4 ms·

Parking citations attach to the car (as does civil collision liability generally), but moving violations can only be levied against the driver. Which is how som

Parking citations attach to the car (as does civil collision liability generally), but moving violations can only be levied against the driver. Which is how some red light camera fines are avoided, if the driver isn’t clearly identifiable by the camera.

gambiting 5y ago
Here in UK it's always the owner of the car who is responsible, unless they can say who was driving the car at the time. If they can't then the fine defaults to them - the assumption being that they are responsible for knowing who is using their vehicle. In other countries with similar laws(Poland) it has been argued in front of court that it cannot be the owner's responsibility to know who is driving their car at any given point especially if there are multiple people who do that usually - it should be the police's job to establish who they are fining.
- rvnx 5y ago
  It's quite logic and an easy rule to take responsible the driver no matter whether they have a driver assist feature on or not. Then the driver could sue the manufacturer for any defect or if the manufacturer misled the user into thinking the system was safe and didn't need human attention. This way, if a system is unreliable, users will start blaming the system and stop using the feature or buying this car. Also, it allows manufacturers to roll-out features faster and learn faster from the real world. If the manufacturer is directly responsible when driver assist features are engaged, but not the driver, then the manufacturer will get scared to roll anything, and progress will be much slower, and there will be more victims because the drivers think "I don't care, I'm not responsible, it's even better if the auto mode is on, even if less safe, cause I won't be responsible"
  - thfuran 5y ago
    >Also, it allows manufacturers to roll-out features faster and learn faster from the real world. I don't think that "move fast and break things" is the approach we want for self-driving cars.
  - eru 5y ago
    > It's quite logic and an easy rule to take responsible the driver no matter whether they have a driver assist feature on or not. That doesn't work in general. We'd want kids to be able to use self-driving cars. And really old people, and people without a licence, or who are mentally challenged enough that they don't have legal responsibility. > If the manufacturer is directly responsible when driver assist features are engaged, but not the driver, then the manufacturer will get scared to roll anything, [...] Google's Waymo specifically lobbies for getting the legal liability on themselves, not on the driver or owner.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
pge 5y ago
In the US, fines for moving violations identified by camera are the responsibility of the car owner, regardless of who was driving at the time of the infraction. The inability to identify the driver just means that the owner is not convicted of a moving violation, but he is stil l financially responsible for the penalty.
- eru 5y ago
  Is that a federal rule, or decided by the states?
  - rootusrootus 5y ago
    States.
- rootusrootus 5y ago
  This is specific to jurisdiction. Having received a ticket for speeding from an automated camera, they just sent me a picture and told me to pay up or deny that it was me. In Oregon, moving violations attach to drivers only, so if they cannot prove you were driving the car at the time they drop the ticket.

gambiting 5y ago

Here in UK it's always the owner of the car who is responsible, unless they can say who was driving the car at the time. If they can't then the fine defaults to them - the assumption being that they are responsible for knowing who is using their vehicle. In other countries with similar laws(Poland) it has been argued in front of court that it cannot be the owner's responsibility to know who is driving their car at any given point especially if there are multiple people who do that usually - it should be the police's job to establish who they are fining.

rvnx 5y ago
It's quite logic and an easy rule to take responsible the driver no matter whether they have a driver assist feature on or not. Then the driver could sue the manufacturer for any defect or if the manufacturer misled the user into thinking the system was safe and didn't need human attention. This way, if a system is unreliable, users will start blaming the system and stop using the feature or buying this car. Also, it allows manufacturers to roll-out features faster and learn faster from the real world. If the manufacturer is directly responsible when driver assist features are engaged, but not the driver, then the manufacturer will get scared to roll anything, and progress will be much slower, and there will be more victims because the drivers think "I don't care, I'm not responsible, it's even better if the auto mode is on, even if less safe, cause I won't be responsible"
- thfuran 5y ago
  >Also, it allows manufacturers to roll-out features faster and learn faster from the real world. I don't think that "move fast and break things" is the approach we want for self-driving cars.
- eru 5y ago
  > It's quite logic and an easy rule to take responsible the driver no matter whether they have a driver assist feature on or not. That doesn't work in general. We'd want kids to be able to use self-driving cars. And really old people, and people without a licence, or who are mentally challenged enough that they don't have legal responsibility. > If the manufacturer is directly responsible when driver assist features are engaged, but not the driver, then the manufacturer will get scared to roll anything, [...] Google's Waymo specifically lobbies for getting the legal liability on themselves, not on the driver or owner.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]

pge 5y ago

In the US, fines for moving violations identified by camera are the responsibility of the car owner, regardless of who was driving at the time of the infraction. The inability to identify the driver just means that the owner is not convicted of a moving violation, but he is stil l financially responsible for the penalty.

eru 5y ago
Is that a federal rule, or decided by the states?
- rootusrootus 5y ago
  States.
rootusrootus 5y ago
This is specific to jurisdiction. Having received a ticket for speeding from an automated camera, they just sent me a picture and told me to pay up or deny that it was me. In Oregon, moving violations attach to drivers only, so if they cannot prove you were driving the car at the time they drop the ticket.