Tesla allegedly in autopilot mode crashes into Texas house, woman killed

https://abcnews.com/US/tesla-allegedly-autopilot-mode-crashes-texas-house-woman/story?id=134062374

by malshe • 1 month ago

104 115 1 month ago

rvz• 1 month ago

Whether if it is either autopilot or Fools Self Driving mode, if this driver did not have their hands on the wheel then he is absolutely in deep trouble.

Tesla themselves got into trouble after previous crashes and are finally telling their drivers to keep their hands on the wheel at all times, and toned down their false advertising.

nashashmi• 1 month ago

Hands on wheel doesn’t absolve the FSD from stopping the car before hitting the wall/object. And the person. This was completely avoidable.

iancarroll• 1 month ago

The latest FSD does not attempt to check if your hands are on the wheel at all.

paulryanrogers4• 1 month ago

Does it do alternate checks for human awareness, like gaze detection?

SpicyLemonZest• 1 month ago

Whatever they do or don't say in the fine print, they and their CEO clearly communicate to every Tesla owner I've met that you do not have to keep your hands on the wheel. tesla.com/fsd has a splash page showing someone driving the car hands-free. I do agree that the driver should also be held responsible.

TurdF3rguson• 1 month ago

I can't imagine the lawyers going after him when they can go after the world's only trillionaire.

powerbroker• 1 month ago

Something is terribly broken in the software release process that constantly allows a worse user experience (including autonomous) as Tesla 'matures' its operations. I'm driving a Tesla, that recently added a 'warning' over a center-display showing the three rear-pointing cameras.

1. The cameras only show while operating in reverse;

2. The warning entirely obscures 30-50% of the view in one or more cameras;

3. The warning tells you that there is dirt or debris on the camera.

So, you are warned, that your vision, via the cameras could be better -- by deliberately worsening the view.

Genius.

jcgrillo4• 1 month ago

Made my day lol. Brilliant.

andrewinardeer• 1 month ago

Cameras get dirty and it is unreasonable to think that they wouldn't. This would force my hand to clean the cameras. Why is this a bad thing?

FireBeyond7• 1 month ago

Used to work in the hardware industry. Friend worked for a company who was a component manufacturer about the mindset of Tesla - which affirmed to him why he'd never buy one:

"Hey, we sent you over the new firmware for the component, check it out." (The test suite for this component takes approximately 36 hours to execute.)

Three hours later:

"This is working so much better, thanks a lot!"

"???"

"Oh, we just flashed a car we have here and took it out for a drive."

"?!?"

Oof.

theturtletalks• 1 month ago

I wonder if they will implement dead zones for self-driving. I was using a Lime scooter in a new city and when I entered a university campus, the scooter slowed to a crawl.

I don’t understand why a person would need FSD in a suburb street.

giza182• 1 month ago

If FSD proves to be demonstrably safer in such a scenario then it would make sense to use it there.

uoaei• 1 month ago

All of the optimism surrounding this industry hinges on "ifs" that never materialize.

kilroy123• 1 month ago

They do that on bikes as well. At first, I was very confused about what was happening.

JumpCrisscross7• 1 month ago

don’t understand why a person would need FSD in a suburb street

My parents have a Tesla. It’s convenient. I engage my Subaru’s lane-keeping in suburbs, too, to reduce driver fatigue.

The Subaru behaves predictably. The Tesla is mostly more capable, but does something dumbfucked and dangerous every few dozen trips.

thephyber3• 1 month ago

to reduce driver fatigue

Fatigue is not the only, or even the biggest, risk to driving safely. Being distracted is frequently one of the biggest risks.

jnwatson• 1 month ago

Crazy I saw one of the victim's grandchildren post on Reddit yesterday and thought it should make the news.

tetromino_• 1 month ago

The grandchildren's post: https://www.reddit.com/r/legaladvice/comments/1uardtu/driver...

agnosticmantis• 1 month ago

As long as Tesla doesn't insure their cars (whenever in self-driving mode) completely for the price of their FSD, it's not FSD, just scammy marketing by a chronic charlatan.

plandis• 1 month ago

The title is misleading and shifts blame from the driver to the machine.

Ultimately the driver is responsible.

Edit: For the folks who seem to think that this is marketed as unsupervised self driving, from Teslas own website it states

“Currently enabled features require active driver supervision and do not make the vehicle autonomous.”

https://www.tesla.com/fsd

theshackleford• 1 month ago

Looks accurate to the content to me.

surgical_fire• 1 month ago

If it is Full-Self Driving, the machine is the driver. The company providing is ultimately responsible.

mattoxic• 1 month ago

The tell is the the name. Full Self Driving.

JumpCrisscross7• 1 month ago

Ultimately the driver is responsible

Recent lawsuits [1] seem to suggest both are. The driver committed manslaughter and should go to jail. The company sold a dangerous product that killed someone and should pay massive damages.

[1] https://electrek.co/2026/04/16/tesla-facing-up-to-14-billion...

dlcarrier2• 1 month ago

It's not even a recent thing. Before the turn of the century, jurors holding Cessna liable for incidents cause by pilot error was a common enough occurrence that it basically destroyed the light airplane industry through skyrocketing liability insurance prices.

Gigachad• 1 month ago

If full self driving was active then the driver was Tesla.

420official• 1 month ago

You might not think so, but there are many people that believe Tesla marketing that FSD is better than paying attention. I struggle convincing my parents that they shouldn't drive if they are likely to fall asleep behind the wheel and it's helpful to categorize an FSD crash separately from a human driver crash.

loloquwowndueo• 1 month ago

Being responsible and being at fault are two different things.

vel0city• 1 month ago

But the car was fully self driving right? Fully, as completely driving by itself? If the person in the front seat is driving, the feature isn't really "full self driving" now is it?

rsynnott• 1 month ago

"The name is a lie, but we have a disclaimer" is not generally considered adequate.

wnmurphy• 1 month ago

The telemetry will tell the story, not the clickbait news headline based on preliminary information. I seriously doubt FSD would drive into a house.

JumpCrisscross7• 1 month ago

telemetry will tell the story

Idk, the death-toll gap between Tesla and Waymo seems to tell a story enough.

Reason0777• 1 month ago

There are very few (if any?) known deaths caused by FSD accidents.

Note: it’s important to distinguish between Autopilot and FSD here. “Autopilot” is Tesla’s old assisted driving stack that comes free in most vehicles and has had no significant updates in years. “FSD” is an entirely different software stack that only works with newer vehicles and that Tesla charges $$ for. It’s much more advanced and IMO a lot safer.

This article never mentions FSD, only Autopilot.

is_true• 1 month ago

does it makes sense to compare the two given that waymos are driven in a limited set of circumstances and most of the times below speeds that could kill you on a crash?

paulryanrogers4• 1 month ago

If Tesla was bold enough to intentionally auto disengage seconds before an accident (to avoid liability) then can they be trusted to maintain telemetry throughout dicey circumstances?

IncreasePosts3• 1 month ago

That's not what they do, and any crash happening within 5 seconds of fsd disengagement is considered to be using fsd.

dlcarrier2• 1 month ago

Auto disengaging seconds before an acciden't isn't a Tesla-specific thing, it's part of the standard for any driving automation SAE level 3 or lower (https://www.sae.org/news/blog/sae-levels-driving-automation-...). The vehicle will return driving over to the human any time it's unable to determine what to do.

gerdesj• 1 month ago

Are there any US federal or state laws stipulating some sort of black box style recording of data for accident investigation?

If not then I suspect a Tesla will turn out to be quite surprisingly forgetful about what it was up to in a road traffic collision.

RTC is a UK term that took over from RTA (road traffic accident) - it describes what happened rather than heading off into the weeds as to cause.

Reason0777• 1 month ago

I don’t know about laws, but Teslas automatically record and save everything in the event of a collision. My brother was hit by another car while driving a Tesla a few years ago and it was very easy to retrieve video from the Tesla’s cameras and show who was at fault.

IncreasePosts3• 1 month ago

The reddit post from the grandchild says "autopilot", which is really just lane keeping and adaptive cruise control.

I believe autopilot would totally run into a house. It doesn't respect stop signs or red lights. If the house is at a T intersection the autopilot might try to drive right through it. I agree about FSD though

FireBeyond7• 1 month ago

Adaptive cruise control certainly shouldn't run into a house, for the same reason it should detect a stationary (or slow) object in front of you and gradually slow to a stop before it.

thephyber3• 1 month ago

And _we_ will never see the telemetry.

Maybe NTSB will.

Certainly Tesla will. And that will inform how their PR team responds to this collision.

Maybe some plaintiffs will if they can manage to subpoena the data from Tesla in some hypothetical future court case.

The reason I will never buy a Tesla is because it is one of the most advanced surveillance systems against the driver, but there is no one empowered to inspect the car / company (comprehensively, not superficially).

I seriously doubt FSD would drive into a house.

Strawman. You seem to be insinuating that FSD intended to aim for a house. Usually the chain of events would start with something like “FSD was engaged on the road and in the intended lane” then “FSD lost track of the boundary of the lane” or maybe “FSD identified an obstruction in the lane so it maneuvered out of lane”.

cosnenc• 1 month ago

Software with bugs in it? Preposterous!

ojosilva• 1 month ago

Teslas do glithcy speed limits readings often, from GPS drift (ie. it thinks the car is on the highway) or may be deceived by some sign with numbers on the street.

When that happens and depending on Autopilot [1] settings, the car will shoot out to reach the new limit. If the driver is distracted enough not to notice or react in time, the car could crash. GPS inaccuracy does sound plausible given Teslas slow down if an abrupt change of direction is near (ie roundabout) per GPS and map data.

The house sits at a corner, not a culthesac.

1. It's not clear the driver allegedly said "autopilot" or "FSD"

srameshc• 1 month ago

Many Tesla owners I know are 100% convinced Assited Driving is 100% safe and reliable and can not go wrong.

bellowsgulch• 1 month ago

It's just not a serious technology. Street-by-street speed limit data exists, and where it doesn't, there are laws across the US as to what speed limits are based on area. Tons of map data to tell you where is residential and commercial, a street and a highway, an on-ramp, and so on.

But FSD doesn't abide by speed limits, and Waymo does, and it is truly self-driving.

So, it's all bullshit. Since day one, it's never been a real attempt at autonomous, legal, safe driving.

FireBeyond7• 1 month ago

There used to be UI options for "by how much can FSD exceed the posted speed limit" and "should FSD actually come to a stop at a stop sign".

aetherspawn4• 1 month ago

Ok, 3 things.

1) I’ve put enough kms on FSD - it’s taken me across Australia a few times, probably 10,000kms in total - to know that it isn’t going to drive into a house.

2) Even if FSD is enabled, there’s loads of things you can do to create an accident like press the brakes or accelerator pedals, which doesn’t necessarily disengage FSD right away, so let’s just wait for the telemetry to get released.

3) Regardless of who was controlling it, why did this guy let his car jump the kerb and go through a house? Why was he going fast enough?

Sad for all involved.

Edit: my experience is HW4 by the way.

paulryanrogers4• 1 month ago

1) I’ve put enough kms on FSD to know that it isn’t going to drive into a house.

Is it possible FSD on this vehicle was a different version? Can't FSD change from one drive to the next, based on software updates or even external conditions?

Perhaps you drove in a different region with differing conditions?

3) Regardless of who was controlling it, why did this guy let his car jump the kerb and go through a house? Why was he going fast enough?

Why is it called "Full Self Driving" if the person behind the wheel must control (or even just monitor) the speed?

aetherspawn4• 1 month ago

That’s exactly the thing. We’re on FSD 13 and America is on FSD 14, we’re always about a year behind. Yours is significantly better than ours (being RHD market), but ours still wouldn’t drive through a house.

IncreasePosts3• 1 month ago

I believe how good your FSD is also depends on how new your Tesla is because older ones are underpowered and maybe use an underpowered vision model

FireBeyond7• 1 month ago

Perhaps you drove in a different region with differing conditions?

Agreed.

He's driven it "across Australia". Which means long straight highways for hundreds and hundreds of miles at a time (then recharge, then do long straight highway for hundreds and hundreds of miles), and often fairly lightly trafficked:

https://www.google.com/maps/dir/Perth,+Western+Australia,+Au...

Like... absolutely shocking that FSD performs decently on well maintained, largely straight highway in generally clear desert conditions. Surely this is indicative of its behavior everywhere else! /s

0cf8612b2e1e• 1 month ago

“Wait for the telemetry”. Like that case where it took years and reverse engineering to pull the footage that Tesla claimed did not exist?

Surely, we can trust Tesla will be providing all relevant information to the authorities without delay.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2025/08/29/tesla-a...

sumeno• 1 month ago

"I've driven drunk enough times to know I'd never cause an accident"

chaostheory• 1 month ago

Regardless of who was controlling it, why did this guy let his car jump the kerb and go through a house? Why was he going fast enough?

There are decades worth of man-machines UX research to prove this: the more you lean on automated systems to perform a manual task, like specific vehicle operations, the more your reaction time and relefexes for that specific motor skill will suffer.

Non-level 4 driver assistance tech should only be used for helping prevent accidents and not pretend to be actual full self driving

toasty228• 1 month ago

"I coded like 500 line of C, I know for a fact segfaults cannot happen"

That's how you sound

water-data-dude• 1 month ago

"I haven't encountered a rare edge case, therefor the rare edge case must not exist"

xnx• 1 month ago

Without knowing the "full" details of this crash, it is outrageous that Tesla calls it "Full Self-Driving (Supervised)" on their website. This is like naming a product "Healthy Dog Food (Rat poison)". If it requires supervision, it is not "full". Period.

I thought previous lawsuits would've forced Tesla to call it "Advanced Driver Assist" or something.

magicalhippo• 1 month ago

My SO just complained about the same when she found out the jug labled weed killer she bought in fact affects all plants and grass, not just weeds.

"Why isn't it called plant killer rather than weed killer", she griped. Why indeed.

pjjpo• 1 month ago

I agree with the sentiment and don't like Elon at all. But I think there is a case to say the Full refers to features, so not only lane change / parking, but actual driving fully. If it said Perfect FSD or even High Quality FSD, that's definitely worse, but we have to acknowledge FSD can fully drive in many cases, not enough for me to be comfortable enough maybe, but comparing to rat poison seems like a stretch.

general1465• 1 month ago

"Full Self-Driving (Supervised)"

Water (Dry)

bumby2• 1 month ago

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dry_water

1vuio0pswjnm73• 1 month ago

"I thought previous lawsuits would've forced Tesla to call it "Advanced Driver Assist" or something"

Securities fraud

Problem: need evidence of intent, e.g., Musk knew software would fail

Example

LaMontagne v. Tesla

Claims

https://dn721902.ca.archive.org/0/items/gov.uscourts.cand.40...

Order

https://dn721902.ca.archive.org/0/items/gov.uscourts.cand.40...

Appeal

https://dn721902.ca.archive.org/0/items/gov.uscourts.cand.40...

False advertising

In progress, currently Tesla is appealing class certification

Example

In Re Tesla Advanced Driver Assistance Systems Litigation

Claims

https://dn721905.ca.archive.org/0/items/gov.uscourts.cand.40...

Tesla arguments

https://ia800708.us.archive.org/3/items/gov.uscourts.ca9.f97...

Snoozus• 1 month ago

Here is a video from the youtube channel Better Biomed, from the scene, apparently it was his house: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6L_8x-Y0jqg

sparky_z• 1 month ago

And doorbell footage of the crash.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HR_Y_yf84m8

Holy shit, it looks like it was going at full highway speeds (at least) in a residential neighborhood. Doesn't look like it attempts to stop or steer away at any point. This seems like the outcome one would expect from a passed-out driver and a stuck accelerator. I'm honestly amazed that the driver survived.

s1artibartfast• 1 month ago

Yeah, would be interesting to see what the cause is. These things do happen from time to time with cars

iJohnDoe• 1 month ago

It looks like a culdesac? Why would it be driving that fast into a culdesac?

moralestapia2• 1 month ago

Someone needs to go to jail for this.

Either the driver or someone at Tesla (their pick, who cares).

This cannot go unpunished.

Machines can never be held accountable.

thephyber3• 1 month ago

It seems your standards are pretty arbitrary.

Personally I want to know that a provable crime was actually committed before calling for someone to be jailed.

aaomidi2• 1 month ago

Also jailing basically doesn’t solve this problem?

1e1a• 1 month ago

Why do news outlets so often use the phrase "high rate of speed"? Speed isn't a discrete event, it can't really have a rate, unless it is a rate of change, in which case they would be referring to acceleration.

dekhn• 1 month ago

rate = distance / time

occoder• 1 month ago

Yeah that's cringey, "high speed" is enough.

Sounds like a junior reporter trying to hit a word count.

throwawaypath• 1 month ago

Is there a Polymarket bet for this being Autopilot vs DWI? These types of accidents happen all the time, alcohol involved in many (most?).

burnerRhodov3• 1 month ago

There's absolutely no way this was on autopilot. A) autopilot would not drive this fast in a nieghborhood and B) Autopilot would not drive into a house like this...

thefz• 1 month ago

What will happen to the liable person? Nothing.

petilon• 1 month ago

Previously: A Florida jury found that flaws in Tesla's self-driving software were partly to blame for a crash that killed a 22-year-old woman in 2019 and severely injured her boyfriend.

The jury verdict requires Tesla to pay $243 million in punitive and compensatory damages to the parents of the woman and to her boyfriend.

https://www.reuters.com/world/us-judge-upholds-243-million-v...

ralph84• 1 month ago

What is "autopilot mode"? Tesla doesn't use that term.

Tesla allegedly in autopilot mode crashes into Texas house, woman killed

Related Stories