car crash

Lithium Battery Led to Fiery Death in Tesla Crash, NTSB Says

January 26, 2020 by Levinson and Stefani Leave a Comment

A May 2018 Florida crash involving a speeding teen driver and passenger became deadly after a subsequent fire was caused in part by the Tesla Inc. vehicle’s lithium battery, according to a recent federal investigation.

The 18-year-old driver had been previously cited for speeding, and was traveling at speeds up to 116 mph in a Model S when he lost control on a Fort Lauderdale curve with a speed limit of 25 mph, the National Transportation Safety Board explained in its December 19th report.

The report determined that the fire contributed greatly to both deaths, even though the passenger had already sustained head and torso injuries during the crash.

A passenger in the backseat was not wearing a seatbelt and was ejected from the car upon impact, but survived with various fractures.

This is one of several crashes currently under review by the NTSB involving lithium-based battery-involved fires in vehicles such as Teslas. These highly flammable batteries cause fires that are difficult to extinguish, and can even reignite hours or days after a crash has taken place.

During this accident, firefighters arrived on scene four minutes after the first emergency call, and reported the fire’s heat was incredibly strong and that they could see electrical arcing, according to NTSB’s report.

Responders used between 200 and 300 gallons of water and foam to combat the flames, but the battery still reignited two more times. Additionally, a piece of the main battery came into contact with a metal chain and briefly ignited on its own. Firefighters continued to spray the battery once more after it caught fire while being loaded onto a tow truck.

In another case which occurred in 2019, a Model S Tesla driver lost control on a South Florida road and collided with a palm tree; however, his family’s lawyers said the car’s battery and designs were the cause of his death–not the crash itself.

According to the wrongful death lawsuit, the Tesla’s lithium battery immediately caught fire after the crash, causing smoke and flames to fill the car and suffocate the driver. A crowd had gathered at the scene, but was unable to help.

Why? Allegedly, Tesla’s retractable door handles failed to “auto-present” and disallowed first responders to open the doors and save the driver.

“The fire engulfed the car and burned Dr. Awan beyond recognition–all because the Model S has inaccessible door handles, no other way to open the doors, and an unreasonable dangerous fire risk,” said the complaint. “These Model S defects, and others, rendered it a death trap.”

Tesla has claimed that its Model S vehicle once achieved “the best safety rating of any car test,” which is the reason his family’s attorney, Stuart Grossman, cited for Aman’s decision to purchase the luxury vehicle in the first place.

“These things, they just love to burn,” Grossman said. “The car is so over-engineered. It’s so techy, it makes you want to buy a Chevy pickup truck.”

These are only two Tesla-related deaths in a string of incidents that blame the carmaker’s technology.

In April, parking garage surveillance footage from Shanghai depicted a smoking Model S finally bursting into flames–a video which pressured Tesla to begin an internal investigation.

We’ve reported on other accidents–even deadly ones–related to Tesla’s “Autopilot” automated driver-assistance feature.

“There are a number of these cases,” said Grossman. “What the hell is going on?”

Regarding Awan’s case, as well as others, Tesla has maintained that any high-speed crash may end up in flames regardless of how the vehicle is powered. However, Awan had survived his crash–but would have been able to escape the fire had the doors been operating properly and allowed responders to pull him out.

The lawsuit says the innovative features made the car “defective” and dangerous,” and that the door handles added to the major issue of an “inherently unstable” lithium ion battery.

“Tesla failed to warn users about the scope and extent of the defective and unreasonably dangerous conditions of the Model S,” said the complaint.

After firefighters extinguished the flames in Awan’s incident, the Tesla was taken to a tow yard, where it reignited and burned once again.

Major Car Models Recalled as Takata Discovers Deadly Malfunction in Air Bags

January 26, 2020 by Levinson and Stefani Leave a Comment

Now-bankrupt air bag manufacturing company Takata has recently discovered a deadly defect in its product.

The newly-found malfunction had led to air bags exploding and hurling shrapnel, or not inflating properly in a crash at all.

This issue comes in addition to an earlier defect that killed at least 24 people and injured hundreds of others worldwide–which also had air bags unexpectedly releasing shrapnel.

On December 19th, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration released documents detailing its investigation into Audi, Honda, Toyota, and Mitsubishi regarding their connections to Takata’s recall of 1.4 million inflators.

The current problem has already killed a driver in Australia in an older 3-series BMW. BMW has recalled at least 116,000 vehicles already, and believes the issue is so serious that it has told drivers of affected models to keep their cars parked until repairs can be made. These models include certain 1999 323i and 328i sedans–these vehicles may have Takata inflators that were manufactured before production improvements.

BMW is also recalling 34,000 of its 323i and 328 sedans from 1999 and 2000, as well a 323Ci and 328Ci coupes from 2000, which were all made between March 1998 and March of 2000. It will also recall over 74,000 of its 323i, 325i, 328i, and 330i sedans from 1999 to 2001, which were produced between May 1999 and July 2000. These vehicles may have inflators that were replaced by defective ones.

As of now, the NHTSA is saying Takata has yet to give details on specific affected makes, models, or even model years of the vehicles that may have the defective inflators, so it has told companies to recall them properly as soon as possible. The agency also says that the vehicles that will likely be recalled were made between 1995 and 2000, which is when these particular inflators were produced.

As opposed to recalls in the past, Takata’s non-azide inflators don’t use ammonium nitrate to fill air bags when deployed–but the propellant still has a tendency to deteriorate over time when exposed to humidity or high temperatures. In this case, it can deploy too quickly, causing it to explode the inflator itself. The faulty inflators also have weak seals.

Recent government documents show that Takata made around 4.5 million of these inflators around the globe, but because the vehicles have grown so old, only a portion are still in use.

Currently, Mitsubishi has told national safety regulators that its only vehicle affected is the Montero model from 1998 to 2000, but is still working to finalize its recall.

Toyota and Honda are both still working to determine which of their models will need to be recalled. Audi also said it is investigating its 1997 to 1999 A4, SA6, A8, and TT models to determine whether they are affected.

The Center for Auto Safety’s executive director, Jason Levin, says the investigation currently “highlights the need for aggressive oversight both by NHTSA and by the companies themselves in terms of when they get these reports to take them seriously and move more quickly.”

Although he believes we can’t yet tell if automakers are procrastinating on these recalls, he knows it is vitally important to get the recalls out immediately, as many drivers use their cars for long periods of time. “We need to recognize that just waiting these problems out is not going to solve the dangerous situations that defective parts can create,” he explained.

This recall comes in addition to a large series of problems regarding Takata and its inflators, which eventually sent the company into bankruptcy.

In the largest string of automative recalls in American history, 19 automakers are recalling around 70 million inflators. Takata is also recalling about 100 million of its inflators across the country.

What is left of Takata has been purchased by Key Safety Systems of China for 175 billion yen ($1.6 billion).

BMW has been working quickly to remedy the issues with its models, and intends to replace all faulty inflators with new ones shortly. The company says it will notify owners when these new parts become available.

Decisions for all affected vehicles are expected to be made soon–NHTSA has told all companies to respond with final recall decisions by January 17th.

Hidden Dangers of Construction Zones

October 28, 2019 by Levinson and Stefani Leave a Comment

The holidays are approaching. If you’ve spent any time in the Woodfield Mall area recently, you would know that there is a lot of road construction going on, making an already heavy-traffic area even more congested, especially on the weekends when the shopping faithful are out in full force. If that isn’t frustrating enough, you may have also heard about the driver who crashed his car into the mall and drove around a bit before being taken into custody by police. It just goes to show that there are some things in life that you can’t control, like the actions of others. When it comes to traffic safety there are things you can look out for that will hopefully make your next trip to the mall safer and more bearable.

Avoid Road Rage

Everyone has seen people lose their cool while driving. Maybe you’re guilty of it yourself. Remember, even if people can see your hand signals, they likely can’t hear what words you are screaming at them. If you have kids in the car, they will certainly hear them. Sometimes hand gestures are appropriate while driving, like waiving thank you to another motorist who lets you merge in front of them, or letting someone else know you are waiting to let them through. However, expressing your disdain for someone probably won’t help them learn any kind of lesson and will only cause your own blood pressure to rise. The best bet is to try and stay calm. Focusing your attention on one guy you think might be a jerk can leave you at risk of getting distracted and might make you miss other hazards. It’s much better to keep your cool and keep your attention focused on avoiding collisions.

Look for Construction Vehicles

There are all kinds of dump trucks, backhoes, pickup trucks, and other heavy machinery roaming around construction areas. Sometimes they leave the coned-off sections of the road and meander through traffic. If you’re not looking, suddenly a bulldozer can jump out in front of you. It’s worth it to scan the portions of the road that are blocked off to normal traffic as you look forward in anticipation of other vehicles maneuvering in front of you. Often times, workers will signal to drivers to let them know when a work vehicle is attempting to cross or enter the road. It would be a mistake to always rely on that. You can’t expect everyone else to always do safe and reasonable things, but you can take steps to help ensure your own safety. This is one of them.

Take Your Time

Eventually, we all get where we’re going. It’s best to plan for the worst and take your time. This is especially true for shopping trips. The value of your life and limbs far exceeds any stuff you can buy. If you put things into perspective, parking spots are not worth fighting over. Merging ahead of that one guy who has been irritating you since the last stop sign isn’t worth it. Plus, (parents will get this one), if you are less stressed out from your perilous journey to the mall, you are less likely to lose it when your child inevitably begs you to buy another worthless piece of plastic they will forget about five minutes after returning home. You may show up a little later, but you’ll glide through the mall, sipping your latte, skillfully deflecting your kids’ outright obnoxious demands to get them more stuff they don’t need. Take solace in knowing that even if you have to sit in the car longer you can always drop a few quarters into one of those mall massage chairs and let those automated rollers knead the frustration away.

Data Suggests “Micromobility” May Alleviate Traffic Congestion; Serious Questions Linger Regarding Safety

September 25, 2019 by Levinson and Stefani Leave a Comment

A new report released by INRIX, a data analysis company that helps power the likes of Google Maps and Waze, suggests that Chicago may be one of the top cities to support “micromobility.” Many may be asking what “micromobility” even means, and for good reason. INRIX has actually coined the term and uses it to define modes of transportation, such as shared bikes, e-bikes, and e-scooters. The data company’s belief is that through the use and support of micromobility, cities may find a lot of potential in curbing traffic congestion in a cost effective and environmentally friendly way.

Supporting this idea and belief is data based on 50 million vehicles throughout the most congested cities in the United States, which found that 48% of all car trips are less than three miles long. INRIX’s belief is that this commuting length of less than three miles is precisely where micromobility can make a change on cities throughout the United States.

In using this initial data, INRIX then turned to cities throughout the States to see where they had the most potential. In doing so, the company found that Honolulu, New Orleans, Nashville, and Chicago rounded out the top 4 of the group. It was found that 22% of Chicagoans driving was to go no further than a mile, while 17% of trips were for 1-2-mile trips, and only 12% of trips were 2-3 miles in length.

At first, this data appeared to speak for itself. Not only does it suggest the long-held belief that the more we commute through public transportation or via alternative means other than automobiles, the better traffic and congestion will be, but that there are endless amounts of data to support such a notion. However, a closer look reveals several questions that must be answered. How does city landscape and terrain affect the potential for successful micromobility options? How does a city properly fund maintaining and regulating such options? And most importantly, how do cities keep their residents safe? The latter being the most pressing concern amid a push for increased transportation.

While the data presented may paint a picture that this is a common sense move that more cities need to continue adopting and build around, the reality is that establishing infrastructure such as this is incredibly dangerous. The argument can easily be made that driving a vehicle is just as dangerous, but as we have continuously covered since the adoption of these scooter programs, riders are not gaining insurance coverage, placing them in horrible situations if they are ever seriously injured. Those extra minutes of sitting in traffic are worth it, if it means you aren’t running the risk of being injured because the city has not properly provided the necessary safety precautions. And that is precisely what the issue is today. As this data from INRIX suggests that cities like Chicago and Nashville are in great positions to adopt micromobility programs and implement them, it doesn’t really factor in safety or landscape into its decision making.

Cities Come in all Shapes and Sizes

Having lived in Nashville, the argument is pretty easy to make that a city with a crumbling public transportation system, with the inability to properly establish bike lanes, should probably not be the poster child for a micromobility platform. This is not to say that Nashville has issues that cannot be resolved, but there is so much more that needs to be addressed before a city can adopt transportation platforms like INRIX proposes. Take away infrastructure concerns for a moment and look to the overarching safety concerns. Nashville actually tested its own scooter program a year ago and quickly shut it down as a man was tragically killed.

Incidents such as the one that occurred in Nashville are happening all over the place. In Chicago, we also have had our share of incidents that have really made city officials pause and analyze if the pilot program is worth it. Not only are these topics that need to seriously be addressed before programs adopting micromobility can be fully adopted, but for us, it really comes down to protection for riders. While city regulations and safety ordinances help establish rules of the road for micromobility users, none of that matters if the person riding is unable to have his medical bills paid for due to the scooter or bike-sharing company failing to provide any sort of adequate coverage. This is a serious issue that needs to be addressed before cities even consider putting more people on the roads.

Although, we have serious reservations regarding any sort of implementation of these programs before coverage is provided for users, INRIX has provided its own Road Rules program that is meant to help cities navigate safe and efficient means to alleviate traffic congestion. Information such as this can be used to inform cities what is necessary to make micromobility a real factor throughout the States. The more information available for our city officials, the higher our safety standards for the place we call home should be.

Professional Football is Back: Avoid Being a Victim of Drunk Driving This Season…

September 6, 2019 by Levinson and Stefani Leave a Comment

Football is back. For some of us in Chicagoland, that means screaming at the TV alone in frustration and joy for the next four months. For others, it’s a collective experience of doing the same thing surrounded by friends and family. And, yet another group of us, about sixty-thousand or so, will gather together on the Museum Campus to attend the battle on the gridiron in hopes of seeing our team defeat the opponent in stupendous fashion. Speaking of fashion, a great many of these enthusiastic spectators will be dressed in jerseys ready to suit up in case da coach needs ‘em. My prediction is that he won’t, but if you’ve ever used the word “super” to describe your commitment as a fan, far be it from me to dash your hopes and kill your dreams of experiencing glory and having the chance at lining up, if only just once, in T formation.

No matter how you plan to enjoy watching the ball game, while getting there and back, strong safety should be your primary goal in defending against traffic crashes. Ok, I know that was corny. I’m a dad, so I like dad jokes. However the sentiment here is what counts. You want to be able to have fun watching the game without worrying about getting hurt in a crash heading home.

People should know better, yet the Centers of Disease Control and Prevention reportedthat 3,866 people died as the result of car crashes involving drunk drivers between 2013 and 2012 in Illinois. A lot of people enjoy having a drink on game day. That should be fine as long as it’s done responsibly. That means, anyone getting behind the wheel of a motor vehicle should be sober; not sobered-up, but sober.

How Long Should You Wait to Drive After Drinking?

Is 48 hours too long to wait to drive after having that last drink? I don’t think so. It’s generally known that it takes about an hour for a person’s body to metabolize one standard drink. Yet, alcohol can be detected in a blood test for up to 12 yours after having a drink. Not only that, consuming alcohol has other, longer-term effects on your body. Having five or more drinks in one night can affect your mind and body for up to three days. Drinking slows down your metabolism and endurance, making it harder to stay fit even if you exercise. Even if your workout performance is of no concern to you, driving a car is still a physical activity. Alcohol also inhibits nutrient absorption. Not only do beer and liquor contain no vitamins or minerals, they deplete the essential elements, such as B12 and zinc, your body needs to maintain focus and energy, which are also needed to properly operate a motor vehicle.

So even if your team’s offense doesn’t show up to do their job, you’ll most likely still be expected to show up to work on Monday. If you’re going to drink during the game, get a driver or use public transportation, even the next day. Having litigated car crash cases for a few years now, I can share from experience that, heaven forbid, if you were to find yourself a party to a motor vehicle crash lawsuit, there is a high probability that you will be asked, under oath, in a deposition whether you consumed any alcohol within 24 to 48 hours before having been involved in a collision.

Negligence is preventable. Every one of us can take steps to improve our chances of getting home safely so that we can enjoy the whole season without injury or worse. So, have fun this season, be safe, and go (registered trademark of a certain team that plays in a certain town that won a certain game in 1985)!

A Left Turn On a Green Light Can Still Be Dangerous

August 1, 2019 by Levinson and Stefani Leave a Comment

Everybody knows that green means go. Kids learn this concept in pre-school. However, every driver should know that turning left on a green light with approaching oncoming traffic requires waiting for the intersection to clear or for there to be enough space to avoid hazards before proceeding with the left turn. This rule is even stated in Illinois traffic law.

Government statistics show that crashes occur more frequently in circumstances involving left hand turns than right hand turns. The reason for this can probably be explained through commons sense reasoning. Left hand turns take longer and cover more space. Drivers often have to time their left turns to avoid oncoming traffic that also has a green light unless they are turning left at an intersection that had a traffic control light that includes a left turn only green arrow. But, even in those situations, motorists will still need to look for pedestrians crossing over the street that they intend to turn into or other vehicles disobeying the traffic signal. Obstructed views can also make left turns more challenging. Although, a good rule of thumb for those situations is to wait to turn until you can see that the intersection is clear and it is safe to turn.

Other Cars May Be Blocking Your View

When turning left, a driver’s view can be obstructed by other cars or trucks waiting to turn left from the opposite direction. Depending on how curved the road is, or how big the vehicles are on the other side of the street, a left turning driver may not be able to see oncoming traffic from his or her vantage point until those drivers make their turns or move out of the way.

Road Design Might Contribute to Obstructed Views for Left Turns

Additionally, the features of a road or intersection can make it tough for drivers to see each other. Take a street like Stony Island in Chicago, for instance. For motorists traveling southbound on Stony Island Avenue approaching 69^th St. in Chicago, one factor to consider is that there are a group of trees in the center median of Stony Island just south of 69^th Street. If you wish to make a left turn from S. Stony Island Avenue on to eastbound 69^th Street, you have to make the turn from the designated left turn lane. When the light is green for drivers attempting to turn left, it is also green for cars coming from the opposite direction traveling northbound on Stony Island. As you approach this intersection heading south on Stony Island Avenue, you have to keep a look out for vehicles heading north on that same street if you intend to turn left on to 69^th Street. You should also be aware in that situation to make sure the trees in the median aren’t preventing you from seeing any oncoming vehicles heading north.

David Struett, a reporter for the Chicago Sun Times, recently published a story about a fatal crash at this same intersection where a car that was attempting to turn left onto eastbound 69^th Street collided with a motorcycle heading north on S. Stony Island Avenue. Both of these drivers had a green light at the time of the crash. The driver of the motorcycle died as a result of his injuries from this tragic incident.

How Can I Make Left Turns Safer?

For intersections where making a left turn requires looking past obstructions, either natural or man-made, and avoiding oncoming traffic, the way to make traveling easier and safer for drivers is to avoid making that left turn altogether. I understand that this may sound strange, but considering the hazards that this intersection may impose on every driver’s goal of avoiding collisions and arriving at their intended destination safely, taking another route that could include 3 right turns instead of a tricky left could be the safer option. Not to mention the potential gas savings that come from less stopping and idling that left turns require and right turns do not. Besides, if it’s safer to make right turns than it is to make left turns generally, why not avoid turning left if you don’t have to? Every driver who makes a decision to take more safety precautions on the road has the potential of making things safer for all travelers.