Suing Google Maps

[bungeejumper]

One of the stranger stories I've read recently.

The family of a US man who drowned after driving off a collapsed bridge are claiming that he died because Google failed to update its maps.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-66873982
At first it seems simple. The man was in an unfamiliar place, after dark, in the rain, and he was following the instructions from his Google Maps app to get home. Unfortunately, the map was several years out of date, and the directions told him to drive over a bridge that hadn't been there for nine years. He ended up in the water and drowned.

Local residents had been asking Google for years to update its map (and thus, presumably, its instructions), but it hadn't. So was Google liable for the danger it had put its users to?

It seems likely that it was, until you consider the implications. How many times has TomTom or Garmin tried to send you straight across a major road at a rural crossroads, because its algorithms haven't clocked the fact that you don't actually have the right of way? How many "go straight on"s don't twig that the road bears left? Or say bear left when they mean go straight on, or tell you to take a next left that's a one way system into somebody's car park?

I've had all of those, and survived. Very close to here, there's a T junction at a main road where you're supposed to stop and turn right, but where TomTom tells me to go straight ahead. Which would land me in the River Avon if I didn't apply a bit of common sense. And haven't there been cases where the satnav forgot to tell its users to check that the swing bridge was closed before they tried to drive onto it?

All very terrible. I daresay Google and the rest have liability waivers and exclusion clauses in their small print. But isn' it ultimately the driver's responsibility to be paying attention, and doesn't the buck stop with his personal judgement? That's what I'd always believed, anyway.

Thoughts?

BJ

[Lanark]

I think the bigger issue is the private company who own that land and didnt put up any signs or bollards.

Its a strange world where a virtual map on the internet is seen as more important than infrastructure in the real world.

Also electric windows make it hard to escape from a car in water, unless you have an emergency hammer, maybe they should sue the car company?

[chas49]

I think the bigger issue is the private company who own that land and didnt put up any signs or bollards.

Its a strange world where a virtual map on the internet is seen as more important than infrastructure in the real world.

Also electric windows make it hard to escape from a car in water, unless you have an emergency hammer, maybe they should sue the car company?

They're not only suing Google:

Barriers that were normally placed across the bridge entrance were missing due to vandalism, according to the Charlotte Observer.

The lawsuit is also suing three local companies, arguing they had a duty to maintain the bridge.

[swill453]

How many times has TomTom or Garmin tried to send you straight across a major road at a rural crossroads, because its algorithms haven't clocked the fact that you don't actually have the right of way?

In my experience satnav doesn't say anything about rights of way. If the route goes straight across any kind of intersection, however it is controlled or marked, nothing is even mentioned in the instructions. That's just the way it works.

Scott.

[bungeejumper]

In my experience satnav doesn't say anything about rights of way. If the route goes straight across any kind of intersection, however it is controlled or marked, nothing is even mentioned in the instructions. That's just the way it works.

Ah, but I didn't say it should say anything about rights of way. Only that it ought (IMHO, anyway) to alert you to the bigger-road crossroads in some way. Regardless of whether there are stop or give way signs.

Granted, I'm not a heavy satnav user, so happy to be corrected, but all such instances around these parts seem to have that one covered. OTOH I've had some white-knuckle surprises in France, where white road markings are very often non-existent.

Good points from Lanark about the liability of the landowners for putting up barriers and warning signs. Although I doubt they'd be convicted if they'd put them up and vandals had recently taken them down. Still, this is the US, where you need to be warned that your coffee might be hot.

BJ

[Mike4]

Isn't this the same country where someone sued MacDonalds (I think) because the coffee they bought was unexpectedly hot and they burned themselves with it...?

Common sense doesn't apply over there.

[Lanark]

Isn't this the same country where someone sued MacDonalds (I think) because the coffee they bought was unexpectedly hot and they burned themselves with it...?

Common sense doesn't apply over there.

That McDonalds case was absolutely justified, they proved in court that McD had chosen profit over safety

documents obtained from McDonald's showed that from 1982 to 1992 the company had received more than 700 reports of people burned by McDonald's coffee to varying degrees of severity, and had settled claims arising from scalding injuries for more than $500,000.[12] McDonald's quality control manager, Christopher Appleton, testified that this number of injuries was insufficient to cause the company to evaluate its practices.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liebeck_v ... estaurants

[dionaeamuscipula]

Isn't this the same country where someone sued MacDonalds (I think) because the coffee they bought was unexpectedly hot and they burned themselves with it...?

Common sense doesn't apply over there.

Their point was that McDonalds knowingly served their coffee at a dangerously hot temperature (apparently because it allowed them to use cheaper coffee).

They won.

https://www.caoc.org/?pg=facts

DM (snap)

[DrFfybes]

Some years ago I was on site one night and a car and caravan appeared and stopped next to the large trench we'd dug across the road.

They were very unimpressed, as their satnav said this was the way to the Ferry. They were actually quite rude and abusive when I said they couldn't get through, literally, as there was a 3 foot deep trench across the road, and pointed out that they had gone past 2 "Road Closed" signs, ignored the Diversion signs (Including a 3m high matrix sign telling Ferry Traffic where to go), and around several cones and barriers.

"But you didn't update our Satnav" was the retort.

We ended up callng the Police to get them removed.

[yyuryyub]

I would say that xkcd had the definitive word on using Google Maps in remote places, many years ago ...

https://xkcd.com/461/

[robbelg]

Isn't this the same country where someone sued MacDonalds (I think) because the coffee they bought was unexpectedly hot and they burned themselves with it...?.

It wasn't just an "owie" The woman was severely burned and needed major hospital treatment

Rob

[Gerry557]

Isn't this the same country where someone sued MacDonalds (I think) because the coffee they bought was unexpectedly hot and they burned themselves with it...?

Common sense doesn't apply over there.

Yes they are a strange lot when it comes to common sense. I remember a lady who sued as she was in her new motor home driving along the freeway and went in back to make a sandwich. Strangely the motorhome "crashed" but she won her case as the instructions didn't say not to do that! Only in America.

There was lists of similar stories.

Personally I don't think Google hold much responsibility. What if his paper map was outdated. I think the landowner who did relatively nothing is more culpable but when we're the signs vandilised and removed. Was it a bit of ribbon

Still its America so anything could happen. It's probably the water companies fault for not using none drowning water and causing the concrete in the bridge not to mix correctly.

[dionaeamuscipula]

Isn't this the same country where someone sued MacDonalds (I think) because the coffee they bought was unexpectedly hot and they burned themselves with it...?

Common sense doesn't apply over there.

Yes they are a strange lot when it comes to common sense. I remember a lady who sued as she was in her new motor home driving along the freeway and went in back to make a sandwich. Strangely the motorhome "crashed" but she won her case as the instructions didn't say not to do that! Only in America.

There was lists of similar stories.

Myth.

https://pattersonbray.com/outrageous-la ... rban-myth/

DM