Injured in a Waymo or Self-Driving Car Accident in California? Who's Liable

If you were injured in a crash involving a Waymo or another driverless car in California, the crucial difference is that there is no human driver behind the wheel to hold responsible. Liability instead shifts to the company operating the vehicle — Waymo — and can extend to the makers of the vehicle, its self-driving software, and its sensors. California follows pure comparative negligence, so you can recover even if you were partly at fault, and you generally have two years to file.

Who is liable when a self-driving car causes a crash?

In an ordinary crash, you make a claim against the at-fault driver's insurance. A fully driverless vehicle changes that analysis, because responsibility no longer rests on a person operating the car. Several parties can be on the hook instead:

• The operator (Waymo). The company that deploys and runs the autonomous fleet is generally responsible for how its vehicles behave on the road. When the self-driving system causes a crash, that company is the primary target of a claim.
• The vehicle or software maker. If a defect in the self-driving software, the perception system, a sensor, or the vehicle hardware contributed to the crash, a product-liability claim may lie against the company that designed or built it.
• Another driver. Many crashes involving autonomous vehicles are actually caused by a human driver in another car. In that case you have a conventional claim against that driver's insurance, just as in any other collision.

Often more than one of these applies, and part of a lawyer's job is identifying every responsible party and every source of coverage before anyone settles.

Product liability: when the technology itself fails

Autonomous-vehicle claims frequently involve theories that ordinary car-accident cases don't. If the crash was caused by defective self-driving software, a sensor or camera that failed to detect a person or object, or a flaw in the way the system perceived or reacted to its surroundings, a product-liability claim may apply against the company that made the technology. These claims can be complex and technical, which is one reason the vehicle's own recorded data is so important.

The $5 million insurance requirement

There is a meaningful coverage advantage in these cases. In California, the CPUC (California Public Utilities Commission) requires companies offering driverless passenger service to carry $5 million in commercial liability insurance. That is far more than the minimum coverage a typical private motorist carries, which can matter a great deal in a serious-injury case where a small personal policy would otherwise cap what you could collect.

Passenger, other driver, or pedestrian — your situation matters

How your claim unfolds depends on where you were when the crash happened:

• A Waymo passenger. If you were riding in the autonomous vehicle, you are almost never at fault — you had no control over the car. Your claim runs against the operator and any other at-fault driver, backed by that substantial commercial coverage.
• Another driver hit by a Waymo. If a driverless car struck your vehicle, you pursue the operator (and potentially the software or hardware maker), and the recorded data from the autonomous vehicle can help prove exactly what happened.
• A pedestrian or cyclist. If you were on foot or on a bike when an autonomous vehicle hit you, you generally weren't in control of any vehicle, and the same operator liability and $5 million coverage apply.

California's comparative negligence rule

California uses pure comparative negligence, which means your compensation is reduced by your percentage of fault — but you can recover even if you were partly to blame. This is one reason preserving the autonomous vehicle's own data matters: it can show the vehicle was at fault and rebut any attempt to shift blame onto you.

The two-year deadline

Under California Code of Civil Procedure section 335.1, you generally have two years from the date of the crash to file a personal injury lawsuit. Missing that deadline usually ends the claim, so it is important to act well before it runs. Some situations — such as a crash involving a government vehicle or roadway — can carry much shorter deadlines.

The bottom line

A self-driving car crash is not a dead end just because there was no human driver — it shifts liability to the operator and, sometimes, to the makers of the vehicle and its software, all backed by a $5 million coverage requirement. At Mousavi Law Firm, we serve clients across California from our Woodland Hills office, offer a free consultation, and work on contingency — no fee unless we win. A free case review will identify every party and policy that may owe you compensation.