Comment by JumpCrisscross
8 hours ago
The entire point of these articles about mounting lawsuits is those assumptions may be wrong. The liabilities involved are higher. And given Tesla is potentially mucking with the data, the exculpatory value of having all those cameras is diminished.
> if the Tesla was more dangerous to drive than a Toyota, because it was a Tesla, then insurance companies would be paying out more for insuring Teslas
You may be over indexing how much work liability insurers do. I have an umbrella policy. It absolutely doesn’t take into account the fact that I ski and fly a plane, for example. At the end of the day, their liability is capped and it’s usually easier to weed out by claims history than running models on small premiums.
> The entire point of these articles about mounting lawsuits is those assumptions may be wrong.
And my entire point is I trust the incentives of the insurer to accurately price risk and determine at fault more than a publication that needs clicks.
> And given Tesla is potentially mucking with the data, the exculpatory value of having all those cameras is diminished.
Does the data from Tesla even come into play for an insurer? They need to pay the damaged parties regardless of whether or not Tesla and its software are at fault. For premium pricing purposes, what Tesla does is irrelevant until after Tesla is found liable.
In the meantime, a collision with a Tesla is the same as any other auto brand’s. I don’t think Ford/Toyota/anyone else’s software comes into play. No auto brand picks up the liability for the driver (except Mercedes in some circumstances, I think), so no automaker is in the picture for payment in the event of an individual collision.
> my entire point is I trust the incentives of the insurer to accurately price risk and determine at fault more than a publication that needs clicks
Fair enough. I agree with you in the long run. I just don't think we've seen the litigation that will define liability play out yet.
> Does the data from Tesla even come into play for an insurer?
Directly? No. At least, not unless AI actuaries make the work worth the while.
For juries calculating damages? Plaintiffs weighing whether to bring a case? Sure. That, in turn, plays into liability. And that is something insurers care about.
> In the meantime, a collision with a Tesla is the same as any other auto brand’s
In the meantime, yes. If collisions with Teslas predictably result in larger damages than with other brands, you'd expect to see more litigation when a Tesla is involved/suspected at fault, and with that, higher costs.
> No auto brand picks up the liability for the driver
Tesla has been assigned liability already [1].
[1] https://law.marquette.edu/facultyblog/2025/08/jury-awards-24...