Tesla FSD Trial Turned Nightmare: Many Cars Damaged.

Tesla recently released their newest version of Full Self Driving (FSD) v12.3.3 to the public for a 30 day free trial. The free trial was expected to boost sales of the $15,000 package. Unfortunately for Tesla drivers, the dream of a self-driving car has quickly become a nightmare. Many disgruntled Tesla owners have taken to Reddit to discuss their dismay and criticize Elon Musk.

The FSD Promise: Innovation or Illusion? Tesla's FSD promises to usher in an era where cars can navigate streets, recognize traffic signals, and respond to complex driving situations without human intervention. Unfortunately for u/Substantial_Ad5034 this was not the case. During their FSD trial the Reddit user claims their car made a turn too quickly, causing them to hit a curb at high speed. The collision took a large chunk out of their wheel and broke the side wall.

Tesla Owners Suffer: It seems this is not an isolated incident either. u/NewTeslaXX told Reddit that FSD decided that he needed to grab the wheel mid-turn, nearly causing an accident that resulted in major rim rash and a busted sidewall. According to the post u/NewTeslaXX was "Going at 40 MPH on inner-city road, FSD asked me to put force on steering wheel when it was making a very acute turn. Nagging the steering wheel didn't work. Honks from behind. I don't know what I did, FSD got disabled. And the car hit the curb real hard."

In another shocking situation, Reddit user u/TheJuiceBoxs said, "My car started following tar seams instead of lane lines. Felt like I was about to sideswipe another car. I'm guessing it would have avoided the car, but it was way too close for comfort."

Tesla Cars Continue Misbehaving:

Reports of damaged cars and erratic behavior from FSD continue to grow. u/Holiday-Ad-3148 reported that their Tesla "makes lane changes at the last

moment and almost misses turn lanes, drives way too close to the curbs and other parked cars." Some drivers like u/goodbodha even reported their Telsa driving in the "wrong lane as it passed over railroad tracks."

Videos and pictures circulating on social media depict instances where FSD-enabled cars exhibit unpredictable behavior, causing damage to sidewalks, property, and other vehicles. Such incidents not only raise concerns about the safety of autonomous driving technology, but also highlight the potential for legal liability in cases of property damage and personal injury.

Legal Liability: Who Pays the Bill for Misbehaving Cars?

In cases where FSD-enabled cars cause property damage or injury, determining legal responsibility can be difficult. While Tesla maintains that drivers must remain attentive and ready to take control of the vehicle at all times, critics argue that the company bears some responsibility for releasing beta software that may not be sufficiently tested for public roads.

California was recently criticized for taking a bold stance, allowing driverless cars to have immunity from traffic tickets. Whether or not California's approach is a good one remains to be seen.

Meanwhile just last month a cyclist in California was struck by a self-driving car, thankfully only causing minor injuries. However, the liability was not immediately on the company operating the vehicle. The incident is currently under investigation, San Francisco police say.

In another more serious incident, a woman in Arizona was hit and killed by a self-driving car. Arizona prosecutors ruled that Uber was not criminally responsible for the crash. The back-up driver of the vehicle was ultimately charged with negligent homicide. But what happens when there is no back-up driver?

Laws Currently on the Books:

Since 2017, Texas has put rules on the books with S.B.2205. The Bill defines "Automated motor vehicles" as a motor vehicle on which an automated driving system is installed.

However, regarding liability The Bill falls short. Sec. A545.454. (B)(5) says that an "Automated motor vehicle must be covered by motor vehicle liability coverage or self-insurance in an amount equal to the amount of coverage that is required under the laws of this state." While a positive step forward for the world of FSD, the law does not go into detail about who is liable if the car damages itself.

Nevada also has laws on the books, but still falls short of the issues we are seeing play out with FSD.

" 1) Except as otherwise provided in subsection 2, if an autonomous vehicle is being tested or operated on a highway within this State, a human operator must be:

(a) Seated in a position which allows the human operator to take immediate manual control of the autonomous vehicle; and

(b) Capable of taking over immediate manual control of the autonomous vehicle in the event of a failure of the automated driving system or other emergency.

2) A fully autonomous vehicle may be tested or operated on a highway within this State with the automated driving system engaged and without a human operator being present within the fully autonomous vehicle if the fully autonomous vehicle satisfies the requirements of paragraph (b) of subsection 2 of NRS 482A.080. "

Paragraph (b) of subsection 2 of NRS 482A.08 states that "If the autonomous vehicle is a fully autonomous vehicle, the fully autonomous vehicle is capable of achieving a minimal risk condition if a failure of the automated driving system occurs which renders the automated driving system unable to perform the dynamic driving task relevant to its intended operational design domain."

While this may sound good on paper, the 'minimal risk condition' is undefined. Therefore the law is not readily enforceable and will likely lead to more litigation.

Government Action:

Not much has been done federally regarding self-driving cars. In 2021 the The Department of Transportation's released their plan titled 'Automated Vehicles Comprehensive Plan' which aims to solve the problems discussed in this article related to Automated Driving Systems (ADS). The outline of this plan is below.

1. Promote Collaboration and Transparency – USDOT will promote access to clear and reliable information to its partners and stakeholders, including the public, regarding the capabilities and limitations of ADS.
   

2. Modernize the Regulatory Environment – USDOT will modernize regulations to remove unintended and unnecessary barriers to innovative vehicle designs, features, and operational models, and will develop safety focused frameworks and tools to assess the safe performance of ADS technologies.
   

3. Prepare the Transportation System – USDOT will conduct, in partnership with stakeholders, the foundational research and demonstration activities needed to safely evaluate and integrate ADS, while working to improve the safety, efficiency, and accessibility of the transportation system.

While the Department of Transportation has good intentions. Thus far, there is no official authority to enforce these clauses, and not much has been done since their release.

Other Manufacturers Take Responsibility:

Volvo is the only mainstream company that has officially made a statement to confirm that they will take responsibility if their self-driving technology causes harm to your vehicle. However, their full self-driving technology has not been released yet.

Additionally, a Mercedes representative was quoted saying something similar, although Mercedes has not released any official statements on it.

Either way, a $15,000 upgrade package is a hard sell if Tesla does not guarantee that your car will not be damaged by FSD.

Prior Litigation:

This is not the first time that Tesla has been in legal trouble regarding FSD.

Tesla was sued for a wrongful death in 2019. In a verdict returned in April 2023, a jury found that Tesla was not liable for the 2019 crash. This was the first Tesla autopilot case to go to verdict, so it is considered an important precedent for similar cases.

However, other cases have made their way through the courts successfully. A Tesla owner in the UK challenged Tesla over its failure to deliver on its full self-driving claims and won a $10,000 settlement which represented a refund of his purchase cost of FSD, with interest, after filing a claim in small claims court.

Numerous suits have been dismissed because Tesla claims that at the end of the day it is up to the driver to maintain control. However legal challenges surrounding damages to Tesla owner's cars and property are still underway.

Conclusion:

The rollout of Tesla's Full Self-Driving capability has been marred by reports of misbehaving vehicles causing property damage and endangering pedestrians. As stakeholders navigate the legal landscape surrounding FSD deployment, it is imperative to prioritize safety, accountability, and innovation.

Tesla, regulators, and FSD users must work together to address concerns regarding liability, safety standards, and the ethical implications of autonomous driving technology. Only through collaborative efforts can we ensure that the promise of FSD is realized responsibly and ethically.