GM Sued By Lane-Splitting Motorcyclist In Self-Driving Chevy Bolt Crash

Chevrolet Bolt


Chevrolet Bolt

Autonomous Chevy Bolt out driving

About a month ago, a self-driving Chevy Bolt was involved in a crash with a motorcycle, and now the driver is suing GM.

Cruise Automation’s autonomous Chevy Bolts have been involved in more than a few accidents recently (13 to be precise, according to the California DMV). Fortunately, no one has been hurt (until now), and it seems that the Bolt hasn’t been at fault in any of the incidents.

This isn’t to say that the self-driving car’s “robotic” driving style may not be part of the reason for the collisions. While even preliminary forms of self-driving tech and active safety features should reduce accidents, other drivers on the road may not anticipate the computerized driver’s intentions and actions, which could result in an incident. Thus far, such incidents have been at low speeds and very minor.

Chevrolet Bolt

Chevy Bolt In Autonomous Mode

The motorcyclist in question is Oscar Nilsson. Apparently, he sustained some injuries when the two vehicles bumped one another. Immediately following the accident, he complained of shoulder pain and proceeded to seek medical treatment. Now, he says he’s unable to work and is on disability leave.

The Bolt EV was driving itself, however, as is always the case at this point, a human driver was in the driver’s seat and ready to engage. At the time of the crash, the driver didn’t have his hands on the wheel. The Bolt was traveling about 12 mph, while the motorcycle was at 17 mph.

According to the crash report filed by GM with California Department of Motor Vehicles, the car began a lane change procedure in heavy traffic, but then went back into its original lane because there was no longer room to merge. Meanwhile, the motorcycle was lane-splitting, bumped the Chevy Bolt, and tipped over. GM claims (via The Verge):

“In this case the motorcyclist merged into our lane before it was safe to do so.”

The Bolt suffered a long scuff on its passenger side. The motorcyclist picked up his bike and proceeded to the side of the road. He then exchanged information with the driver of the Bolt … not the robot, but the human. A Cruise Automation spokesperson explained:

“… a motorcycle that had just lane-split between two vehicles in the center and right lanes moved into the center lane. [The motorcycle] glanced the side of the Cruise AV, wobbled, and fell over.

We test our self-driving cars in challenging and unpredictable environments precisely because, by doing so, we will get better, safer AV technology on the roads sooner. In this case, the motorcyclist merged into our lane before it was safe to do so.”

GM and Cruise are rapidly updating the self-driving Bolt in an attempt to reach Level 5 autonomy as soon as safely possible. The automaker just announced that it will release a fully self-driving car next year, with no steering wheel or pedals.

Source: The Verge

Categories: Chevrolet, Crashed EVs


Leave a Reply

89 Comments on "GM Sued By Lane-Splitting Motorcyclist In Self-Driving Chevy Bolt Crash"

newest oldest most voted

If two fully autonomous cars are involved in an accident, do they pull over to the side of the road and exchange information?

They would exchange information beforehand to ensure that the crash didn’t happen. Most of what we hear about is human-autonomous car interaction because that is the hard problem. The easy (but essential) technology is vehicle to vehicle communication. Expect cars, traffic lights, signs, and even crossing guards to possess signs that broadcast their intentions and requirements to nearby vehicles.

You’re assuming that everyone building AV’s are using and talking on the same protocol amd datastream.
That’s the dumbest assumption ever.

If the EV makers don’t agree on vehicle-to-vehicle protocols for exchanging data, then you can be sure the government will soon step in to create such a protocol. The government isn’t going to stand idly by when people’s lives are at stake, unlike they have with the EV charging format “wars”.

We have the FCC to regulate radio and TV broadcasting, and the FAA to regulate airplane travel; you can be sure that we’ll soon have something similar to oversee vehicle-to-vehicle communication, altho that may fall under the control of the NHTSA.

Vehicle-to-vehicle communications, facilitating the cooperation of self-driving cars to ensure smooth and safe traffic flow, and guaranteeing right-of-way for emergency vehicles, must all use the same protocol.

There can be only one! 😉

The government shouldn’t allow AV development on public roads. There’s plenty they aren’t ready for without endangering the public.

They didn’t mandate a Cellular Protocol, I doubt they’ll mandate a V2V communications protocol either.
At least I don’t expect the current leadership of the FCC to take that on.

Mary Barra is currently on a conference call with all the remaining GM ignition switch lawyers. Motorcycle lane splitting, and premature and unsafe lane merging, in this particular case, just has to be Oscars fault. /s

I hope Oscar can get back to work soon, without any further autonomous vehicle incidents.

It seems pretty clear that the motorcyclist was at fault.

Furthermore, Mary Barra wasn’t CEO when the fateful decision was made regarding the faulty ignition switch design. She’s the best CEO GM has had in many decades, a true car person who grew up wrenching on them. I wouldn’t underestimate where she may lead GM.

They put her there as the Scapegoat to take the heat during the ignition switch Fiasco ..the other guys Chickened out and headed for the door . She is doing a good Job , way better than all the her other predocsessors “PUT TOGETHER”


Did you mean Predecessors? (Dudes who came before, like Ancestors!)

Actually, it’s not the motorcyclists fault. It’s the cars fault. Changing lanes in California where lane splitting is legal puts the burden on the vehicle changing lanes to make sure the lanes clear to take, including lane splitting motorcycles.

Not sure about Californian differences.

In Australia if the car starts changing lanes it still is legally considered to be in its original lane, until it has fully left the lane.

It has to be done that way so that it can quickly pull back in if something dangerous comes into view.

What? I didn’t think lane splitting was legal anywhere. I cannot imagine any situation where it would be safe. When, where and why is lane splitting legal?

Nope, legal in California. Always has been and so far CHP supports it fully.

From the description I am not sure what happened. It doesn’t say if the car is moving from lane 1 to lane 2 or the other way around.

Without more information it is difficult to say what happened, therefore impossible to say who was at fault. The speeds were very low so crazy wasn’t a major consideration.

Studies have shown that under 30 MPH there is no more risk for the biker lane splitting than normal lane riding. Above 30 it gets progressively more dangerous.

Former Motorcycle Safety Foundation Experienced Instructor with nearly 50 years of experience riding on California and Texas streets. Plus 10 years amateur and professional racing in everything from flat track to Road racing (CMRA)

“Without more information it is difficult to say what happened, therefore impossible to say who was at fault.”

Exactly. We were not there, so we’re not in a position to say who was at fault.

From some descriptions, the motorcycle tried to move into the hole left when the self-driving Bolt EV started to change lanes, but then the Bolt EV moved back into the same lane. If that’s correct, then both vehicles were changing lanes, so perhaps both are partially “at fault.”

Seems to me that, bottom line, this is just another case of an ambulance-chasing lawyer who thinks he’s got a shot at winning a “whiplash” type personal injury suit against a big company with deep pockets.

The computer driven car was negligently designed, resulting in two fails: It failed to detect the motorcyclist and could have killed him. It failed to choose the safer option of stopping until safe to change direction.

Lane splitting is illegal in Ca. but lane sharing is legal. And yes there is a difference. As I undersand this the car had the lane position and was beginning a transition to another, most likely away from the motorcycle before it reassumed it’s original lane position. Motorcycle or car, if it’s not safe to enter the space then it’s your fault if you do and it results in a crash. This sounds like an oppertunistic lawsuit. Knowing how sensor and camera laden these cars are it should be easy to show in court what really happened.

Methinks the motorcycle at fault. Motorcycles have a fatality rate about 30 times higher than cars (measured per passenger mile).

Dead young motorcycle drivers are an important source of donor organs.

Lane splitting can only be called foolish and dangerous.

But totally legal where this occured.

The AV does not k kw how to handle the situatio n therfore it is not ready. It’s a moving object. It can’t see a moving object?

No. Computers and robots can’t see anything, at least not in the sense that humans do, nor anything remotely close to that.

I’m amazed at all the anthropomorphic abilities that people want to assign to robots and other machines. This is real life, not a cartoon or a science fiction movie.

Now, we certainly hope that any car described as “self driving” can detect (not “see”) other vehicles around it. But that doesn’t mean they can predict the actions of those other vehicles. If the motorcycle was changing lanes quickly — as we all know motorcycles can do — then it’s seems quite possible, perhaps even likely, that the self-driving car didn’t have time to react and move out of the motorcycle’s way. Even if the car’s computer reacted instantly to alter the car’s direction in an attempt to avoid the accident, inertia still has to be overcome. Computers can’t help with that!

At this point we also dont know wether or not the Bolt re-entered to its lane, detected the motorist but decided to follow trough due to a predicted more serious accident if it would not have done so.

Yes, computer control or not with traffic all around, and a gap you were planning to move into is rapidly closing, what other choices are there? If a motorcyclist moves into the space you were leaving, any action at all results in hitting somebody. If the law says this is legal, then the law needs to be re-written.

As a motorcyclist I will ask you one simple question.

Did you see the accident as it occurred?

If not, I will politely as you to leave the accident investigation to the professionals who have access to the evidence onsite.

“Pretty clear”

Perhaps until lawyers, judges, and juries get involved.
Then black and white are both shades of grey.

Mary Barra is the best Bolt EV salesperson in the world! And one thing is for certain, when she’s wearing leather … she means business. So watch yourself.

BTW, while lane sharing or lane splitting is legal here in CA; this case won’t ever hold up in court.

Cops routinely give ticket to lane sharing mc riders for “unsafe passing”. That’s what this guy was doing; now he’s gone to “see Saul”, lawyered up, and thinks he’s going to retire. He’ll soon find out.

Guess what? In the real world, people don’t always strictly obey the rules, they don’t always drive the exact speed limit, and they make assumptions about what other people see and will do. Until that gets programmed into the neural net, level 5 will be a long way off.

Or just have dedicated self driving roadways.

I can see entering into dedicated HOV type lanes or dedicated downtown areas. Until then I make a few claims:

1. It will never be legal or safe to be fully autonomous on a public road with cars that aren’t autonomous. It’s just straight up ripe for class action lawsuit. Driving on a road where only some of the cars are autonomous (and presumably communicating with each other and/or a net) would be like flying in/out of O’Hare where only some of the airplanes are part of the air traffic control process.
2. Pieces of the technology will become standard as driver assist to make the driver more aware/attentive/effective. A recent test drive of a Subaru Outback showed me just how superior their application of this kind of stuff is as compared to the rather behind the curve and misguided claims of Tesla.

“It will never be legal or safe to be fully autonomous on a public road with cars that aren’t autonomous. It’s just straight up ripe for class action lawsuit.”

That’s the “Cars shouldn’t self-drive at all until they can do it perfectly” argument that has already become tiresome. Just another case of “The perfect driving out the good”, and in this case doing that would kill people. And the longer that situation continued, the more people would die unnecessarily.

It’s as ridiculous as claiming we should stop using airbags because a few people have been killed by them malfunctioning. Great heavens, no! We should start using self-driving cars just as soon as doing so will reduce the overall accident rate. Refusing to do so will be literally costing lives.

“The thing to keep in mind is that self-driving cars don’t have to be perfect to change the world. They just have to be better than human beings.” — Deepak Ahuja, CFO of Tesla Inc.

And when they cause an accident because they didn’t obey the rules, they are at fault.

The Level 5 autonomous vehicles will have cameras to record everything.

If the autonomous cars obey the law and are safer than humans overall, then it’s not going to matter whether there are some collisions because they don’t do everything that humans do.

Guess what? Making assumptions about what others will do is a very error-prone game whether other drivers are erratic humans or payment more consistent robots. Maybe software drivers are more difficult in this regard, but there’s actually no indication of that here – it’s purely speculative. Starting a merge procedure and aborting it (for instance because others fail to help make room) is common in heavy traffic, and there seems to be no reason to think this accident couldn’t happen with only human drivers involved. The real question is whether autonomous cars drive much more safely than people. Once they do, we will probably accept them. What you are doing is really little more than pointing to a potential flaw and claiming, without comparison to the also-flawed alternative of human drivers, that this disqualifies the technology until fixed. That’s such an unreasonably high bar that almost nothing we have would have passed it. Certainly cars themselves are dangerous, and they sometimes set themselves on fire. Cell phone batteries sometimes explode. TVs and coffee makers start fires. Bridges occasionally collapse, buildings are not perfectly earthquake proof. In every case the relevant question to ask is if we’d be better off without… Read more »

Bravo! Well said, sir.

Leptoquark: Yes, GM immediately responded that at this low speed it was not their fault, however I would be an insurance investigator will at least assign partial blame to GM.

But the stakes are so big here it is hard to believe that the ‘investigator’ will be not subjected to influence, shall we say.

If you break the law you have to expect there may be consequences. I ride a motorcycle and wouldn’t pass a vehicle while it was merging lanes.

A wise and reasonable response.

When I lane split if there is a car making even a hint of wanting make a lane change, I pull into the lane and just wait until his intentions are plain and clear or the lane change is complete.

To do otherwise is inviting pain. You are pulling into a space where the driver of the car has limited vision. It makes no sense to assume he can see you.

Seriously your somehow trying to blame autonomous cars because they drive too well???
If your not capable of driving to the road rules I suggest you buy an autonomous vehicle to do it for you.

I know why people are tempted to lane split, but it is not a safe way to travel.

Anyone who does it should always be fined for dangerous driving.

Problem is it’s completely legal in certain states like CA. My sister got sued by a motorcylists who basically hit her front quarter panel in a similar accident as this one.

She had her signal on and was slowly changing into the next lane at below 10 mph in thick traffic and a motorcyclist who was “legally” lane splitting was far exceeding the surrounding traffic’s speed and just rammed into the front quarter panel of her car. She couldn’t see him coming because of his speed and line of sight was obscured by the curve of the road and larger vehicles behind her.

She lost the case or at least her insurance company lost and had to pay up for damages. Luckily the guy wasn’t physically injured.

It boggles my mind that lane splitting is legal much less that it gives so much legal weight to the cyclist who is risking their life doing it.

I did not know it was legal in any of the states or provinces.

And any car turning left should be fined for endangering motorcycles, because left turning cars cause far more crashes than any other.

If you have your blinker on and the lane splitting bike is coming up behind you while the blinker is on, then that biker is an idiot if they proceed to pass you and it is clear you can merge. A bikes never gonna come off better than a car in a collision, simple survival instinct should make you wait for the car, but we know peoples is stupid and impatient!

So, I guess that would also count for Right Turning Cars, turning right from the left or 2nd lane from the curb, like the one that turned into me some 35 years ago, causing me to dodge to avoid them, but boucing and spilling after hitting the rounded part of the curb on the far side! Nice to know!

Unfortunately, after I picked myself up from a rock garden I ended up planting in, those dudes spoke 1st to the cops and blamed me for the incident (I avoided their car, but got caught by the curb, that bounced my front wheel out of line of travel, that spilled me)! Guess who got the Ticket! Ta Da! Yup! Me!

Not even lane splitting, just dudes who couldn’t hear a 1974 Honda CB550, beside them, turning into me from my left!

I too was “Left turned”.
I made direct impact on the right side of an SUV as it turned left in front of me with no turn signal.

A 2015 study by UC Berkeley found that lane splitting was no more dangerous for motorcyclists when done in traffic under 50mph, and if they kept their relative speed less than 15mph faster than surrounding traffic.

In stop-n-go traffic, motorcyclist regularly get rear ended. By allowing them to slowly drive in the center of the lanes between cars, it prevents that.

Problem is when they do it at excessive speeds.

Statistically, it’s safe.

Apparantly lane splitting isn’t against the law there from what I read.

That seems idiotic to me. It is incredibly dangerous. Its hard enough to see motorcycles as is.

Unless you’ve tried lane splitting, you have no idea how safe or dangerous it is. Law forbids splitting above about 10 MPH over traffic flow, and it’s just as safe at that speed differential than risk getting hit from behind.

I never drove a motorcycle but I rode with my grandfather on his two seater Honda plenty of times when I was young.

He never did this. But his motorcycle was quite large so he couldn’t anyways. He would, however, often complained about other wreckless motorcyclists.

Of course he was also a police officer so he saw the carnage that happened when people drove wrecklessly, moved unpredictably, and didn’t leave enough space between them and the car ahead of them.

Avoiding a collision is one thing – cars need to do that too sometimes.

But it is very dangerous when i see motorcyclists darting in and out of lanes of traffic. Not for safety, just because theyre too impatient to wait. Or when I am at a stoplight and a bycicle or motorcycle comes straight between the lanes to the front of the light. (sometimes the cyclists just keep on riding through the red light)

If they’re gonna drive on the same roads as real cars, they should follow the same traffic laws!

As others have pointed out, studies show lane splitting at reasonable speed no more more dangerous than typical. Anecdotally, I know of few people who got rear ended while riding, but I know of no one who crashed due to lane splitting. We all do it and do it safely, not “darting in and out of traffic”. Of course, we’re old riders who managed to survive by being safe (evolution at work).

Another interesting anecdote; almost everyone I know who ride have been involved in crashes with left turning cars. Stats say 40%+, but my anecdote indicates 90%.


SparkEV, I think you and I are a lot alike. “In a different reality I could have called you friend.” Star Trek TOS can you name the episode? 🙂

“He would, however, often complained about other wreckless motorcyclists.”

When a typo becomes irony… 😉

You meant reckless. “Wreckless” would be… almost precisely the opposite.

Sounds like English vs Legalese, where a Judge or a Lawyer or a Cop asks a Legal Question, but we just hear an English Question, and don’t know and understand the Difference!

Or…. If a Typist is a person who Types, then a Racist would be a person who Races! There goes the Neighborhood!

But, as to spelling, you would be correct, yet in conversation, could you tell the difference? Wreckless vs reckless?

“…in conversation, could you tell the difference? Wreckless vs reckless?”

Well of course not. “Wreckless” and “reckless” are homophones and therefore indistinguishable in the spoken word, just like “their” and “there” and “they’re”.

Fyi, we call it “riding” not “driving”.

Think like horse, you don’t drive a horse, you ride it. Same idea.

Cite a California law that prohibits lane splitting at more than 10mph over the speed of traffic.

There isn’t one, AFAIK

Unfortunately you are correct. There is no law restricting lane sharing at all. CHP tried to put some guidelines to safe and prudent behavior on their website and DMV made them take it off. They said because it was on an official state sponsored website it could be interpreted as law and that just isn’t the case.
However, When I am in the HOV lane riding at 70 MPH and flowing with traffic and you pass me at 85 it REALLY pisses me off.

I tried it once. Never again.

Now, lane filtering is something different, and I am ok with that.

Lane filtering occurs at a traffic light, the bikes go between the cars to the front. This is because most motorcycles accelerate faster than most cars. This allows them to get in front of, and out of the way of the cars stopped at the light.

“incredibly idiot”…Half the states don’t have helmet law…Beyond some rare local laws, there aren’t any major protective gear laws…Yet within for the U.S. military troops and for anyone, including civilians, riding on military installations, protective gear is required…

Literally 95% of the world allows lane splitting, short of 49 US states (maybe 48 now). It’s completely safe, or as much as any other situation. It can introduce a new risk, with the exchange of mitigating a different risk. As usual, all parties need to actually pay attention.

Driving a car is not safe. Riding a motorcycle in traffic is not safe Splitting lanes with a motorcycle is not safe. Any questions?

Is it safe to stay home..? We’ve all heard it but it bears reminding: life is a sexually contacted disease with a 100% mortality rate. Of course this doesn’t mean everything is equally dangerous. But to my mind, it seems society has no right to restrict the freedom of sane adults to do things that endanger their own life and health. In my view, it is far more obvious that everyone in a bus should be required to wear seat belts than that motorcyclists should be required to wear helmets. A passenger becomes an overwhelming threat to the life of the passenger ahead when a bus crashes, and bit using a seat belt therefore involves not just that individual’s safety, but that of the other passengers as well. The motorcyclist doesn’t pose a greater danger to others by not wearing a helmet. (I still actually think helmets and protective gear should be required, the latter perhaps only to go at speed, say, above 30 mph. Some people benefit from protection against their own poor judgement, and I don’t think this restricts their freedom in a serious way. But compared to not wearing seatbelts on a bus, driving without a helmet… Read more »

As of now, lane splitting is only legal in California.

Personally, I hope it stays there.

“immediately following the accident, he complained of shoulder pain and proceeded to seek medical treatment.”
That was fast! Sharks waste no time. Well at least he is original, I’m tired of the same old phantom “neck injury”.

I hate motorcyclists and their childish noise bikes!

Your poor attitude isn’t helping ‼️

I’m with him! Fricking hate them, especially the choppers….

Maybe get over yourself!

Don’t worry, I’m sure a lot of them hate you too.

People make mistakes and take risks like Oscar. Some ambulance chaser convinced Oscar That the negative publicity for GM could make this a profitable event for him. This will likely fade away as GM probably has the data to refute his claim.

Yeah, this is all about a settlement. Good call.

GM should counter-sue for $10 million for slander/defamation of their autonomous technology. That should make someone poop their pants a bit.

Exactly. The ambulance chaser is hoping GM will throw huge wodges of cash at him and his client, to make the bad publicity go away before reaching trial.

Unfortunately, there’s a good chance this legal extortion is going to work. 🙁

Because motorcycles are linear (less wider), the car may not have sensed it and that could have caused crash. It needs more research to avoid motorcycles & bikes.

Still motorcycles are very risky as a passing car/truck could shake the vehicle.

Ideally a 4 wheeled single seater convertible should be designed for the open air enthusiasts. Such a 4 wheeled vehicle will be stable and when it rains/snows or becomes windy, they can close the top and ride safely.

And when they are tired, they can pull into a nearby store and take a nap inside the vehicle. Safety is more important than thrill.

If autonomous cars are put into rental service, then we can rent a car for 1 way drive from one place to another.

And the cars will drive on their own to their original rental company.

Or the car may be given on rent to a place which is close to the original rental company and from there it can drive.

This way a passenger can enjoy the 1 way drive while on return trip, take a flight or bus or train.

Self-driving cars will have many advantages, and yes that’s one of them. Better yet, if you rent a self-driving car, it can come to you rather than you having to go pick it up.

This definitely has the stink of opportunism.

Not really anymore than any other accident.
It seems fairly typical.

This is pretty typical. Have you driven in traffic on Oak Street? Oscar was lane splitting and traveling faster than traffic. While driving car less he got careless and made a mistake. A very human thing to do. He was cited for his err. Usually that is the end of the story because he didn’t damage the vehicle he hit. In this case there is a perceived op to profit hence the suit.

I meant by typical to bring a claim.
Even in cases where citations are issued claims are brought, as their is always last driver concerns & accident avoidance measures that can be taken.
If someone runs a red light and slam into them anyway, though you could have tried to stop, then you are still at fault.

In this case also reasonable arguments can be brought, to claim that the autonomous vehicle should have been able to avoid the accident.

“…reasonable arguments can be brought, to claim that the autonomous vehicle should have been able to avoid the accident.”

But that same argument applies at least equally well to the motorcyclist, and arguably even more so since the cycle can brake and change direction faster than the car.

I’m pretty sure most every action a human takes is opportunistic.

Get used to such articles. The mix of human-piloted and autonomous road vehicles will lead to a lot of headaches and even more legal battles. And that’s before people start getting creative with hacking road signs with tape to make them unrecognizable to cars and finding other ways to screw with other drivers. The bottom line is that there’s no good way to mix fully autonomous vehicles and human-driven vehicles. The only two solutions that stand a chance of making a big difference are [1] heavily instrumenting roads so cars aren’t merely passively collecting information and sharing it among themselves, and [2] dedicated autonomous roads. The first will never happen, as it’s far too expensive and too prone to vandalism and failure. The second won’t happen because of expense and because it won’t provide a door-to-door pathway except in highly unusual circumstances. As I so often point out: Highly to fully autonomous cars cannot possibly get here too soon for me. I am sick to death of dealing with the morons who can’t drive worth a flying fig. But a long background in programming and computer hardware tells me that this is a vastly tougher problem that most people realize,… Read more »

GM came out and threw the motorcyclist under the bus.
When Tesla reveals logs that proves it’s not Teslas fault people blast Tesla.

WTF is wrong with people?

Preach it brother. No one gets hurt in a Tesla crash and it is every major publication. 13 accidents in a Chevy Bolt and nothing until a suit.

Simple. Tesla’s stock is often the #1 shorted stock in the entire world. So there are a lot of people out there who have a strong motive to post Tesla hater FUD, in an attempt to damage Tesla’s public reputation and thus drive down the stock price.

No doubt there are other motives for Tesla hater posts; shills for Big Oil who correctly see Tesla as leading the EV revolution which is going to sharply bite into their revenue, and people who work for GM and other legacy auto makers who, rightly, see Tesla as a big threat to their market.

But the Tesla stock shorters alone are sufficient alone to create an astonishing volume of FUD, and mostly the other Tesla haters are just copying and pasting the FUD churned out by stock shorters.

Yeah, it’s too bad that so many Tesla related discussions are polluted by so many Tesla Hater cultist posts, even here on what is supposed to be a pro-EV website.

I’m still hoping for the ability to “vote up” and “vote down” posts here, which is something the staff have talked about as a possibility, but unfortunately it hasn’t happened yet.

No way only Tesla Autopilot have accidents.

I thought the motorcycle rider got a ticket for it. If I remember correctly, the police found the motorcycle at fault. I wonder if they sue when fault is already found, then on what ground do they expect to win? Are they expecting the decision to be overturned? or are they expecting GM to settle and move on? The motorcycle is at fault based on what I know. lane sharing is legal in CA. But it is motorcycle’s responsibility to ensure there is space to do so. That is the key here. The Bolt went to other lane but didn’t completely vacate the lane and decided to come back. The motorcycle end up scrapping the side of the Bolt. That means the space wasn’t available yet because the rider “assumed” the space was going to be opening up. This actually happens often in CA where I drive daily. Many riders assume the cars will move over once they start to go. They eagerly take over the lanes before the vehicle completely vacate the lanes. I am sure GM has enough data stored to show exactly what happened. OF course, GM might just pay some $ to settle and move on…