Skip to main content

Tesla Autopilot system ‘not at fault’ in fatal crash

A nine-month investigation by the US National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) into the fatal car crash involving a Tesla Model S in Florida last year has concluded that the car’s Autopilot system, which was in operation at the time, was not at fault. The decision noted that Autopilot is a Level 2 self-driving system and, therefore, requires the driver to always monitor the system and be at the ready to intervene – a stipulation that the driver failed to perform, the administration says.
January 24, 2017 Read time: 2 mins
A nine-month investigation by the US National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) into the fatal car crash involving a 8534 Tesla Model S in Florida last year has concluded that the car’s Autopilot system, which was in operation at the time, was not at fault.

The decision noted that Autopilot is a Level 2 self-driving system and, therefore, requires the driver to always monitor the system and be at the ready to intervene – a stipulation that the driver failed to perform, the administration says.

“A safety-related defect trend has not been identified at this time and further examination of this issue does not appear to be warranted,” says the NHTSA in its report and the investigation is closed. However, it warns that the closing of the investigation does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that no safety-related defect exists. The agency will monitor the issue and reserves the right to take future action if circumstances warrant it.

Following this and other crashes in 2016, Tesla modified the Autopilot system, which it describes as semi-autonomous, to ensure drivers don't take their hands off the wheel for extended periods and reminding them of the need to remain aware of road conditions.

Tesla issued a statement following the investigation, saying, “At Tesla, the safety of our customers comes first, and we appreciate the thoroughness of NHTSA’s report and its conclusion.”

For more information on companies in this article

Related Content

  • Will the European Electronic Tolling System serve its purpose?
    February 3, 2012
    ASECAP's Kallistratos Dionelis asks whether, despite the best intentions at the policy level, the European Electronic Tolling System can ever hope to serve the customer in the way it is intended to. Reality doesn't just happen. In many ways, reality is created. We first create or produce a reality and then we consume it; this takes time and has a cost that needs to be covered.
  • ITS America seeks stable and secure platform for connected vehicles
    May 30, 2013
    The Intelligent Transportation Society of America (ITS America) has issued a statement following the submission of comments regarding the Federal Communications Commission’s (FCC) Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) seeking to amend the Commission’s rules to allow for the operation of Unlicensed National Infrastructure (U-NII) Devices in the 5850-5925 MHz Band (“5.9 GHz Band”) which was set aside by the FCC for the development of connected vehicle technology.
  • Auto safety initiative seeks to reduce driver errors
    December 2, 2013
    A push by the US National Highway Traffic Safety Administration to use technology to reduce traffic fatalities aims to keep drunk drivers off the roads by using in-vehicle technology that immobilises their cars. They are pushing for systems that prevent drivers from starting their cars, help cars avoid collisions and prevent vehicles from starting if the occupants don’t wear seat belts. "Ninety per cent of all crashes have an element of human error," NHTSA administrator David Strickland said. "We really
  • UK plans changes to AV Code
    April 20, 2022
    Drivers can view content 'not related to driving' - but mobile phone use still illegal