Boston Personal Injury Attorneys
Boston Personal Injury Lawyers Click here to read about our attorneys Click here to see our recent results Click here to read what our clients are saying about us Contact us today
View our recent victories of cases like yours Have you been injured? Click here to learn what to do next If we don't win, we don't charge Why Choose Turco Legal?
Personal Injury
Car Accident
Medical Malpractice
Slip and Falls
Dog Bites
Premises Liability
Food Poisoning
Wrongful Death
Train Accidents
Product Liability

The Next Major Car Accident Avoidance Innovation

Technology is cool, and technology in cars is even cooler. Our personal injury lawyers at Mass Injury Firm, P.C. see so many awful injuries that we are always on the lookout for new and emerging safety technologies. This type of technology tends to take years to go from idea to testing to mass production. That means we usually see emerging technologies in car safety way in advance. Today we are discussing an interesting type of technology called V2V Tech.

V2V stands for vehicle to vehicle technology. Essentially, this is technology in which vehicles driving on the road to communicate with each other to avoid accidents, adjust based on driving and weather conditions, and will alert the driver of emerging threats to safety. The US Department of Transportation has been working on this technology for years. Clearly, any technology that will control or even impact the operation of vehicles must be carefully reviewed at length.

After several years of research the DOT has announced an initiative to establish the industry standard of having small vehicles enabled with V2V safety features. you may naturally be wondering if one of the safety features is automatic, driverless vehicles. Although that is not part of this initiative, it is a logical next step geared at both reducing car accidents and the resulting personal injuries. The bottom line is, if technology can be implemented in a manner that can reasonably improve safety, reduce injury and death, and can be done at a reasonable cost, the general consensus is that it is an initiative worth doing.

Core to V2V is 360 situational awareness. That is, this technology typically utilizes a combination of radar and laser to constantly assess all potential threats, 360 degrees around the vehicle. The vehicles then communicate with the other vehicles within close proximity. The result is that you have of tremendous amount of data being processed and shared, and, in response, vehicles behaving differently to avoid danger. Employing technology of this nature will logically reduce the frequency and severity of personal injury car accidents.

If cars don't collide, there will be fewer injuries. However, keep in mind the timeframe for both the implementation of this type of technology on a mass-market scale and the simple turnover and attrition of existing vehicles without the technology still on the road. In simple terms, it will take a long time for this type of technology to really take over and become widespread in the community. We can also expect plenty of system errors, faulty software, bugs, and the like, impacting the effective performance of this technology. Again, it is logical that all such system problems will be resolved eventually. On the way, there will be additional personal injuries and accidents as a result of the technology itself.

This opens up an interesting question regarding how those personal injury cases will work. There may be a negligent party, including the driver of either vehicle in control at the time. When a party's negligence is to blame for personal injuries or a car accident, that party's auto insurance would ordinarily provide coverage to compensate the party with the injury. A common issue that arises, however, is that the injuries exceed the limits of the insurance policy. So, you might have a $100,000 injury with only a $20,000 policy. The most the injured party could get out of the $20,000 policy is $20,000. However, if there is an additional negligent party, particularly with an insurance policy to protect against liability, that party could be sought for recovery.

If that party is Ford Motor Company, there should not be an issue recovering the additional $80,000 in the above hypothetical. But, the cases would be more costly and experts would be necessary. The deep pockets of any large corporation like Ford or Toyota or the like would likely mean a protracted litigation battle. How this all plays out is yet to be seen and only time will tell. Until then, there will be plenty of people causing car accidents--even with the hundreds of safety features our cars have today.

The information on this website is for general information purposes only. Nothing on this site should be taken as legal advice for any individual case or situation. This information is not intended to create, and receipt or viewing does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship.

Phone: (866) 995-6663
Address: 15 Court Square, Suite 800, Boston, MA 02108