Schedule your meetings now
You’re stopped at the light on Main Street when you see in your rearview mirror that the car behind you isn’t slowing down. The impact shoves your car into the intersection, and by the time you climb out to check the damage, the other driver is already talking a mile a minute, saying the car didn’t brake like it was supposed to, that it was driving itself, that it wasn’t their fault. You do not know what any of that means, only that you were alarmed by the oncoming traffic, and you already know you need to see a doctor. New York Auto Law understands how unfamiliar this territory still is, even to insurance companies, and we step in to help you figure out who is actually accountable.
Who Is Responsible When a Self-Driving Car Causes a Crash?
Responsibility depends on how much control the vehicle actually had the moment it crashed. The driver who was supposed to be paying attention, the company that manufactured the vehicle, and the company that wrote its software can all end up answering for the same wreck. A self-driving car accident lawyer in Buffalo looks at what the system was doing, what the human was doing, and where the two stopped matching up.
What Does Self-Driving Actually Mean on the Road Today?
Here’s the part most drivers get wrong about a crash like this: almost nothing sold as self-driving today actually drives itself. Engineers rank automated systems on a scale from zero to five, and most of the driver-assist features on Western New York roads, systems that combine adaptive cruise control with lane centering, sit at level two. A level two system can steer, brake, and accelerate on its own for stretches of a drive, but New York law still requires the person in the driver’s seat to keep at least one hand on the wheel and stay ready to take over, no matter what the manufacturer calls the feature. That requirement does not change until a vehicle reaches level four or five, where the system handles an entire trip without a person weighing in at all.
Tesla Autopilot Crash Attorney in Buffalo
Tesla sells its driver assistance software under two names, Autopilot and the more advanced Full Self-Driving system, and the two are not the same product. Federal safety regulators opened an engineering analysis into the Full Self-Driving system in March 2026, covering more than 3.2 million vehicles, after finding that its cameras sometimes fail to detect glare, dust, or other conditions that block a clear view of the road, and fail to warn the driver when that happens. A driver who trusted the system to handle exactly the kind of low-visibility conditions its cameras were not designed to manage is not the only one who may bear responsibility for what happened next.
Who Is Still the Legal Driver When a Car Is Driving Itself?
A person using a level two system on a Buffalo street remains the legal driver the entire time, which means the usual questions about a driver’s own negligence still apply. Several things can keep that responsibility squarely on the human behind the wheel:
- Ignoring the system’s own warnings. A driver-assist feature that flashes an alert or beeps for attention, then gets ignored, points back to the driver, not the technology.
- Using the system outside its design. Engaging a lane-centering or highway-driving feature on a street it was never designed for shifts the blame back to the person who enabled it.
- Looking away from the road. New York’s hand-on-the-wheel requirement applies no matter what the dashboard says the car can do, so a driver who stopped watching the road broke that rule anyway.
- Driving through conditions that the system cannot see. A snowstorm that blinds the car’s cameras should change the driver’s own judgment too, not just the system’s.
None of these rules out a claim against the manufacturer. It just means the driver’s own choices get examined first, the same way they would in any other crash.
When Does an Autonomous Vehicle Accident Lawyer in New York Look at the Manufacturer?
The Vehicle Itself
A crash traced to a sensor that failed to detect a stopped car, a camera that could not see through glare, or software that braked too late suggests a claim of a design or manufacturing defect against the vehicle’s manufacturer. New York holds manufacturers responsible for a product that was unreasonably dangerous as designed, made with a flaw that deviated from its own specifications, or sold without a clear warning about what the technology could not yet do.
The Company Behind the Software
The company that assembled the car and the company that wrote the code behind its cameras and sensors are not always the same business, and a crash caused by a software failure can point toward a technology supplier a driver has never heard of. Sorting that out, and preserving records like software version numbers and update history before they disappear, is exactly the work a self-driving car accident lawyer in Buffalo does before naming a defendant, to help focus the case on the actual source of the failure.
How Does Western New York Weather Change Who Is at Fault?
Lake-effect snow, sudden whiteouts, and long stretches of glare off the snow on I-90 and the Thruway are routine here in a way they are not in most of the country, and federal investigators have already flagged camera-based systems for struggling with exactly those conditions. That raises two separate legal questions after a Buffalo crash: did the manufacturer know, or should it have known, that its cameras could not handle a Western New York winter, and did the driver continue to rely on the system after conditions made that reliance unreasonable? A crash on Route 33 during a whiteout raises both questions at once, and the answer to each one can point to a different defendant.
What Does New York’s No-Fault System Cover After a Crash Like This?
No-fault insurance pays first, automatically, regardless of whether a person or a computer was in control of the other vehicle. That coverage covers up to $50,000 in combined payments for medical bills, lost wages, and other reasonable expenses, and it does not require proof of who caused the crash before it pays.
Pain and suffering is a different pool of money, and reaching it means clearing New York’s serious injury threshold, which now covers death, dismemberment, significant disfigurement, a fracture, loss of a fetus, or a permanent or significant limitation of your body, nothing less. A partial share of the blame does not automatically block that claim either. New York reduces a claimant’s recovery in proportion to their share of the blame, and bars recovery entirely only when that share exceeds half.
How Do You Prove What the Vehicle Was Actually Doing?
An autonomous vehicle accident lawyer in New York requests evidence immediately after a crash like this, before any of it can be overwritten or lost:
- Event data recorder logs—the vehicle’s own black box, which records speed, braking, and steering input in the seconds before impact;
- Driver-facing camera footage—video showing whether the driver was watching the road or looking away when the system required them to;
- Sensor and radar data—the raw information the vehicle’s cameras and sensors actually captured, which can show what the car could and could not see; and
- Software version and update history—confirmation of which version of the system was running and whether a known issue had already been identified before the crash.
Insurance companies and manufacturers are not required to volunteer any of this, and some of it is stored for only a matter of days before the next trip overwrites it. Both a negligence claim against the other driver and a product liability claim against the manufacturer share the same three-year deadline to file a case in New York, but the evidence tied to your crash will not wait nearly that long.
Why New York Auto Law Takes These Cases
New York Auto Law takes on one kind of case: people hurt by another vehicle on the road, whether a distracted commuter or a self-driving system caused the crash. That single focus means our team already knows how to request and preserve the data that a self-driving vehicle generates before a manufacturer or its insurer can claim that the evidence no longer exists.
We pursue the company that designed the vehicle’s technology, not just the person sitting behind the wheel, when a defect or design choice contributed to a crash on I-90, the Skyway, or any other road in Western New York. When a manufacturer or its insurer refuses a fair result, we prepare every case as though it may need to go before a judge.
Let Us Sort Out Who Was Really in Control
You do not need to figure out on your own whether a person, a company, or a piece of software failed you. New York Auto Law digs into what the vehicle was actually doing at the moment of your crash and pursues whoever is actually responsible, not just whoever is easiest to blame. Reach out for a free case review and find out where your case actually stands.
Legal References Used to Inform This Page
To ensure the accuracy and clarity of this page, we referenced official legal and other resources during the content development process:
- Control of steering mechanism, N.Y. Veh. & Traf. Law § 1226 (2014).
- National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, ODI Resume, Investigation EA26002 (Tesla Full Self-Driving) (Mar. 18, 2026).
- Definitions, N.Y. Ins. Law § 5102(a), (d), (j) (2026).
- Causes of action for personal injury, N.Y. Ins. Law § 5104 (2026).
- Damages recoverable when contributory negligence or assumption of risk is established, N.Y. C.P.L.R. § 1411 (2026).
- Actions to be commenced within three years, N.Y. C.P.L.R. § 214 (2022).
Michael Greenspan has been deeply involved in the affairs of his community for his entire professional career. Mike has been a certified high school track and field official since 1992 and has officiated at prestigious invitational meets as well as the New York State Championships. Additionally, Mike has served as a member of the Executive Committee of the Glenn D. Loucks Games at his alma mater, White Plains High School since 1991 and as a member of the Board of Directors of the JCC-Rockland.