Google sued for negligence after man died following map directions

https://apnews.com/article/google-maps-lawsuit-north-carolina-death-f4707247ee3295bf51bbcb37bd0eb6c8

by dimitropoulos • 3 years ago

140 299 3 years ago

apnews.com

tass2• 3 years ago

So much negligence here, partly on Google but:

“there were no barriers or warning signs along the washed-out roadway” for a road which was destroyed 9 years before.

livefox• 3 years ago

Exactly, Google for sure should have updated it but why had the city or even a concerned neighbor not put a fence or even a log or something there to block access to the bridge? A sign and a temporary barrier would have saved lives here.

Hell non-locals might have driven off the thing without GPS help, depending on how the bridge looked from road-level

avereveard• 3 years ago

The kind of person that plows trough bushes likely overlap with the kind that would remove the roadblock.

whylo• 3 years ago

Apparently there were barricades but they'd been removed due to vandalism. No mention of how long they'd been missing though. https://www.charlotteobserver.com/news/state/north-carolina/...

caf3• 3 years ago

It is mind-boggling both that such a piece of destroyed public infrastructure can stay in that state for 9 years, and that no kind of safety barrier or even signage was put in place in that time.

alistairSH7• 3 years ago

The part that confuses me is: The North Carolina State Patrol had said the bridge was not maintained by local or state officials, and the original developer’s company had dissolved.

So, nobody is maintaining the roads in that neighborhood? It makes very little sense. The roads in my neighborhood are owned and maintained by the neighborhood (not that state or county) and we (the HOA) carry liability insurance.

shadowgovt7• 3 years ago

There's a relatively famous story of a former West Virginia mining town that had the only access bridge collapse, isolating the town via any route except private roads owned by the original mining company (that, due to bad blood via the way the mining town turned from a company town to a public municipality, the mining company refused to let the townsfolk use).

Because the bridge crossed the river separating West Virginia and Kentucky, each state (two of the poorest states in the Union) pointed at the other as being responsible for reinstituting the bridge. Neither did so, and the Federal government refrained from intervening.

Desparate to see something happen, the de facto mayor (he didn't want the job, but people tend to look for leadership in a crisis) hit upon a stroke of genius. You see, this was all happening... In 1977. The town's mayor wrote a letter for international aid to solve a humanitarian crisis... To the USSR.

It took West Virginia like a week to announce their plans to build a new bridge.

https://www.wvencyclopedia.org/print/Article/2433

All this to say: bridges tend to connect two different municipalities because water tends to be a natural administrative and territorial divide, so it is not as surprising as one might think that they can stay down far longer than is efficient. Putting them back up requires two municipalities to agree on the cost structure... Municipalities that, worse than having differing goals, have all the long-memory animosities that build up from being forced-geographic neighbors, so they come to the table with a bag of opposing goals.

yreg3• 3 years ago

Why partly on Google?

In my opinion it is obvious that marking / blocking off unsafe roads should be the full responsibility of a public institution. They cannot hand over any part of that responsibility to Google.

What if someone drove through there without using a navigation / map? What if someone drove through there using an offline satnav with outdated maps?

I would hope Google (or OpenStreetMaps!) is not legally responsible to keep their maps 100% updated and accurate, since it's impossible to do that.

hef19898• 3 years ago

All car mounted navigation systems have the driver confirm, paraphrased, that they are aware the save operation of the vehicle is their sole responsibility.

freejazz9• 3 years ago

Because they knew they were directing drivers to a collapsed bridge for 2 years and did nothing about it. Sure enough, someone eventually went over it. There is no legal principle saying that both Google and the municipality can't be jointly liable.

tass2• 3 years ago

Negligent in updating maps that they were being warned about over years. I don't personally believe this makes them liable, though.

I think liability of this is complex being that it's unclear to me who owns the bridge and road leading to it, as well as how obvious it is to a driver that they shouldn't have been driving on that road. There shouldn't need to be a wall preventing drivers from flying off every cliff, but if there was a normal-looking road leading off the edge it's a little different.

internet2000• 3 years ago

This seems to be the bridge for context: https://maps.app.goo.gl/dtEvqS9iWUURUWM1A

Crazy it just has bushes blocking the way.

skowron• 3 years ago

Crazy that someone would just drive through those bushes...

pfannkuchen• 3 years ago

New age life insurance fraud?

gwd• 3 years ago

Did the driver come from that side, or the other side, which doesn't look like it has any bushes?

The photo here has pretty clear barriers, but one of the articles posted elsewhere in the comments said that the barriers had been removed.

cornstalks• 3 years ago

Were the bushes there in 2022? That picture is from 2023.

eli• 3 years ago

That picture is from May 2023. Seems safe to assume that additional barriers were added after the death in 2022.

dathinab8• 3 years ago

the picture shows concrete barricades, too

it also seems to have been taken after the accident

cma256• 3 years ago

I'm reminded of a certain episode from The Office...

People should be responsible for the machines they operate. North Carolina should be responsible for their roadways. Google _should_ update their maps but that's aspirational. It's clearly a hard problem to solve when no data exists.

AlexandrB2• 3 years ago

People should be responsible for the machines they operate.

Yes, but there are limits. E.g. if you're sold a car whose brakes are not fit for purpose, the manufacturer should bear some of the blame when you hit something. The alternative is that every consumer needs to be an expert (or consult an expert) before every purchase, which is a ton of friction for a functioning economy.

I'm not sure how much blame Google should bear in this case, but that's why we have a court system.

asddubs2• 3 years ago

if they were informed like the article says, I definitely think they should be liable to at least some extent.

korse2• 3 years ago

I agree there are limits, but I think you are setting a pretty low bar with the given example.

Just because they aren't designed to fly doesn't mean car acquisitions don't need to be 'pre-flighted' and taken for a shakedown cruise.

solardev11• 3 years ago

I'm one of what Google calls a "Local Guide". All that means is that I'm active in Maps, frequently submitting fixes, closures, additions, pictures, and whatnot.

I think it's really cool that Maps has these community features (and they're often more up to date than even OpenStreetMap).

But the process is totally opaque. Sometimes you submit a random edit[1] and it shows up a minute later. Other times you can submit the same highly important edit (this road will be closed for months), multiple times, and it won't show up for months if ever. But beyond the initial confirmation that says thanks, they'll review it, nothing. No status updates unless it actually goes through. No request for additional evidence or denial with or without reason. Just silence a lot of times.

I wish they'd provide followups and really allow the local guide community -- their volunteer boots on the ground "ground truth" team -- more transparency and proper change tracking. We want to help. We live in these places and use Maps multiple times a day.

Maps's errors range from inconvenient to outright dangerous (my area has a bunch of fake stop signs that don't actually exist, and real stop signs that aren't on Maps, and I've nearly slammed on the brakes when it told me there's a stop sign when there isn't). And it's gotten a lot worse recently. Not sure if they're using more AI or whatever, but there's just wrong information everywhere, often for months if not years. I fix them every time I can, but the process is aggravatingly slow and seemingly random. It would be better to use peer local moderators instead of whatever invisible process they have now.

They don't lack data. Even the article says they received reports. They lack a functional pipeline to vet and approve that data in a reasonably timely fashion.

-------

[1] Side anecdote: One time, deep in my discontent during an election cycle, I marked a local political headquarter of one of the two major parties as a "Garbage Dump". It went through immediately and stayed for months, even making the local news. Every time you were in that area, the icon would prominently show up. Yep, political party X, still ever the dumpster fire. Got a kick outta that, heh. Sweet, petty digital vengeance.

jraph2• 3 years ago

It really reads like you wish Google Maps were OSM.

Why not contribute to an actually open database that benefits to everyone and takes your contributions seriously?

(I personally don't think that Google, of all organizations, needs to be helped by unpaid volunteers - and they can import OSM themselves anyway if they choose to)

Rygian3• 3 years ago

What you describe are not community features, but rather "user-sourced one-way value creation," ie. you can't benefit from the content you contribute unless Google takes unilateral action to allow you.

Why don't you contribute to OpenStreetMap instead? That way it will be more up to date than Google Maps in your corner of Earth too (like it does in many areas). Organic Maps is a very good replacement for the Google Maps app, I am told.

notwhereyouare2• 3 years ago

Maps's errors range from inconvenient to outright dangerous (my area has a bunch of fake stop signs that don't actually exist, and real stop signs that aren't on Maps, and I've nearly slammed on the brakes when it told me there's a stop sign when there isn't)

so you've almost caused accidents looking at your phone instead of outside the car at the actual road?

SteveGerencser• 3 years ago

I'm also a guide and have submitted multiple road closed reports. One specific route takes people down a single lane dirt road to a creek that had a bridge over it a decade or more ago, but that is long gone. The people that live on that road average one or 2 people backing back out of the spot every single day. And no matter how many reports they get, they refuse to update their maps. Even with pictures showing the lack of a bridge.

WalterBright7• 3 years ago

Vandalizing the maps is why we can't have nice things, like community input on the maps.

eitally2• 3 years ago

The problem is that Google has a review process with a human in the loop for most of the submitted changes (unlike OSM). This makes it easier for them to negotiate relationships with data providers, but it also means a lot of things aren't enacted quickly enough to be useful.

7e3• 3 years ago

If Google was told multiple times of the error and didn’t update their map, well, that’s negligence. You can’t recall a paper map, but you can update an online map easily.

korse2• 3 years ago

Never seen The Office, however 'people should be responsible for the machines they operate' is my exact feeling for a whole lot of technology. Thanks for the wording. I now have a concise way to voice my feelings about Autopilot regulation efforts!

darknavi• 3 years ago

https://youtu.be/DOW_kPzY_JY?t=27

freejazz9• 3 years ago

It's clearly a hard problem to solve when no data exists.

If you read the article, Google had received reports that it was directing drivers to that collapsed bridge at least 2 years prior to this man's death, and google responded saying "they were looking into it".

SoftTalker3• 3 years ago

Weirdly Google Maps usually knows about all the daily lane closures and closed exits on the interstate construction zones I drive through. Do state authorites have some kind of direct way to publish this information that mapping/navigation services can subscribe to? Or do they just rely on crowdsourcing this?

jeffbee2• 3 years ago

Yes, there are APIs intended for governments, transit agencies, etc known as "content partners".

https://contentpartners.maps.google.com/

https://support.google.com/mapcontentpartners/answer/144284?...

LeifCarrotson3• 3 years ago

Compare the satellite imagery from 2023, which clearly shows the bridge is out:

https://i.imgur.com/WXIxLtp.jpg

with the Street View record from 2012:

https://i.imgur.com/cen89bg.jpg

I agree that it's negligent to not have barriers or signs, and I feel terrible for the daughters and wife mourning the loss of their father, but I think it's shocking that someone would drive off a bridge that you can see is out from the air. For the past decade, hundreds to thousands of residents and delivery drivers and visitors to this neighborhood were likely given these same directions but did not die there. They saw that the bridge was out and turned around. It's a residential neighborhood; there will be no signage that says a child or dog is in the road! This is not a situation for an instruments-only landing in a plane, you have to keep your eyes outside the cockpit, even if your instruments say to drive on.

Edit - I also find it interesting that Google's map still shows the road as connected, but (now) refuses to route you over it, while Bing Maps shows the road as disconnected:

https://i.imgur.com/D9dRF1B.png

https://i.imgur.com/4NcTIxZ.png

Maps link:

https://www.google.com/maps/@35.7815814,-81.2828119,82m/data...

happytoexplain2• 3 years ago

I'm having trouble interpreting this:

"I think it's shocking that someone would drive off a bridge that you can see is out from the air"

Why are you equating air-visibility and ground-visibility? Holes/gaps are famously less visible from a shallow angle.

Also, "everybody else avoided it" is a really poor defense. Most safety measures solve the 1-in-1000 or 1-in-100000 scenarios, not the 1-in-10 scenarios.

Edit: Previously I said I agree that the driver's awareness played some part in the accident, but I failed to read about the extenuating conditions. I think this was nearly 0% the driver's fault.

shaneoh• 3 years ago

Could have easily been at night and/or during a heavy storm with very low visibility

levinb• 3 years ago

That was the case here; 11pm, rainy night, after staying late to clean up after his daughter's birthday party.

Bing maps shows barriers, google shows a clear road. Apparently the barriers had been removed.

Normally I view these sorts of incidents with a lot of cynicism, but if you look at the road from street view, I can see how this would happen eventually.

LeifCarrotson3• 3 years ago

That's absolutely a possibility, but even in those conditions - especially in those conditions - one should always be careful to not drive off a cliff, or off the outside of an unexpected turn in the road, or into a fallen tree, or into a pedestrian, or into a stopped car!

In about two months, I predict, some dark November morning here in Michigan will have hundreds of "accidents" because the first snows will fall. Some drivers will be cautious and slow, while others will be going 5 mph over the speed limit. The latter will slam on their brakes far too late given the icy conditions, and will rear-end the former. That's not an accident, that's a negligent collision. Seven months of clear roads have conditioned Michigan drivers into assuming that everyone else will always be going about the same speed. When that ceases to be the case, there will be a few weeks of adjustment. Years of following Maps directions, and seeing uninterrupted roads, conditioned this unfortunate North Carolina Dad into assuming that reliable GPS directions and maps were guiding him down an unobstructed road like any other. When that ceased to be true, it's sad but not entirely unexpected that this happened.

Therefore, I propose Google respond to this incident by deploying an automated "Netflix Chaos Monkey" approach to their mapping data: Every thousand turns or so, provide bad directions - guiding people down boat ramps or through forests, send the wrong way up a one-way road. Show graphical maps with straight roads where there's a turn, and turns where the road is straight, show stop signs where there's a stop light. Show the speed limit as 25 mph when it's 55 and 55 when it's 25. All of those things will happen accidentally, so make them happen intentionally and help drivers build robust error-handling practices.

freejazz9• 3 years ago

Well, people don't drive "from the air". They drive "from the ground".

Borgz• 3 years ago

I believe the driver was driving a car, not an airplane, so I'm not sure how the bridge being visibly damaged "from the air" is relevant.

recursive• 3 years ago

Compare the satellite imagery from 2023, which clearly shows the bridge is out:

Maybe it shows it, but I could definitely not call that "clearly", although that doesn't really matter anyway, as abundantly mentioned elsewhere.

cbm-vic-20• 3 years ago

OpenStreetMap also shows it as disconnected, as part of a change made after this happened.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=18/35.78116/-81.28272 https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/126938081

The nodes on either side claim that there are barriers here.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/10072951700 https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/10072951701

The comment on the changeset says "24th St Pl NE bridge over Snow Creek has been out for several years and will not be repaired. The road continues down to the creekside (and bridge wreckage) from both sides and is a serious hazard to drivers not familiar with the area. A man was killed"

jeffbee2• 3 years ago

This wapo article has much better photos of the site, if you have access to it. https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2023/09/21/north-carol...

I think these deep image links work even if you aren't a subscriber. https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://...

fdsalkjvlkj2• 3 years ago

but I think it's shocking that someone would drive off a bridge that you can see is out from the air.

According to the article it was pitch-black and raining. How can you be "shocked" that someone would have worse ground visibility in those conditions compared to your clear-day aerial view?

And are you really "shocked" that you can notice a hole in the ground from the air easier than from in front of it?

There was a barricade for 9 years. It was removed 1 week before the accident.

crazygringo7• 3 years ago

There was a barricade for 9 years. It was removed 1 week before the accident.

Can you link to a source for that? I'm looking but can't find it.

If there was an effective barricade that was removed, it would seem the person/people responsible for that are the most criminally negligent here. That sounds like a positively insane thing to do -- it's going to get someone killed, as it did here.

EDIT: found a couple of links:

"Typically, barricades are in place to prevent drivers from crossing the bridge, North Carolina State Highway Patrol said. But the barricades had been removed after being vandalized and were missing at the time of Paxson’s wreck."

[1] https://www.charlotteobserver.com/news/state/north-carolina/...

[2] https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2023/09/20/google...

karussell3• 3 years ago

It is a one-way bridge! Try swapping start+end and it will happily route over the bridge.

mailund• 3 years ago

Me and a friend a mine were directed into a lake by google when biking across Denmark! We ended up having to backtrack quite a while back to get back to a road that didnt include quite as much swimming. Im still wondering why it was marked as a road, because it was straight through a wildlife reserve.

AlexandrB2• 3 years ago

When driving across the US, google maps directed me down a narrow highway somewhere in Wyoming. After about 10-15km it got narrower, then turned to a gravel road, finally turning into a dirt road that would be impassible for my compact car. Had to backtrack a ways to get back to a main highway after that.

Im still wondering why it was marked as a road, because it was straight through a wildlife reserve.

I wonder if this is one of those inaccuracies that map makers use to catch plagiarism[1].

[1] https://theweek.com/articles/466184/trap-streets-crafty-tric...

lsaferite2• 3 years ago

When I was a kid we stayed at a campground with the most beautifully crystal clear lake. There was a paved and marked road leading right into the lake and it continued until you couldn't see it anymore. I assume the road was there before the lake. I also assume the lake was from a dam somewhere downstream. Anyway, point being, it was a legit road straight into a lake. I can see that being a case where a mapping company might give bad directions.

belltaco• 3 years ago

That's really sad. I would've hoped that a 20 foot drop into water would be survivable given that a Tesla was driven off a cliff at 80mph and survived a 250ft drop into ground. There might be some element of luck involved with the angle of impact and what not.

asddubs2• 3 years ago

It seems to be very shallow water, but it was pitch black, so maybe the husband just had a hard time orienting himself and getting out of the water

drewbitt• 3 years ago

He died via drowning, so survived but just couldn’t get out of the vehicle in time.

parhamn• 3 years ago

This article has an image of the bridge (and the accident?): https://nbcnews.com/news/us-news/widow-man-died-driving-coll...

I assumed the bridge was much taller. The flipping of the car is very unfortunate.

karaterobot• 3 years ago

If Google Maps sends people across a bridge that has not existed for almost a decade, I wonder why there have not been many more such incidents. Likewise with the signage and barricades.

Maybe this unfortunate story is a reminder that GPS navigation is just an assistant, and you should always pay attention to where it's telling you to go.

dathinab8• 3 years ago

because normally broken roads get blocked of e.g. for bridges using concrete barricades

and potential unmaintained off road roads tend to at least have warning signs and often are very obvious visible bad ideas to drive on

so even if google routes people there they normally know better then to take that route

through there had been all kind of cases

like a (river) ferry being listed as a normal route in the map and people driving into the river at the ferry dock at night when the ferry was on the other side

or people taking country side roads without any infrastructure they are guaranteed to get stuck one when they run out of gas because of navigation apps (not just google), like the app trying to send someone through the desert

namdnay• 3 years ago

https://www.google.com/help/terms_maps/

Actual Conditions; Assumption of Risk. When you use Google Maps/Google Earth's map data, traffic, directions, and other content, you may find that actual conditions differ from the map results and content, so exercise your independent judgment and use Google Maps/Google Earth at your own risk. You’re responsible at all times for your conduct and its consequences.

this seems very obvious to me? i imagine "state of north carolina sued for allowing a dangerous abandoned bridge to stay connected to the public system" wouldn't make a nice juicy headline (and i imagine the state of north carolina has less money to throw at random lawsuits)

7e3• 3 years ago

Are you an attorney or judge?

loco5niner• 3 years ago

He's suggesting that everyday people should just use their noggin, and that's basically what the terms are saying too.

lern_too_spel2• 3 years ago

Waivers don't protect against negligence.

dathinab8• 3 years ago

yes but the neglience was presenting a route which doesn't exist

which isn't anywhere close to killing someone

what killed that person is whatever allowed them to drive onto a collapsed bridge without noticing it

where I live this bridge would have been fenced of, and not just with some easy to remove by trolls fences but (with construction vehicles) movable concrete barricades or larger wooden logs depending on the area

freejazz9• 3 years ago

this seems very obvious to me?

That the terms say that? Who is disputing that? It's completely besides the point of whether or not that term carries legal wait. You can't have someone waive away your duty to not be grossly negligent.

Speaking of obvious:

"The Tuesday court filing includes email records from another Hickory resident who had used the map’s “suggest an edit” feature in September 2020 to alert the company that it was directing drivers over the collapsed bridge. A November 2020 email confirmation from Google confirms the company received her report and was reviewing the suggested change, but the lawsuit claims Google took no further actions."

They had been on notice for ~2 years that they were directing people towards a collapsed bridge. I find it concerning the way some people respond to this issue, and the general concept of negligence, as it speaks towards their views on how we should treat others.

travoc• 3 years ago

But the automation that declined the edit suggestion saved Google 37 cents in manual labor.

mrtksn3• 3 years ago

It's obvious but probably you can't escape responsibility by just writing it on the terms and conditions if you are responsible for something. What if they put "we are not responsible for anything, use your judgement" on every product and sell dangerous products? I mean, IMHO they should be able to do that if they warn you properly(not just in the legal text) but that's just my opinion.

Is Google Maps responsible? I don't know but I can imagine someone claiming it due to the way information is displayed on the UI. Google maps always shows the information from position of authority, they are always very sure about the information they have and you don't have a clue about how certain they are bout what they tell you. I had multiple situations where Google Maps will direct me very confidently to roads that don't exist and once I had to stop and investigate if the road that Google Maps insist on is viable and the other time I had to turn back as the road conditions deteriorated from SUV-needed to T-80 tank needed. Negligent local authorities combined with authoritative assistant who is wrong and can't tell its wrong can be dangerous.

Maybe a UI with more clear communications is needed?

aeurielesn• 3 years ago

I'm actually at odds at what's Google responsible for exactly. Google isn't paid by the county to provide this service nor Google Maps is a paid service.

My first thought was it's the county's fault.

chrischen• 3 years ago

More customer support is needed. Article says bridge collapsed 9 years ago and people used the suggest edit feature and Google ignored it. Even if Google is not fully responsible for a person driving off a cliff, they are definitely negligent.

zyang• 3 years ago

It's up to the judicial process to decide if Google is liable or not. But in my opinion the county is most at fault here for not blocking off the road. It's an odd choice to go after Google since they have world class lawyers and the case would open a floodgate of lawsuits for Google.

bacchusracine• 3 years ago

an odd choice to go after Google since they have world class lawyers

Steve Dallas lawsuit?

dragonwriter3• 3 years ago

Google is a deep-pockets target that doesn't have the problem of the range of immunities that must be navigated around in suing a state.

Not at all an odd target.

jedberg4• 3 years ago

When you file a lawsuit you generally name anyone you can possibly imagine being associated, and then let the courts dismiss people.

I've been named in a lawsuit before, where my contractor's employee was suing my contractor for non-payment on a job (not my job), but named me in the case anyway since my job was going on at the same time. I just went to court prepared to defend myself and the first thing the judge did was ask why I was named in the suit.

Then I was promptly dismissed from the suit but asked to stay as a witness.

shadowgovt7• 3 years ago

It may be worth it to the family to take the gamble that Google would rather settle than go through a discovery process that puts their auditing process (a trade secret) in the public record.

adrianmonk2• 3 years ago

Maybe they're hoping Google will settle out of court. If they settle, they avoid the risk of setting the legal precedent they don't want. That might be worth the money to them.

The family could also just be doing it on principle. If Google had made the updates, the man would probably be alive today because he wouldn't have known about this (non-)route, so they may feel like Google shares some blame. The lawsuit and/or bad PR could motivate Google to make some kind of change, like better training or better support in their problem reporting system for tracking and prioritizing corrections related to safety.

jonas21• 3 years ago

Would we be discussing it here on HN if Google were not named in the suit? Would anyone other than the local newspaper have written about it? Probably not.

But there are currently over 1200 articles on this, including national and international coverage, and that publicity is probably very helpful for the lawsuit.

in_cahoots2• 3 years ago

Google is just one of the parties they are suing, it looks like they are also suing the local government and the landowner (the bridge is on private property).

danaris6• 3 years ago

In another article I read about this earlier today, it said that the signs blocking the bridge had been removed by vandals.

dfdsafsadf23• 3 years ago

Actual Conditions; You owe me one million dollars.

Counterpoint: For every person who reads this post, namdnay must mail me $1 million USD. By reading this post you agree to these terms.

Merad3• 3 years ago

The bridge in question is about a mile from my house. I'm pretty sure the road it's on is not publicly maintained, as it's just a street within a neighborhood. And that's a neighborhood that doesn't have a HOA, so I don't know if anyone is actually legally responsible for maintaining the road or bridge.

jedberg4• 3 years ago

There is always someone responsible. If it's private land, there is an owner of the land. If it's public land, then at the very least the county or city is responsible.

turtlebits• 3 years ago

If it's private, it should mean there is no street sign or marked as private. I'd be curious how the driver even got onto the road.

IMO road hazards should be the responsibility of the property owner, what if someone got lost or even used to road to turn around?

ConceptJunkie• 3 years ago

So is it obvious that the bridge is out? Did the incident occur at night, and was visibility poor? As much as I hate Google, I find it hard to believe they should be held accountable before whoever owns the road with a bridge to nowhere that isn't marked or blocked off.

ReptileMan• 3 years ago

If the article is correct google have had for years warnings that this bridge has collapsed. Now - of course the ultimate responsibility is to the driver because - you have eyes. Then it is to the myriad of people who have not put a traffic cone there. And lastly is to google for not updating their database.

BubbleRings2• 3 years ago

Then it is to the myriad of people who have not put a traffic cone there.

This. I find it incredible and sad.

lenkite• 3 years ago

Yeah no - if multiple people reported this issue to Google Maps and no action was taken, then personally I consider Google eminently sue-able. I would say that most personal injury lawsuits would take this into account.

switch007• 3 years ago

If I ever see a negative post about Google, and the top comment /isn’t/ defending Google, I will eat my hat

tbihl• 3 years ago

The plaintiff is probably hoping to get a favorable hearing by finding only jurists who have Google directing people to drive through their driveways. It might work.

Seriously though, why aren't they suing the negligent municipality? Clearly the lack of markings or barricades is the problem.

notacoward2• 3 years ago

It's barely two days since I was saying right here that Google Maps's increasing awfulness had probably contributed to actual deaths. All of the Googlers (and Xooglers and wannabes) commenting here might try to minimize how much that was in this case, but I'm equally sure that there are many other cases. Building an app like this carries a responsibility to minimize likelihood of harm, no matter what the TOS says. Google is not doing that.

devmor• 3 years ago

I think this is far more on the shoulders of the local DOT for not having barricaded the roadway to begin with.

However, anecdotally I once had Google direct me to take a right turn onto "Old Military Canal Road" off the side of an unlit, narrow, low bridge with no guardrails in the middle of the night. If I had not been extremely observant, I would have driven my car about 5 feet down into "Old Military Canal" and totaled it, possibly injuring and/or killing myself.

I understand that there are terms & conditions that supposedly indemnify Google from these sort of mistakes, but I wonder if there is perhaps at least a moral duty for google to add some kind of UX alert when a user is being instructed to take routes that users do not normally take.

kayodelycaon• 3 years ago

There's a ford in one of the public parks I grew up near. When the river is low, it's a slightly damp concrete pad. When it's not, there can be several inches of fast flowing water. The warning signs aren't ideal because it's connected to a large parking lot.

freitzkriesler22• 3 years ago

I find this story hard to believe. If you go to Google streetview it shows that barriers are indeed present (time stamp of May 2023) as well as significant overgrowth behind said barriers.

Address for the curious is 3844 23rd st ln NE hickory NC

You can even see the barriers on bing maps. They're not big barriers and it looks possible to drive around them.

What I think really happened was Mr Device Salesman in his "jeep gladiator" got cocky and tried to off road his vehicle because hey, it's a Jeep.

Instead the drop in the road was hidden and he drove himself essentially off of a small cliff.

The two problems here are: 1. Blindly following a GPS and not thinking critically about where you are going. 2. Trying to off road a vehicle without investigating the terrain prior to driving.

I'd say this is a potential Darwin award. It's sad but a cautionary tale about not being a thinkless lemming with GPS tools and off roading.

a1o• 3 years ago

It was raining, night and the barriers weren't there in 2022. The bridge also has a very unfortunate still in place guard rails going from one side to the other, so only the bottom of the bridge is collapsed, which adds to the illusion that the bridge is still there in the previously mentioned conditions. :/

freitzkriesler22• 3 years ago

There were already in place back in 2014 which you can observe on bing maps.

kristjansson2• 3 years ago

Like a lot of failure, a few things going wrong at the same time.

Typically, barricades are in place to prevent drivers from crossing the bridge, North Carolina State Highway Patrol said. But the barricades had been removed after being vandalized and were missing at the time of Paxson’s wreck.

[0] https://www.charlotteobserver.com/news/state/north-carolina/...

fdsalkjvlkj2• 3 years ago

That explains a lot! I was wondering how this only happened to one person and it took 9 years... Some idiot removed the barricade and then it only actually took 1 week.

zihotki• 3 years ago

In 2020 a person frooze to death in Syberia due to GMaps giving them a 'shortcut' via long time abandoned road (1).

In a small country like Netherlands it also has issues of being up to date with road works and closures and that information is available well in advance.

That looks like a general problem of keeping navigation information up to date. And I'm not sure if such problem has a good solution. Probably some motivation/regulation from a goverment is needed to ensure that map service providers are more reliable.

1 - https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/13438396/driver-18-froze-death...

dathinab8• 3 years ago

In difference to this case cases like google routing people over ofroad countryside roads (e.g. through the middle of Australia, desert routes, tundra routes etc.) should be something you could/should be able to sue them over.

But this case looks like the local government majorly fucking up.

In general the maps are updated in many countries based on information from the respective department for road whatever.

It pretty common that when random road closures are not in gmaps that it's because the respective official channels didn't publish that information.

Like how is google supposed to know when a random road gets absconded, temporary closed, newly opened etc. if no one tells them?

And random complains from people using the service aren't really a reliable (or trustable) source.

WalterBright7• 3 years ago

"The Office" had an episode where two of the characters were following the navigator's driving instructions, and the instructions told them to turn right into a swamp. They got to arguing about it, one saying the instructions must be wrong, the other saying that the navigator could not possibly be wrong.

They drove into the swamp.

Now it has become real life.

astrange5• 3 years ago

This actually happens pretty often - people will start a long route that goes through somewhere remote with no cell service (mountains, deserts, the outback…), find it's wrong because it's out of date or a road is washed out, and then get stuck because they can't reroute.

kristjansson2• 3 years ago

From [0]

as well as three people who own or control the land on which the bridge on 24 Street Place NE sits.

and from [1]

The lawsuit, which was filed Tuesday in Wake County, names Google and Google’s parent company Alphabet, Hickory businessman James Tarlton and the companies Tarde LLC and Hinckley Gauvain LLC as defendants.
Tarlton and the two companies are identified in the lawsuit as the owners of the bridge and the land near the bridge.

That'd explain the abysmal handling of this from the city. City records don't seem to show that bridge as private, but I'm not sure? They do have a better view of the collapse though: https://arcgis2.catawbacountync.gov/newSetup/pictometry.html...

[0] https://nbcnews.com/news/us-news/widow-man-died-driving-coll... [1]: https://hickoryrecord.com/news/local/crime-courts/google-hic...

Exuma• 3 years ago

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DOW_kPzY_JY

dathinab8• 3 years ago

How do you drive of a multiple years ago collapsed bridge?

I mean shouldn't the road to the bridge be blocked/fenced off? If not isn't that clear neglience of the state not Google?

Sure Google routed someone to a path which didn't exist.

But so could have someone using an older map or who hasn't been around for years.

So either someone intentionally bypassed a road blockage.

Or the land/state massively messed up by not blocking of a collapsed bridge.

Through condolence to the family eitherway.

dfdsafsadf23• 3 years ago

The bridge was unmarked and wasn't barricaded. The court can assign partial liability to multiple negligent parties. The __average person__ expects Google Maps to be current, and Google Maps does provide minute-by-minute updates on traffic and road hazards. The __average person__ doesn't expect a paper map to be updated with the same frequency as Google.

Downvote this if you feel that you know the legal standards that apply here, have read the article and disagree.

gretch• 3 years ago

disclosure: I am not a lawyer and I have not studied frameworks associated with NC state. I'm a guy who reads books

You keep describing the "average person", but this is not the framework that most law uses when considering negligence.

Source: Cases and materials on TORTS; Epstein and Sharkey; 11th addition; page 139

"It is sometimes said that the study of negligence is the study of the mistakes a reasonable man might make."

And then there's a lot more text that goes on to talk about what is 'reasonable' and not just 'average'.

Also, just because the average person wouldn't be harmed does not mean a party would not be liable, because there are non-average people like blind people or old people who must be protected.

error54• 3 years ago

From the article:

State troopers who found Paxton’s body in his overturned and partially submerged truck had said there were no barriers or warning signs along the washed-out roadway. He had driven off an unguarded edge and crashed about 20 feet below

AlbertCory2• 3 years ago

when I was in Maps, we heard about the call center that handled Maps complaints. As you can imagine, there are a lot of them.

I suspect (with no current knowledge) that the complaint got lost; buried beneath a bunch of newer ones and forgotten. That is on Google. They have a system to handle things like that.

The NC authorities were also negligent, not only for the roads and lack of signage, but for not notifying Google themselves. A letter from the state would carry some weight.

dathinab8• 3 years ago

given that the road wasn't blocked of I suspect/speculate is that the local government wasn't reporting the bridge as broken for whatever reason and in turn it wasn't listed as broken with the state department responsible for infrastructure

so when people reported it to google they checked back with the officials about how long the bridge will stay blocked and they got told "no the bridge is fine"

AlbertCory2• 3 years ago

do you know that, or are you just guessing?

SSchick3• 3 years ago

Anecdote:

I reported multiple places where google maps (or in this case the tesla navigation system which runs on the same) gives dangerous instructions.

One of them is right here https://www.google.com/maps/@47.6293355,-122.1879246,112m/da... The assistant will tell you to stay keep left (which you don't have to since both lanes converge later) way too late, causing a lot of people to cross the median last second, this caused numerious accidents.

I reported this condition twice, no actions on their end was taken.

I'd consider this neglegent.

thehappypm• 3 years ago

Staying left is legal though?

SSchick3• 3 years ago

Maybe I didn't make it clear, people will be in the right lane and the assistant will instruct them last second to move to the left lane. This creates a dangerous situations as many US drivers do not care about traffic laws and cross the median. This is dangerous since this is generally unexpected to other drivers who will often have to sverve / brake to avoid collissions.

nonfamous• 3 years ago

A thought I might know where this is based on your description alone, and I was right, I think. I assume you're talking about the merge from 405N to 520E? I've thought the same thing about the wrong directions too.

SSchick3• 3 years ago

Updated link since the first variant would not point to the location accurately for some reason.

karussell3• 3 years ago

btw: Tesla navigation system is very likely based on OpenStreetMap data and not on Google (even though the map shown is a Google map)

SoftTalker3• 3 years ago

Someone owns that land. That is the person or party who is ultimately responsible for allowing a hazard like that to exist for years without proper (or even any) safeguards, barriers, warning signs, etc.

murphyslab2• 3 years ago

Google Maps should change the way that edits work. My experience suggests the current approach is to require independent verification, via volunteers, of too many user edits.

If I were to update the hours of a local business with a photo, that gets addressed within a couple hours, since the photo offers a form of verification. But to correct the location of a feature often takes far longer.

A pharmacy in my community had its location wrongly recorded in Google Maps, leading to people trying to drive through a very wrong route. The pharmacists himself had tried and couldn't change his business' location. I made the edit (as a "level 7 guide" for what it's worth) and even then it required another 50 days before it was verified. In that case, it was likely awaiting another user to verify.

I checked the map today while thinking about it: Ten months later, the marker has been moved back, to the incorrect location!

I fixed the pharmacy location because Google Maps was hurting my pharmacist, a good guy with a small business that I like. But to go out of my way to verify other edits, I'm not quite sure what the motivation is. Google should pay users -- offer some small remuneration -- for correct edits and for verification of edits. They already offer similar payment for information in other contexts: offering Google Play credits with their Google Rewards survey platform. Why not employ that on Google Maps, which is earning them around $5B/year?

Another option might be to trust (then verify) for users who have a history of valid edits.

jedberg4• 3 years ago

If I had to take a wild guess, your pharmacist's business is probably incorporated at the old address, and they haven't updated their incorporation documents.

Google periodically pulls those from public records, and most likely this is why the marker moved back.

murphyslab2• 3 years ago

That's possible, however I'm not changing the address, I'm changing the position of the marker on the map by 70 metres. Google regularly tweaks marker coordinates, in order to provide better driving directions, without changing the address.

Additionally, the wrong location, where the marker has reverted to, does not correspond to a building structure, rather it's in the middle of a greenspace. I've illustrated it here:

https://i.imgur.com/kvYePAZ.png

All of the other markers I've included in the diagram match what is shown on Google Maps; they are correctly positioned at the structure where the organization is located. One oddity of the location is that it is like a campus, hence all of the buildings share the same street address, but with different unit numbers (e.g. 9999 Hacker Road #5 and 9999 Hacker Road #8).

astrange5• 3 years ago

This sometimes causes businesses to show up on the map at their owners' house instead of the actual location. Or a restaurant's name will change to Obscure Name Pty Ltd LLC Co Inc because that's the name of their holding company. The last one happens unusually often in Australia I feel like, maybe because people outside the country don't know how to validate the data.

binkHN• 3 years ago

Yeah. It's frustrating. I'm Level 7 as well (I use Google Maps to help me remember if I liked a particular restaurant or not) and it took me 7 months to get my new home address (new construction) into the system and I'm not certain if my edits were even responsible. So, for 7 months, deliveries were problematic because "everyone" used Google Maps and my house didn't exit.

spondylosaurus• 3 years ago

IIRC Waze supports almost exactly what you're describing. Which is kind of ironic since Waze is owned by Google.

mhandley• 3 years ago

Doesn't it at least seem odd that Google can't infer a road is impassable, when no vehicle it has been navigating has ever made it across the bridge in the last nine years? Seems like something that shouldn't be impossibly hard for them to figure out.

Edit: or maybe they have inferred it's impassible, but occasionally send someone that way to see if it's been fixed?

crazygringo7• 3 years ago

It does seem extremely odd.

I always assumed Google detects things like temporary road closures because suddenly nobody is crossing a common road, in order to reroute people.

Does it not? And if it does, wouldn't it be doing the same thing to detect more permanent road closures in less busy locations?

WesolyKubeczek• 3 years ago

Where I live there's a disused pedestrian/cycling bridge over a river, with no paved road whatsoever leading to it on one side. There's a mud "road" there which I wouldn't risk driving on in anything other than a tank or a tractor (my farmer neighbor does drive his tractor there and across water, so there's that). The bridge has never been made for use by vehicles other than bicycles since its inception.

Nevertheless, when trying for navigation guidance to the street on the other bank of the river, many map applications insisted I could drive right across that disused bridge. Until recently, only OpenStreetMap and Google Maps presented the correct information. Apple Maps, TomTom, and Sygic all insisted I had to drive right across mud and the disused bridge (that would not be suitable for a car anyway).

These maps also reported there had been a street in the other part of the town where there was only barely a boundary between two fields.

I've been reporting this via Apple Maps feedback, complete with photos, for three years straight with no response whatsoever. I think one of my feedbacks just had been closed. Then a year ago Apple Maps got refreshed and their data sources got better, at least now they don't show roads where there are none.

Google Maps used to navigate me in the wrong directions on one-way streets months, if not years, after the changes had been made. They also seem to choose the shittiest routes ever when driving from any A to B, like the narrowest unmaintained countryside roads with steep gradients, and ETA seems to be drugs-induced fiction, like their information on speed limits and the actual speed attainable on those roads is waaaay off.

OSMAnd and OSM data in general is way better, I only wish it was recalculating the routes faster. Oh, and live traffic information.

I'm glad at least there's some movement to have some accountability about that clusterfuck. But then again, whom am I kidding, that won't move the needle in ad sales so nobody's giving a shit.

junon• 3 years ago

As much as I dislike Google at a very deep level, this isn't Google's fault. That's like saying everyone who searches "how to dispose of a body" after murdering someone is somehow Google's fault.

Apple Maps's app icon showed a route off of a bridge for the longest time. Is Apple liable if people drive off a bridge, then?

I feel for the deceased's family but the local government or state government are at fault here.

ar_lan• 3 years ago

I'm curious of the legal implications and how this would play out, but I don't really think I understand how Google is responsible here. Was the driver not paying attention?

IIUC Maps TOS calls out that actual conditions may differ from their updates. I wouldn't think Google is responsible when there is an accident in front of me on the road.

If anything, this just calls out maybe Google Maps is not as accurate as people always believe. There are competitors to use instead. It's also free - unless guaranteed as a public utility, I'm not sure I buy that there is any responsibility on Google here at all beyond "make sure to update regularly."

This really seems like it falls squarely on the driver (pay attention to road conditions, people!) and maybe the local government responsible for the bridge/roads.

FartyMcFarter2• 3 years ago

I don't really think I understand how Google is responsible here. Was the driver not paying attention?

I would blame the government for not closing off the road before I would blame the driver.

Pyrodogg• 3 years ago

I won't put all of my issue on Google maps, also the County takes a big share. But when I was visiting my hometown recently I heard about a bridge that had been taken out months previously and was in the process of being replaced.

None of the signs said "bridge out" just "road closed ahead". The state maps that overlayed the area but about another project showed no information about the bridge being out for most of a year.

Google happily routed over the bridge that had been out for months. I reported it but haven't followed up on it. It's open again now recently.

It's almost like no one wanted to acknowledge the bridge being out even though it got reported in local media early on.

I can hardly believe there was no barrier to a drop from a missing bridge. I mean people can easily do worse driving off of a paved roadway but to being continuing on a what seems like a safe path is just nuts.

Zak• 3 years ago

Google street view pre-collapse: https://maps.app.goo.gl/dnt6aztvp4rjLmHx6

Bing street view post-collapse: https://www.bing.com/maps?osid=c3224526-5ada-4a41-b8f7-e854f...

Openstreetmap shows the road divided by the creek: https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/35.78149/-81.28311

Looking at the street views, I think it would be pretty hard for someone driving safely not to see the washed out bridge from far enough to stop. The speed limit is 25 MPH, the road is straight, and the bridge is downhill from either side.

crazygringo7• 3 years ago

I'm looking at that Bing link and concluding the exact opposite.

Because news reports say the barricades had been removed and were missing. And he was driving at night and in the rain. And there are no streetlights there.

It's a tiny short collapsed area that you're easily just not going to see until it's too late. You might notice that a patch of the road appears darker but assume it was recently resurfaced black asphalt or something -- not that the road was entirely missing. Depth perception doesn't work on a pitch black area of vision.

lsaferite2• 3 years ago

Looking at the images, I'm confused how he drowned in that stream.

crazygringo7• 3 years ago

Google is still providing driving directions over the collapsed bridge:

https://www.google.com/maps/dir/35.7822529,-81.2819178/3834+...

I got the location from LeifCarrotson on this comments page, who helpfully provided a link to the bridge in 3D Maps mode where you can clearly see the collapse:

https://www.google.com/maps/@35.7815814,-81.2828119,82m/data...

(I'm writing this comment as root-level rather than replying to LeifCarrotson, for higher visibility, so people can see this is still not a fixed problem.)

FartyMcFarter2• 3 years ago

How has that road not been closed off?? That's the bigger news here.

RandallBrown2• 3 years ago

It was in the Bing street view. I wonder how the signs got removed.

https://www.bing.com/maps?osid=c3224526-5ada-4a41-b8f7-e854f...

jollyllama• 3 years ago

Why isn't the bridge fixed?

bell-cot• 3 years ago

IANAL...but Google still serving up the wrong data - ~1 year after the fatal accident, and also after the lawsuit was filed against them - seems unlikely to score sympathy points in the jury box.

TonyTrapp• 3 years ago

And in case anyone is wondering, OpenStreetMap got it right! https://www.openstreetmap.org/search?query=35.781302%2C%20-8...

karussell3• 3 years ago

Another comment showed the Google link where the route was blocked which got me interested. And the solution is: the bridge is mapped as one-way street :) ! (try swapping the start+end and it won't pass the bridge)

Very confusing... any maybe the reason why it has been not properly fixed.

astrange5• 3 years ago

I don't see the issue. Was it fixed today?

crazygringo7• 3 years ago

Looks like it was indeed, in the past couple of hours. The entire road segment is now removed from Maps.

Nothing like a top comment on an HN front page story to get a company to take action, I guess.

spaceguillotine• 3 years ago

This is what happened when they cut back on staff maintaining map accuracy and went to the community model with MapMaker.

This team was way larger than 200 during my time there a decade ago and guess what? 2 years and you get the boot because they don't wanna pay to hire people who could actually do the work consistently. I loved working on POIs and Local. https://www.nytimes.com/2022/05/23/technology/google-maps-wo...

Apple Maps is eating their lunch right now and OSM is way prettier. Google tried to focus on charging large businesses like home depot to do internal store mapping instead of getting the best data they could for routing, the internal rule was if its within 100 feet it was close enough.

mmanfrin• 3 years ago

Apple Maps is eating their lunch right now

Source? Literally every single person I know on iOS still uses Google Maps because it is significantly better.

ak217• 3 years ago

Just to make this more explicit for those following along... this is just another aspect of Google's TVC (temporary, vendor and contractor) caste system. Google's full-time workforce is supported by a larger shadow workforce of contractors who are treated as disposable and routinely denied basic workplace protections. I know TVCs who were illegally denied access to basic workplace facilities like bathrooms while required to work at a Google office.

(I do think Google Maps is still generally better than Apple Maps and OSM, but I want the TVC situation to be recognized.)

danielvf• 3 years ago

Here's the timeline:

- Bridge collapsed in a neighborhood in 2013

- Bridge was owned by the neighborhood, not the government.

- There was some kind of heavy barrier blocking the bridge, but it was washed away at some point in the past.

- There was some kind of barricade/signage after that, but it was removed by vandals.

- The man, while following google maps late on rainy night, drove off the collapsed bridge, into the water and died. No barriers were present.

- Neighbors (not the HOA) have added heavy concrete barriers since the accident.

corbezzoli2• 3 years ago

What an absolute joke. Google is not god. They cannot possibly ensure that all of their data is correct.

Give that the local government neglected this road for years without placing a single permanent market to close off the road, I’m going to assume that they also never reported the road as closed.

Legally, Google should be in the clear. Technically, I hate that Google won’t take such reports, because I encountered the exact same situation before (except I did not drive through)

wslh• 3 years ago

Not really. When you are the size of Google you should be responsible. If they cannot ensure that Google Maps data is correct they pay the issue in fines.

I see very basic issues with Google Maps that are not addressed that make me think they are not caring enough about the quality of the product. I imagine that a company that produced so many cutting edge stuff could handle this kind of problems. They also bought Waze to have realtime information.

corbezzoli2• 3 years ago

I agree they could definitely do a better job if they were benevolent, but keeping the whole world up to date is an immense task and it would be unsound to be punished for not being good enough at it.

say_it_as_it_is• 3 years ago

Man walks into a pole while reading TikTok, dies of excessive bleeding from head injruy. Family sues TikTok.

aYsY4dDQ2NrcNzA• 3 years ago

https://www.cnn.com/2015/10/05/americas/brazil-wrong-directi...

"Waze app directions take woman to wrong Brazil address, where she is killed"

m463• 3 years ago

I've always wondered why there wasn't more direct feedback built into any and every system like this.

For example, why doesn't telsa have a direct feedback button, clearly marked for all. This would highlight problems with things on a map, things missing from a map, invalid, non-optimal or dangerous routing, and more?

I've wondered this will all KINDS of systems. why not flag suspicious product or restaurant reviews? Why can't you highlight spelling or grammatical errors directly in the kindle app - as errors?

AverageDude• 3 years ago

Slightly offtopic but I find Apple maps to be way better than Google maps. Their lane by lane directions are amazing. Most of the time you don’t even have to look at the phone. Whereas google has their weird way of zooming in and out and often a bit late. My success rate of not missing a turn is way higher on Apple maps and than on Google maps.

morpheuskafka• 3 years ago

Some context. This road is entirely outside the city limits of Hickory (the city's zoning ETJ extends to one side of the creek in question). In NC, only cities and the state maintain roads, not counties. Outside of a city, almost all roads outside of a neighborhood are state "secondary routes," which have a number but are referred to by name. Some neighborhood roads are, and some aren't. This one is not, and apparently no private entity is actively maintaining it.

These "orphan roads" have become a statewide problem. Normally, the issue is not as severe as this--just a road that needs paving. The rule is that NCDOT will usually accept the road, but only after it is fully maintained. Wake County has a program to fund this and assess a special tax on the owners to repay the cost: https://www.wake.gov/departments-government/planning-develop...

Good image of bridge in 2021: http://gis.catawbacountync.gov/_TileStitch/printn7q2sl.jpg City Limits (dark) and ETJ (light): http://gis.catawbacountync.gov/_TileStitch/printszuxzi.jpg

Google sued for negligence after man died following map directions

Related Stories