipment.

The human driver

It’s highly unlikely that a driverless car will cause a crash as they are incredibly hi-tech pieces of equipment that are able to predict other road users much more accurately than humans. They will be able to see and understand when a vehicle is slowing, indicating, setting off or pulling out and adjust accordingly. In a collision between a human driver and a driverless car, it will be both statistically and factually more likely that the human driver is responsible for the collision.

The human driver being at fault is a sentiment echoed by charity Road Peace “whilst casualties and collisions are expected to decrease, as long as some motor vehicles are being manually driven, collisions will continue.”

What’s next for driverless cars?

For the time being, driverless cars will retain the ability to have human input. There is still a steering wheel and pedals, just like in a normal car, and the passenger can take control of the vehicle by moving the steering wheel or pressing a pedal. Therefore, if the human passenger feels that the car hasn’t recognised a hazard, they can manually take action.

Accidents are predicted to drop dramatically though, making the roads safer. It’s not just on the roads that driverless cars are excelling however – they’re also showing they can push a car’s limits on the track. Stanford University used an upgraded Audi TTS on the Thunderhill Raceway in California to set a time 0.4 seconds faster than the track’s CEO – proof, if needed, that a driverless car is able to interact with the road and itself better than its human counterparts.

It’s this ability to judge performance and timing better than humans which will help lead to much higher fuel efficiency, reduced journey times and safer roads. Driverless cars will be able to interact with each other coming up to junctions and traffic lights meaning that, rather than stopping, they will be able to adjust their speeds to fit through gaps. This is fine for cars, but what about cyclists and pedestrians?

Without a stop in traffic, it could become much harder for pedestrians to cross the road. The new relationship between pedestrian and car is something that is being tested in the UK trials – something Simon Williams, spokesperson for RAC, thinks is a step in the right direction. “The announcement that testing has started is an important first step along the road to us seeing driverless cars become common place in the UK. But there is a significant way to go and the prospect of driverless vehicles entering service before the end of this decade looks ambitious.”

Many of the issues surrounding driverless cars are still undecided. As with any technology, it will doubtless be an ever-changing and adapting process, similar to the aviation industry. And, just like the aviation industry, driverless cars will soon become as commonplace and accepted as autopilot on planes – just another part of an already well-automated method of travelling in the 21st century. Until then, a lot remains to be seen about this very new, futuristic technology.

What Our Clients Say

trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star

"Brillant service"

Brillant service , from start to finish definitely recommend hudgells solicitors all the hard work is done for you wouldn’t hesitate to use them again or recommend them

LeannFebruary 21, 2020

trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star

"Hudgell Solicitors have given me…"

Hudgell Solicitors have given me outstanding service and support through a difficult time. They have assisted me in claiming compensation which they made the journey of getting it as easy as possible.

KatieFebruary 14, 2020

trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star

"Couldn't be easier"

Couldn't be easier. From the initial call the whole process was handled smoothly and effortlessly.

Kevin RobertFebruary 14, 2020

trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star

"Amazing !!"

I felt relaxed through the whole process, i was made to feel confident in winning my case which i would like to add i did 😁 .. the company kept me informed all the way through by emails aswell as telephone calls, i would highly recomend to everyone needing expert…

LesleyFebruary 11, 2020

trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star

"Really happy with the service I had…"

Really happy with the service I had from Hudgells & Alex was great!

Natalie PayneFebruary 10, 2020

trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star

"Claim resolved quickly and efficiently"

The lawyer was quick to respond and always kept me updated on progress. Everything was resolved efficiently. I would certainly recommend them to family and friends.

Lulu BFebruary 04, 2020

trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star

"There when ever I needed to ask a…"

There when ever I needed to ask a question, very informative, brilliant job definitely use them again if I needed too

KatieFebruary 03, 2020

trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star

"Thank you Sarah Kidd"

Sarah Kidd was fantastic she give me the best advice always keeping me up to date with everything that was going on

Christopher DixonJanuary 31, 2020

trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star

"It took over 3 years to resolve my case…"

It took over 3 years to resolve my case and Hudgell supported me throughout with great sensitivity and professionalism. My caseworker, Gemma, always kept me updated and was easily reached if l had questions to ask. Can wholeheartedly recommend Hudgell.

Robert WebsterJanuary 31, 2020

trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star

"Every time I phoned my call was…"

Every time I phoned my call was answered in a polite manner and I got answers to my questions.

KhalidJanuary 30, 2020

trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star

"Anthony and his team at Hudgell…"

Anthony and his team at Hudgell solicitors are extremely professional and caring People. From the first phone conversation right through to completion i was always kept updated, if i had any concerns and contacted them, they were always happy to listen and put my mind at rest. I would highly…

Mrs lisa martinJanuary 21, 2020

trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star

"Excellent service"

Great service . Made me feel at ease . Proffesional and very quick to respond to any questions or concerns I would highly reccomend

LesleyJanuary 21, 2020

trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star

"Excellent service"

Excellent service

JensonJanuary 21, 2020

trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star

"Excellent service"

Excellent service, Alex Garven was most helpful in dealing with my claim. Many thanks for his hard work in getting a result for me,. It took quite a while but during that time I received regular progress updates and a quick response if I had any queries .

Jill ElliottJanuary 15, 2020

trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star

"Lauren Dale"

Lauren Dale was so sensitive when dealing with my mums claim and she totally understood what i really wanted from the outcome. she kept me fully informed of everything, as and when it happened. I cannot thank her enough for her help and understanding on such a sensitive case. 5…

Jane from North YorkshieJanuary 11, 2020

trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star

"Excellent Service"

Excellent, professional and friendly solicitors. It was a very simple process and they kept in constant contact to update me on any developments. Would definitely recommend.

Philippa January 09, 2020

trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star

"Could not have been simpler or easier"

Could not have been simpler or easier, they did everything required and more. Nice, pleasant to talk to, they do all the leg work, put everything into context and resolve as quick as possible. Hopefully will not have to use again but if a situation arises then would not hesitate…

DarrenJanuary 08, 2020

trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star

"Very helpful and always kept in touch…"

Very helpful and always kept in touch via email through the while process. Highly recommended

Joseph Conrad Waudby January 07, 2020

trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star trustpilot-star

"Brilliant customer service"

Brilliant customer service, always will contact you as they say they will. Have been very helpful with my case and explained the process thoroughly, very easy to understand. Would definitely recommend.

Julia MatildaJanuary 07, 2020