2017+ Chrysler Pacifica Minivan Forums banner

41 - 56 of 56 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
15 Posts
And what claims am I making? That insurance is for accidents? That they only care about true accidents or willfully causing an accident to collect insurance money. Um, because that's how insurance works. You can be the dumbest, ignorant person around, crash your car, be totally your fault and insurance will pay out. As long as you have payed your premiums, don't lie about what happened, and it's covered by your policy, your good to go.
You've made some rather uninformed claims about liability and insurance.

I'm not particularly interested in rolling around in the mud with you on this. It's enough for me to know that you've got zip for actual credibility on the claims you make.

Sure. If you say so. You don't have to be an attorney to understand insurance. As long as you can read your policy and fully understand the definitions used in said policy, you'll be fine.

And i know there are very different kinds of attorneys and it doesn't mean they are all experts in insurance claims. Some attorneys try to make claims you said something, without further expanding of said claims. "It's enough for me to know that you've got zip for actual credibility on the claims you make" but each his own, I guess. Once we see what the insurance agent has to say about OP, then we can revisit this conversation.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
110 Posts
If you crash, it would still be your fault! So it doesn't matter. OP does not remove built in safety mechanism. It is a after market driving assist development unit. The only thing the insurance companies would care about is if the accident was intentional. For example, did you willfully remove your vicegrip steering wheel on purpose. However, I'll wait and see what his insurance agent has to say officially. There is no herd mentality at play here, just people that know what OP is and how it works.
It does matter if someone or multiple people die and the civil suits start pouring in. Insurance only covers so much, if covered. Insurance does not stop civil suits.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15 Posts
Now we are talking about a civil suit, that is a totally different beast and can happen regardless if OP was in use or not. I suppose if the investigating officer determined you to be at fault, then that can be a problem. However, I doubt its no more a problem than if you were driving a stock car and using adaptive cruise control and plowed into another car that was stopped killing a hypothetical person. It comes down to operator error.

Now I for one would not want to test that theory, but civil suits happen all the time when a driver is at fault for an accident. The key word there is 'driver at fault'.

Now if anyone wants to show me what laws or regulations that governor the use of adaptive cruise control, LKAS, and emergency breaking, I would be more than happy to read more into it. The common theme in the manual is "driver has the responsibility".

Here is what the manual says on the 2018 pacific hybrid :

Forward Collision Warning (FCW) With Mitigation
"Forward Collision Warning (FCW) is not intended to
avoid a collision on its own, nor can FCW detect every
type of potential collision. The driver has the responsibility to avoid a collision by controlling the vehicle
via braking and steering. Failure to follow this warning could lead to serious injury or death."

B]ADAPTIVE CRUISE CONTROL (ACC)[/B]

"• Adaptive Cruise Control (ACC) is a convenience
system. It is not a substitute for active driving
involvement. It is always the driver’s responsibility
to be attentive of road, traffic, and weather conditions, vehicle speed, distance to the vehicle ahead;
and, most importantly, brake operation to ensure safe
operation of the vehicle under all road conditions.
Your complete attention is always required while
driving to maintain safe control of your vehicle.
Failure to follow these warnings can result in a
collision and death or serious personal injury."

"The ACC system:
• Does not react to pedestrians, oncoming vehicles,
and stationary objects (e.g., a stopped vehicle in a
traffic jam or a disabled vehicle).
• Cannot take street, traffic, and weather conditions
into account, and may be limited upon adverse
sight distance conditions.
• Does not always fully recognize complex driving
conditions, which can result in wrong or missing
distance warnings."
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
288 Posts
Now we are talking about a civil suit, that is a totally different beast and can happen regardless if OP was in use or not. I suppose if the investigating officer determined you to be at fault, then that can be a problem. However, I doubt its no more a problem than if you were driving a stock car and using adaptive cruise control and plowed into another car that was stopped killing a hypothetical person. It comes down to operator error.
I suppose your legal training has informed your opinion on that? How do you think a jury might choose to view someone who ceded control of their vehicle to an untested system? I suppose you'll want to argue about what "untested" means, but in this context it means a system that the OEM never tested.

Guys like you are interesting. You'll argue until you're blue in the face, basing your uneducated, uninformed opinion on what you'd like to believe. You keep saying that the driver is always responsible, as though anyone is arguing that point. I'm saying that yes, the driver is responsible--likely for much more than a person with your level of knowledge thinks they're responsible for.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15 Posts
I suppose your legal training has informed your opinion on that? How do you think a jury might choose to view someone who ceded control of their vehicle to an untested system? I suppose you'll want to argue about what "untested" means, but in this context it means a system that the OEM never tested.

Guys like you are interesting. You'll argue until you're blue in the face, basing your uneducated, uninformed opinion on what you'd like to believe. You keep saying that the driver is always responsible, as though anyone is arguing that point. I'm saying that yes, the driver is responsible--likely for much more than a person with your level of knowledge thinks they're responsible for.
My reading comprehension has allowed me to form thoughts and opinions on subjects that I may not be an expert on, they may not be entirely right, or entirely wrong but they are mine. It does not mean I am ignorant on certain subjects, however. You have had more than enough time to demonstrate your expert opinion on this subject, however. If i'm wrong call me out, explain it to me. I can admit when I'm wrong. I've met a lot of educated people in my time, it does not make them smart. Now for your scenario.

Yes, I would like clear definitions. How else can anything clearly be debated. First and foremost, You do not cede control of your car with OP. OP is a level two system which requires a driver behind the wheel at all time, because the driver controls the car, not OP. For your information, a level one system is cruise control for example, it also requires a driver to be in control of the car. Level one and level two are driver assist technologies, not self driving technologies. First point, OP is driver assist, not self drive. The driver is still responsible.

Second. You talk about untested by the oem. OP users have driven over 10+ million miles. How many miles do the oems test for with these systems? I don't know, but I can tell you, my lawyer and I would definitely have our expert there to convey this information and compare this information to the jury in a positive note. The OEM numbers could be higher, but I highly doubt that (I have personally seen video of oem ACC ramming a car because the driver didn't understand how it works, his fault). I would also point out the safe numbers to the jury with OP, and I believe we could convey to the jury what it is, how safe it is, and that its the drivers responsibility.

Further, OP does not remove any oem safety features from the car. Actually, it adds safety measures. For example, keeping the car between the center line of the road. The software does not allow it to jerk the steering wheel hard into cross traffic. It also has driver monitoring while this system is engaged, via camera and steering wheel input. Like I said, its a driving assistant where the operator should have their hands on the steering wheel at all time, ready to react. Depending on vehicle, OP controls different things, for the pacifica, OP only controls steering (lateral control). Longitudinal control (speed) is controlled by the oem system. It is stock. And I can tell you from personal experience, using my ACC and Lane sense, its horrible and badly implemented where the steering wheel has jerked towards the side of the roads because it followed the line.

This whole scenario is hog wash anyhow. If I am the at fault driver, well guess what? I would have to convince the jury that it was not my fault, that a difficult barrier to over come, if me the driver, was cited by the investigating officer, more so in a civil trial. This trial likely means that it was my fault! OP would be a foot note in my negligence if I was the at fault driver.

Anyhow, I would more than welcome your expert opinion on this matter. Like you said, "yes, the driver is responsible--likely for much more than a person with your level of knowledge thinks they're responsible for". To each his own!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
288 Posts
Like you said, "yes, the driver is responsible--likely for much more than a person with your level of knowledge thinks they're responsible for". To each his own!
To each his own? So now you want to create your own reality?

Tort law is, at times, out of control. For situations like this, compensatory damages, punitive damages, things like like pain and suffering, loss of consortium... Those would likely all be much greater than in a "normal" civil trial. It'd be a nasty wrongful death suit if someone were to die. It's entirely possible to see manslaughter charges resulting from it, too.

Guys like you really have no idea what you're suggesting when you promote things like this. It's one thing to know the risks not just with the system (which I don't believe you actually understand), but to not consider all of the other risks... It's unconscionable.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15 Posts
Like you said, "yes, the driver is responsible--likely for much more than a person with your level of knowledge thinks they're responsible for". To each his own!
To each his own? So now you want to create your own reality?

Tort law is, at times, out of control. For situations like this, compensatory damages, punitive damages, things like like pain and suffering, loss of consortium... Those would likely all be much greater than in a "normal" civil trial. It'd be a nasty wrongful death suit if someone were to die. It's entirely possible to see manslaughter charges resulting from it, too.

Guys like you really have no idea what you're suggesting when you promote things like this. It's one thing to know the risks not just with the system (which I don't believe you actually understand), but to not consider all of the other risks... It's unconscionable.
Great response, way to help me see the error in my thinking. Now we moved on from civil liability to criminal liability, manslaughter baby. Oh my. Like I said, if you know the system, explain the error in my thinking. I know it's not as simple as what I described but I also know it's not a black and white and being scared of technology with your "get off mom lawn you **** techno kids" statements. I'm more than willing to learn something from a expert". I told you, I'm not afraid of being wrong.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
306 Posts
Doing this in New Jersey, the most densely populated state in the country, is particularly irresponsible.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3 Posts
Doing this in New Jersey, the most densely populated state in the country, is particularly irresponsible.


No it's not... The driver is still in full control. All this does is keep the vehicle in the center of the lane. It does not affect the stock ACC at all. The speed is controlled by the vehicle.

There is no difference between setting your cruise to 70 and plowing into a stopped vehicle in front of you. The accident and liability for any injuries would be all yours. If there was a civil suit, the vehicle manufacturer would not have liability, just the driver. Using OP would be no different.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
400 Posts
Doing this in New Jersey, the most densely populated state in the country, is particularly irresponsible.
So driving with the OEM Lanesense and ACC is responsible but adding a system that offers more precision to the Lanesense is not? I could be wrong but it seems that the Open Pilot system “adds on” to the existing Lanesense so if it were to suddenly stop working you’d be left with Lanesense.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15 Posts
Sorta, OEM Lansesense is turned off (disabled) while OP is engaged. However, if OP were to suddenly stop working (fault), you will not have OP or Lansense. This why its a level two system that requires a driver to drive the vehicle. This why you should maintain control of the steering wheel. That said, the OP software doesn't allow for so much torque on the steering wheel that you should ever lose control, if you were using it as advertised. It does offer more precision control than lanesense. Further, OP doesn't touch longitudinal(speed) of the pacifica, that is OEM ACC, stock. And unless you fully understand the limitations of ACC, that can be scary and dangerous.



I've had stock lanesense pull my van off towards an exit, and had I not had positive control of the wheel, it would have drove off into the ditch.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
75 Posts
Discussion Starter #52
Finally heard back from my insurance. I've posted their response below. It does not solve any of the questions/concerns around liability, but it does answer the question of whether or not it would be restricted in my policy.


Thank you for your email.

Currently, we do not have any restrictions against this type of modification added to your vehicle but also we do not have any discount associated with it either.

This type of technology is rather new and while we are reviewing the options that are rapidly becoming available to our customers, currently this update would not change your policy.

However, this could be subject to change in the future as more information and research is learned about this type of vehicle automation.

You will be contacted if anything further is needed.

We're always available to help. Give us a call at 1-800-PROGRESSIVE (1-800-776-4737) if there are any additional questions.

Sincerely,

Lisa H.
Progressive Processing Specialist
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,734 Posts
In theory OpenPilot may present the liability issues, but would it actually happen? People regularly "upgrade" their cars with unapproved or clearly illegal parts- LED lights, oversized wheels, stiff suspension and so on. Admittedly, I'm not a lawyer or automotive industry expert, and I've never heard about someone getting into a serious trouble because of the mods. Around here people don't even get ticketed for blue LEDs in the front parking lights. And those mods permanently alter the vehicles, while OpenPilot can be disengaged and overridden at any moment.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1 Posts
Over 25K miles with OP installed in my Pacifica with no real problems to report. Sure does make my 35-40K year driving a lot easier. :shrugs:
Is the Comma Power actually required for the Pacifica? I notice that the FCA Giraffe comes bundled with a Comma Power unit; usually the power is only required for vehicles that throw an exception when the LKAS/Giraffe system isn't immediately responsive after powering on. It would be nice to not have to run the cable all the way over to the OBD port.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7 Posts
Is the Comma Power actually required for the Pacifica? I notice that the FCA Giraffe comes bundled with a Comma Power unit; usually the power is only required for vehicles that throw an exception when the LKAS/Giraffe system isn't immediately responsive after powering on. It would be nice to not have to run the cable all the way over to the OBD port.
No, the Comma Power is not required. It's useful if you need to update your Panda's firmware.

I wrote the OpenPilot port for Chrysler and designed the first FCA Giraffe. Glad to see people using it and enjoying it! It's been super useful in my 2017 PacHy. Let me know if you have any questions.

OpenPilot is a driver assistance system and the driver is responsible for safe operation of their vehicle.

If anyone in Austin wants help setting it up, send me a message.
 
41 - 56 of 56 Posts
About this Discussion
55 Replies
20 Participants
adhintz
2017+ Chrysler Pacifica Minivan Forums
PacificaForums.com - A forum community dedicated to Chrysler Pacifica owners & enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about upgrades, towing capacity, reliability, and more!
Full Forum Listing
Top