The promise seems almost too good to be true: drive without hands on the wheel or feet on the pedals for as long as it’s active, provided the car’s internal camera sees you watching the road, ready to take control at any moment. General Motors markets its Super Cruise system as revolutionary technology that delivers true hands-free highway driving. But as recent real-world experiences demonstrate, the gap between marketing promises and road reality can create dangerous situations—and complex legal questions when accidents occur.
The Reality Check: A Driver’s 1,000-Mile Wake-Up Call
A recent detailed account from a driver who completed a 1,000-mile journey using GM’s Super Cruise system reveals concerning safety issues that every driver should understand. While the system helped make the drive “easier” and provided “a safe feeling to look at your surroundings,” the driver documented multiple dangerous incidents that highlight serious limitations.
The system consistently exhibited alarming behaviors:
- Constantly changing lanes for no reason – creating unnecessary risk and driver frustration
- Making unsafe lane changes into lanes with vehicles merging onto the highway – forcing the driver to override the system “many times for safety reasons”
- Randomly disconnecting – requiring “button smashing for 10 seconds” until reconnection
- Emergency braking and shutting off unexpectedly when it didn’t understand lane paths
- Complete inability to dodge dangerous vehicles like semi-trucks drifting into the lane
- No understanding of semi-truck blind spots where human drivers would naturally speed up
The driver’s sobering conclusion? “I’m surprised there has been no fatal accidents, this Super Cruise is one incident away from killing someone. Either getting sideswiped by a truck, breaking unexpectedly and getting rear-ended or my favorite, changing lanes into vehicles merging onto the highway.”
Understanding What Super Cruise Actually Does (And Doesn’t Do)
Despite GM’s marketing suggesting near-autonomous capabilities, Super Cruise cannot steer to avoid any objects including vehicles, animals, pedestrians, bicyclists, potholes, debris, construction barriers or cones. It is not a crash avoidance system. The system focuses on keeping vehicles in a single lane and maintaining distance from cars ahead—nothing more.
As automotive experts emphasize, you cannot buy a fully autonomous vehicle in Canada right now, no matter what the sales and marketing folks would like you to believe. They aren’t for sale. The driver is still legally responsible for whatever happens behind the wheel.
The Growing Scope of the Problem
GM aggressively expands Super Cruise availability across its vehicle lineup. According to the automaker’s Q3 2024 earnings presentation, GM expects about 15 percent of all of its vehicles in 2025 to be equipped with Super Cruise, with 380,000 GM vehicles equipped with Super Cruise by the end of 2024, and expects that number to double in 2025.
This expansion puts more drivers at risk of experiencing the types of dangerous malfunctions documented by real users. Multiple online forums report persistent issues including:
- Systems that stop working entirely, displaying “Super Cruise unavailable, no road information”
- Frequent disconnections requiring dealer “flashing” that may not solve underlying problems
- Technology that fails to engage on previously compatible roads
Legal Liability: Who Pays When Technology Fails?
When Super Cruise or similar semi-autonomous systems cause accidents, determining liability becomes significantly more complex than traditional car crashes. Filing a car accident claim after a self-driving car accident involves navigating intricate legal and technical issues.
Multiple parties may bear responsibility:
Driver Responsibility: The driver will need to consent to share operational responsibility which will require a legal framework. Even with Super Cruise engaged, drivers must remain attentive and ready to take control instantly.
Manufacturer Liability: It is also possible that the manufacturer’s burden may fall on its shoulders to prove that its vehicle did not cause the crash rather than on the driver of the other vehicle to prove that it did. Product liability claims can arise when systems fail to perform as advertised or create unreasonable dangers.
Software Developer Liability: Determining liability could involve questions about the autonomous vehicle’s programming and the extent to which the programming or hardware contributed to the accident.
Shared Responsibility: Georgia’s comparative fault rule also plays a role in determining liability, allowing multiple parties to share responsibility based on their degree of fault. In an autonomous vehicle accident, this could mean that the vehicle owner, manufacturer, software developer, or even a third-party maintenance provider may share liability.
The Insurance Complexity
In a traditional accident, the at-fault driver’s auto insurance typically covers damages. However, in an autonomous vehicle accident, coverage may involve multiple policies, including auto insurance, product liability insurance, and even cyber insurance in cases of software failure.
This complexity can leave accident victims facing delayed claims, denied coverage, and insurance companies pointing fingers at each other while medical bills accumulate and vehicle damage remains unrepaired.
Critical Evidence in Super Cruise Accident Cases
University of South Carolina law professor Bryant Walker Smith points out that with automated systems, considerably more data will typically be available than with human-driver crashes, allowing more reliable and detailed assessment of liability.
Essential evidence includes:
- Vehicle data logs and black box information
- Super Cruise engagement records
- Software version and update history
- Maintenance records
- Road mapping data from GM’s systems
- Camera and sensor data
- Driver attention monitoring records
This data is typically in the possession of the vehicle manufacturer or software developer, making experienced legal representation crucial for accessing and interpreting this technical evidence.
Red Flags Every Driver Should Recognize
Based on documented user experiences and system limitations, drivers should immediately take manual control when:
- The system makes unexpected lane changes near merging traffic
- Approaching construction zones or unusual road conditions
- Near large trucks or in truck blind spots
- The system disconnects repeatedly or shows error messages
- Weather conditions reduce visibility
- Approaching intersections or traffic signals
What to Do After a Super Cruise-Related Accident
Immediate Steps:
- Ensure safety and call emergency services if anyone requires medical attention
- Document everything – photograph vehicle positions, damage, road conditions, and any visible system displays
- Preserve evidence – avoid turning the vehicle on/off unnecessarily as this may clear system logs
- Contact law enforcement and provide factual information without speculating about system performance
- Seek medical evaluation even for seemingly minor injuries
Legal Protection Steps:
- Contact an experienced personal injury attorney immediately who understands autonomous vehicle technology
- Avoid giving recorded statements to insurance companies before consulting with counsel
- Preserve all documentation including purchase/lease agreements, system manuals, and service records
- Document ongoing symptoms and impacts on daily life
The Future of Liability Law
As autonomous cars shift the control of driving from humans to autonomous car technology, there is a need for existing liability laws to evolve to reasonably identify the appropriate remedies for damage and injury.
Some manufacturers recognize this shifting liability landscape. Volvo and some other manufacturers of autonomous vehicles have already declared that they will pay for all injuries and property damage caused by their autonomous vehicles. However, GM has made no such commitment for Super Cruise incidents.
Know Your Rights
The legal system continues adapting to address semi-autonomous vehicle accidents, but current laws still protect your right to compensation when negligence causes harm. Whether that negligence involves system design flaws, inadequate warnings, software malfunctions, or failure to update safety systems, experienced legal counsel can help identify all potentially responsible parties.
Those injured in crashes will still need to prove the extent of damages they have suffered. Negotiating with insurance adjusters may still prove to be as difficult as ever, particularly when multiple complex technologies and parties become involved.
The Bottom Line
While GM touts more than 160 million miles driven accident-free with Super Cruise, real-world user experiences reveal significant safety gaps between marketing promises and road reality. The technology that promises to make driving safer may actually create new categories of risk when systems malfunction, disconnect unexpectedly, or make dangerous decisions.
As these systems become more prevalent, drivers must understand both their limitations and their legal rights when technology fails. The integration of semi-autonomous systems into everyday vehicles represents a fundamental shift in how we think about driving responsibility—but it doesn’t eliminate the right to seek compensation when that technology creates unreasonable dangers.
If you’ve experienced concerning behavior from your vehicle’s semi-autonomous systems, or if you’ve been involved in an accident where such technology played a role, understanding your legal options remains crucial. The rapid evolution of automotive technology may outpace regulatory frameworks, but your right to safety and compensation when others’ negligence causes harm remains constant.
Joe I. Zaid & Associates has extensive experience handling complex personal injury cases involving cutting-edge automotive technology. If you’ve been injured in an accident involving semi-autonomous vehicle systems, contact our office for a free consultation to discuss your case and protect your rights.
