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

  • Increasing road safety with automated driver assistance systems
    January 26, 2012
    Jon Masters looks at how drivers will be trained to use the increasing number of advanced driver assistance systems being incorporated into modern cars
  • Grey areas: who's legally responsible for C/AVs?
    October 22, 2018
    Connected and autonomous vehicles are an exciting development in the ITS sector – but amid the hype some big questions about their deployment remain unanswered, finds Ben Spencer Connected and autonomous vehicles (C/AVs) have the potential to change the way we travel - and to eliminate road fatalities. But policy makers and regulators will need to ensure user and public safety is included in future planning. The legal and insurance industries will have to catch up, too. For example, questions over who is
  • Putting a stop to intersection indecision
    March 9, 2015
    David Crawford takes a look at innovations to reduce crashes at rural intersections. Intersection crashes continue to represent a worryingly large share of deaths and serious injuries across US highway networks. Statistics from the US Department of Transportation’s Federal Highway Administration show that an average of 21% of road traffic accident deaths occur at crossings. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) calculates that intersection crashes account for 48% of all injury-related i
  • Commercial vehicle cross-border enforcement needs muscle
    February 3, 2012
    A look at the current status of cross-border enforcement of commercial vehicle operation in the European Union and a look at what still needs to happen to realise a coherent working system