retired lawyer explains $105K (1%) liability against Tesla in teenager 160mph crash trial jury award

[firsttruck]

Tesla's liability was supposedly because Tesla service dept removed the speed limiter that father had ordered installed earlier (was installed weeks/months before by Tesla service).
Tesla was not NOT found liable for deaths because of car battery fire.

Unfortunately this this is not totally over. This trial was only by the reckless teen driver's family. I think there were passengers in the car so there are probably more trials coming.

-----------------------------

Tesla Verdict - Only $105K - No Joint & Several Liability in Florida
Warren explains the recent jury verdict involving a Tesla accident in Florida, and why the headlines mislead - as usual - about what the verdict means. Barrett Riley died because he was driving 116 mph in a 30 mph zone and lost control of the Tesla.
Jul 22, 2022
Warren Redlich (retired lawyer in Florida)

----------

 

[JBee]

What was the speed limiter meant to be set too?

 

[firsttruck]

What was the speed limiter meant to be set too?

Don't know what original setting for speed limiter was in 2018 but be below is some info on the optional "Speed Limit Mode" setting Tesla released in a vehicle software update:

--------------------

Tesla dedicates new speed limiting feature to 18-yr-old who died in a Model S crash
By Fred Lambert
Jun. 26th 2018
https://electrek.co/2018/06/26/tesla-dedicates-new-speed-limiting-feature-kid-died-model-s-crash/

.....
We now learn that Tesla is actually dedicating the feature to the son of a Tesla owner who died in a Model S crash due to what the police believe may have been excessive speed.

Tesla owners with vehicle software version “2018.24 or above” and the latest mobile app update (Version 3.4.1) can now access a new speed limiter feature.

The automaker describes the feature ( Speed Limit Mode )in the update:
“Limit vehicle speed and acceleration with speed limit mode.
Maximum vehicle speed can be set between 50-90 mph (80-145 km/h).”

When Tesla launched the feature, we speculated that it might be aimed at parents who let their kids drive their Tesla vehicles, which are considered quite powerful vehicles to be used as first cars by teenagers.

Now we learn that it’s likely what Tesla had in mind since they dedicated the new feature to Barrett Riley

.....
The father was aware of his son’s lead foot and attempted to address the issue following the speeding ticket.

Knowing that Tesla’s loaner cars can’t go over 85 mph, James Riley reached out to Tesla to see if they could limit the top speed of his son’s car, which Tesla did on request.

It looks like it has now inspired Tesla’s latest feature, which enables owners to limit the speed far lower than 85 mph.

 

[JBee]

Shame that it had to come that far, but it's good they have the limiting feature. At some point they might limit vehicle performance to match your driving score. Might not make people happy, but it will make it safer.

But really Tesla shouldn't allow such excessive speeds in built up 30Mph areas at all. 50 maybe? But 116??

Not saying its Teslas fault though, both driver and parents rightly hold most responsibility in this.

 

[firsttruck]

Shame that it had to come that far, but it's good they have the limiting feature. At some point they might limit vehicle performance to match your driving score. Might not make people happy, but it will make it safer.

But really Tesla shouldn't allow such excessive speeds in built up 30Mph areas at all. 50 maybe? But 116??

Four wheeled vehicles are usually 1 to 3-ton masses.
If most vehicles have human controls it is always possible to accidentally, recklessly or intentional drive in manner that is a hazard. There are even drivers that have intentional run over groups of pedestrians or used vehicles as battering rams into stores.

I think that is only resolved when most vehicles driven on public roads are autonomous with no direct human steering controls. Humans prohibited from driving on public roads.

FSD

 

[Crissa]

The kid had convinced the Tesla repair center to remove the speed limiter by falsely claiming to have authority. Tesla's service center should have made more certain the kid had the permission he claimed, since he wasn't the registered owner legally or in the software.

But one percent is very little fault, and the total (ten million) is a bit high for the ruling. It may come down in the end.

-Crissa

 

[CyberGus]

When FSD is fully released, it should have a setting for limiting speed to "Posted Speed Limit + [allowed offset]". With a Parental-Control password.

There should be limit on acceleration too. In my first drive of a Tesla, I nearly rear-ended several vehicles due to the surprising quickness and throttle response.

 

[SparkChaser]

set controls to "Learner"?
This would be very helpful

 

[zurinefalling]

It's deeply concerning to delve into the liability issues surrounding Tesla in this case. The revelation that Tesla's service department removed the speed limiter against the explicit wishes of the father raises significant questions about accountability and the adequacy of customer safety protocols within the company. While there's a measure of relief that Tesla wasn't held liable for the fatalities resulting from the car battery fire, it's disheartening to realize that this trial marks just the tip of the iceberg. If you're interested in delving deeper into legal matters like this, you might find this resource on whistleblower lawyers enlightening - https://federal-lawyer.com/ . They might have the info you need.

 

[Crissa]

Tesla needs to set a maximum speed of 85 miles per hour, so people don't need a speed limiter. Why do people need such fast cars if speeding is always a violation of the law? Then why do we need other numbers on the speedometer if the driver will never have a chance to try them? It's a stupid idea. I know a guy accused of speeding. And so he hit the guy (but he survived). It was a military employee who was rushing to the airport. He had a good reason, but he forgot to put the flashing light on. But everything was fine because his rights were protected by these lawyers at ucmjdefense.com. Have you heard about this case? It was in Washington.

He should suffer for his negligence. Civil costs and criminal punishment.

The problem with setting a limiter is that it's contextual, and until we have much of level 5 autonomy, the car won't always know what those limits are. 40 in a 25 is still super deadly for those pedestrians. Let alone 85. But not being able to go 90 for a passing zone and it might not be safe.

-Crissa