Austin and central Texas · Travis · Williamson · Hays · Bastrop
Hit by a Waymo or a self-driving car in Austin
Austin is one of the places where driverless vehicles carry passengers on public streets. Texas rewrote the law governing them in 2025, and that law decides who is responsible, what the vehicle had to be equipped with, and who controls the recording that shows what happened. Se habla español.
Call now and speak with a lawyer today.
Rather have us call you? Fill out the formFill out the form and we will reach you today.
We handle crash claims across Austin, Round Rock, Georgetown, San Marcos, Pflugerville, Cedar Park, Leander, Kyle, Buda, Hutto, Taylor, Manor, Bastrop, Lakeway, Bee Cave and Dripping Springs.
Free consultation · No fee unless we win · Immigration status does not stop a claim
The short answer
When an automated driving system is engaged, Texas law treats the system itself as the operator of the vehicle. There is no human driver to blame, and the claim runs against the company that owns and operates the vehicle, the entity holding the state authorization to run it without a driver, and — where the failure was in the machine — the manufacturer of the vehicle or of the driving system.
The statute says the system is the operator
When an automated driving system installed on a motor vehicle is engaged, the automated driving system is the operator of the vehicle, including for the purpose of assessing compliance with traffic and motor vehicle laws. That sentence is the foundation of every driverless crash claim in this state.
People ask this as "who is at fault if a self-driving car hits you" or "can you sue a robotaxi".
The citation goes to the owner or the authorization holder
When the system is engaged, any citation for a traffic or motor vehicle violation is issued to the owner of the vehicle, or to the holder of the state authorization if it is operating under one. Responsibility is assigned to a company by statute.
People ask this as "who gets the ticket when a driverless car runs a light".
The vehicle had to be insured to be on the road at all
A vehicle may not operate with the driving system engaged unless it is covered by motor vehicle liability coverage or self-insurance, registered and titled in Texas, and compliant with federal motor vehicle safety standards.
People ask this as "does a Waymo have insurance".
Commercial driverless operation requires state authorization
To carry passengers or property for a commercial enterprise without a human driver, a company must hold an authorization issued by the Texas Department of Motor Vehicles, and must have filed a first-responder interaction plan with the Department of Public Safety. Operating without that authorization is an offense under the statute.
People ask this as "are robotaxis even legal in Texas".
This is new law. Subchapter J was rewritten by Senate Bill 2807 in the 2025 legislative session and took effect on September 1, 2025. A page on this subject written before that date describes a different legal regime.
The software is the driver, and what that changes
In an ordinary crash the case is built around a person: what they saw, when they braked, whether they were on the phone. In a driverless crash there is no such person, and the questions move to the machine and to the company running it.
Texas also makes clear that no human driver and no driver licence is required for an automated motor vehicle to operate when the driving system is engaged. So the absence of anyone in the driver seat is lawful, and the absence of a human defendant does not leave you without one.
What replaces the human is a set of factual questions about the system: what it perceived, what it decided, whether it complied with traffic law, whether it reached a safe stopped state when something failed, and whether the company that deployed it did so reasonably. Those questions are answered from engineering records, sensor logs and internal safety documentation rather than from testimony about what a driver remembers.
What Texas law requires of a driverless vehicle
Section 545.455 sets the conditions a vehicle must satisfy before it may operate on a Texas street with the driving system engaged. Each one is a fact that can be tested after a crash, and a failure on any of them is a fact worth knowing.
| Requirement | What it means after a crash |
|---|---|
| Capable of complying with Texas traffic and motor vehicle laws | Ordinary traffic law applies to the vehicle. Running a red light, failing to yield, or unsafe speed are violations by the system. |
| Equipped with a manufacturer-installed recording device | The vehicle must carry a device recording speed, direction, location, steering, braking and belt status around a collision. That record exists. |
| Compliant with applicable federal safety standards | Federal motor vehicle safety standards apply to the vehicle as built. |
| Capable of achieving a minimal risk condition on failure | If the driving system fails, the vehicle must be able to bring itself to a safe state. Whether it did is a central question in a failure case. |
| Registered and titled in Texas | Identifies the owner, which identifies the defendant. |
| Covered by liability insurance or self-insurance | There is coverage behind the vehicle by law. |
| For driverless commercial service: state authorization plus a first-responder plan | A TxDMV authorization and a plan filed with DPS covering how emergency responders interact with the vehicle, including how to reach a fleet support specialist while it is operating. |
Texas Transportation Code §§ 545.455 and 545.456, as amended effective September 1, 2025. Read from the Texas Legislative Council document on 2026-08-16.
Two further provisions matter to an injured person. Section 545.457 confirms that the ordinary crash duties in Chapter 550 apply after a collision involving an automated motor vehicle — stopping, exchanging information, reporting — with the vehicle, a person acting on its behalf, or any human occupant responsible for compliance. And Section 545.458 provides that an automated motor vehicle that is a commercial motor vehicle must still operate under the commercial vehicle laws, except where a provision by its nature applies only to a human driver.
There is also a preemption rule worth understanding, because it explains why the answer does not change between Austin and any other Texas city: a political subdivision may not impose a franchise or other regulation on the operation of automated vehicles or driving systems, and a state agency may not adopt a regulation that discriminates against them.
Who you actually make a claim against
A driverless crash usually presents more than one path to recovery, and they are pursued together rather than chosen between.
The company that owns and operates the vehicle
Registration and title identify the owner, and the statute directs traffic citations to the owner or the authorization holder when the system is engaged. This is the primary defendant in most cases, and it is the entity whose liability coverage or self-insurance stands behind the vehicle.
The authorization holder
For a commercial driverless service, the company holding the TxDMV authorization has told the state, in writing, that its vehicles meet the statutory requirements. That representation is a document, and it is a starting point.
The manufacturer of the vehicle or of the driving system
Where the failure was in perception, decision-making, or a physical component, an ordinary Texas product liability claim is available: design defect, manufacturing defect, or failure to warn. A software failure that causes a collision is a product question as much as a negligence question.
A maintenance or fleet-operations contractor
Sensor calibration, cleaning, tire condition and depot inspection are physical maintenance tasks. Where a contractor performs them, a negligence claim can run against that contractor.
Another human driver
Many crashes involving a driverless vehicle also involve a conventional one. Texas apportions responsibility by percentage among everyone responsible, so a claim can run against the automated vehicle's owner and a human driver at the same time.
Your own uninsured or underinsured motorist coverage
Still available and still worth checking, exactly as in any other crash.
The company owns the vehicle, the software, and the recording
This is the hardest practical problem in a driverless crash, and it is the one worth acting on first.
Texas requires an automated vehicle to carry a manufacturer-installed recording device. Texas also restricts who may take the data off it. Information recorded or transmitted by such a device generally may not be retrieved by anyone other than the vehicle owner, except on a court order, with the owner's consent, for approved safety research that does not identify the owner or driver, or to determine the need for emergency medical response.
Put those two rules together and the position is plain. The record of exactly what the vehicle saw and did exists, by law. It belongs to the company you are making a claim against. Getting it usually means a court order, and a court order means a lawsuit, and a lawsuit takes time that a retention schedule does not wait for.
The response is a written preservation demand, immediately, naming the categories: the recording device data, the sensor and perception logs, the disengagement and fault records, the remote-assistance session records, the maintenance and calibration history for that vehicle, and any communications with a fleet support specialist around the time of the collision.
The first-responder plan required by § 545.455(c)(2) tells you something useful: the statute contemplates a fleet support specialist reachable while the vehicle is operating. If someone was contacted about your crash while it was happening, that contact generated a record.
Tesla Autopilot and driver-assist systems are a different case
Autopilot, Full Self-Driving in its supervised form, and the driver-assist packages sold by other manufacturers are not the same thing as the automated driving systems the Texas statute governs. The statutory definition covers systems capable of performing the entire dynamic driving task on a sustained basis at Level 3, 4 or 5. A supervised driver-assist system operating below that threshold leaves the human in the driver seat as the driver.
The practical consequence is that a crash involving a driver-assist system is usually an ordinary negligence case against the person behind the wheel, with a possible product claim alongside it. The driver remains responsible for the vehicle, and "the car was driving itself" is not a defence when the system in use required supervision.
What the technology adds is evidence. Vehicles with these systems record a great deal about the seconds before impact — whether the system was engaged, whether it warned, whether hands were detected on the wheel, what the cameras saw. That data sits under the same access restriction as any other recording device, which is to say it belongs to the vehicle owner unless a court orders otherwise.
Working out which regime applies is therefore the first question in any crash where automation is mentioned: was a supervised assistance system in use with a human responsible for the driving task, or was an automated driving system engaged and performing it. The answer changes the defendants, the law, and the proof.
The automation levels, as Texas defines them
Texas does not invent its own scale. The statute adopts SAE International Standard J3016 (April 2021) and defines Level 3, Level 4 and Level 5 by reference to it.
| Term in the statute | What it covers |
|---|---|
| Automated driving system | Hardware and software that, when installed and engaged, can operate the vehicle at Level 3, 4 or 5 by performing the entire dynamic driving task on a sustained basis. |
| Automated motor vehicle | A vehicle with an automated driving system installed that is capable of Level 4 or Level 5 operation. This is the category the authorization and equipment rules attach to. |
| Dynamic driving task | The real-time operational and tactical functions required to operate a vehicle — steering, braking, acceleration, monitoring, and responding to what is on the road. |
| Minimal risk condition | The safe state a vehicle must be able to reach on its own if the driving system fails and can no longer perform the driving task. |
| Authorization holder | A person or company granted authorization by the Texas Department of Motor Vehicles under § 545.456 to operate automated motor vehicles. |
The distinction that matters to an injured person sits between Level 2 and Level 3. At and below Level 2, a person is driving and is responsible for driving. At Level 3 and above the system performs the driving task, and Texas assigns operator status to the system.
What to do after a crash with a driverless vehicle
Call the police and make sure a report is written
Chapter 550 duties apply to a collision involving an automated motor vehicle the same way they apply to any other. A written crash report identifies the vehicle, the owner and the insurance.
Photograph the vehicle identifiers
The licence plate, any fleet or unit number on the body, the sensor housings, and the company markings. Photograph the position of both vehicles before anything is moved, if it is safe to do so.
Photograph the road environment
Lane markings, the signal, the sun angle, construction cones, temporary signage, anything unusual about the roadway. Those are precisely the conditions an automated system may have handled poorly, and they change by the next morning.
Note whether anyone was in the vehicle
A passenger, a safety operator, or nobody at all. It is a basic fact about the case and it is easy to forget within a week.
Look for other cameras
Nearby vehicles, businesses, and residential doorbell cameras. Independent footage is not subject to the statutory access restriction that applies to the vehicle's own recording device.
Get medical care the same day, and call a lawyer early
The medical gap argument is identical in these cases. The evidence-preservation problem is not, and it is the reason to make the call quickly.
Austin streets, and why these crashes happen here
Driverless passenger services operate on Austin streets, which means the collisions they are involved in happen in Travis County and are litigated here. The environments where automated systems are tested hardest are the ones Austin has in quantity: dense downtown grids with cyclists and scooters, constant construction detours and shifting lane closures, unprotected left turns onto arterials, and heavy pedestrian volume near campus and the entertainment districts.
For scale on the underlying risk: the City of Austin's own crash record shows 11,973 reported crashes inside the city limits in 2025, 7,981 people hurt, and 99 people killed. Work-zone crashes accounted for 1,527 of them, 12.8 percent of the year's total — a useful figure here, because a work zone is exactly the kind of unmapped, changing environment that stresses an automated driving system.
We publish no figure about how many automated vehicles operate in Austin, how far they travel, or how often they are involved in collisions. No source we can cite publishes those numbers in a form specific to this city, and we would rather say that than estimate.
Deadlines
The ordinary Texas rule applies: suit for personal injury must generally be brought within two years of the day the cause of action accrues.
The deadline that actually governs the strength of one of these cases is earlier and unwritten. The vehicle data is held by the company, protected by a statutory access restriction, and kept on a retention schedule set by that company. A preservation demand in the first days is worth more here than in almost any other kind of crash case.
Common questions
What people ask after a crash involving a self-driving vehicle in Austin.
A Waymo hit my car in Austin. Who is at fault?
When the automated driving system is engaged, Texas law treats the system as the operator of the vehicle, and any traffic citation goes to the owner or to the holder of the state authorization. The claim runs against the company that owns and operates the vehicle, and where the failure was in the machine, against the manufacturer as well.
Can you sue a self-driving car company?
Yes. The vehicle must be registered, titled and covered by liability insurance or self-insurance to operate at all, and a company running a driverless commercial service must hold a TxDMV authorization. Those requirements identify the entity to bring a claim against.
Are driverless cars legal in Texas?
Yes, under Subchapter J of Chapter 545 of the Transportation Code. A vehicle may operate with the driving system engaged whether or not a human is on board, provided it satisfies the equipment, insurance and registration requirements. Carrying passengers or property commercially without a human driver additionally requires authorization from the Texas Department of Motor Vehicles.
There was nobody in the driver seat. Does that mean nobody is responsible?
No. Texas addressed exactly that situation by making the driving system the operator and directing citations to the owner or authorization holder. The absence of a human driver is lawful and it does not remove the defendant.
How do I get the data from the vehicle?
Usually by court order. Texas requires these vehicles to carry a recording device, and it restricts retrieval of the data to the vehicle owner, someone with the owner's consent, someone with a court order, and a few narrow exceptions. Since the owner is the company you are claiming against, the practical route is a preservation demand followed by formal discovery.
What if the robotaxi was not at fault and another driver caused it?
Then the claim runs against that driver, and the automated vehicle's own recording may be the best evidence of what happened. Texas apportions responsibility by percentage, so more than one party can be responsible in the same crash.
I was a passenger in a driverless vehicle when it crashed. What are my rights?
A passenger injured in any vehicle may bring a claim against whoever is responsible for the crash, which may be the operating company, another driver, or both. The vehicle's own trip and sensor record is directly relevant, and it is held by the operator.
Is a Tesla on Autopilot the same as a Waymo?
No, and the difference decides the case. Supervised driver-assist systems leave the human in the driver seat responsible for driving. Texas assigns operator status to the system only where it performs the entire driving task at Level 3, 4 or 5 as defined by SAE International Standard J3016 (April 2021).
The other driver said their car was driving itself. Does that excuse them?
Not where the system in use required supervision. A driver using a supervised assistance package remains responsible for the vehicle, and the vehicle's own data usually shows whether the system was engaged and what it warned about.
Does Austin regulate these vehicles differently from other Texas cities?
No. A political subdivision may not impose a franchise or other regulation on the operation of automated vehicles or driving systems, so the framework is statewide.
What should I do at the scene?
Call the police so a report is written, photograph the vehicle identifiers and the road environment before anything is moved, note whether anyone was aboard, look for independent cameras nearby, and get medical care the same day.
How quickly do I need to call a lawyer?
Quickly. The two-year filing deadline is the outer limit, but the vehicle data is held by the company and kept on its own retention schedule, so the preservation demand is the step that cannot wait.
What does it cost to hire a lawyer for this?
Nothing up front. The consultation is free and we work on a contingency fee, which means no fee unless we win your case. The percentage is stated in writing before you sign.
Does my immigration status matter?
No. A person injured by someone else's negligence in Texas may bring a claim regardless of immigration status.
Sources
Every statement of law above was read from the official Texas statute text on 2026-08-16. Subchapter J was rewritten by Senate Bill 2807, 89th Legislature, Regular Session, Chapter 1034, effective September 1, 2025.
- Texas Transportation Code Chapter 545, Subchapter J — operation of automated motor vehicles
§ 545.451 definitions and automation levels; § 545.452 preemption; § 545.454 the system as operator; § 545.455 operating requirements and the offense; § 545.456 TxDMV authorization; § 545.457 crash duties; § 545.458 commercial vehicle laws; § 545.459 enforcement.
- Texas Transportation Code § 547.615 — recording devices and access to their data
- Texas Transportation Code Chapter 550 — crash reporting duties
- Texas Transportation Code Chapter 644 — commercial motor vehicle safety standards
- Texas Transportation Code § 601.072 — minimum liability coverage amounts
- Texas Insurance Code § 1952.101 — uninsured and underinsured motorist coverage
- Texas Insurance Code Chapter 1954 — transportation network company insurance
- Texas Civil Practice & Remedies Code Chapter 33 — proportionate responsibility
- Texas Civil Practice & Remedies Code § 16.003 — two-year limitations period
- City of Austin — Austin Crash Report Data, crash-level records
Calendar year 2025 figures, pulled 2026-08-10, covering crashes inside the Austin full-purpose city limits.
Talk to a lawyer today
If a driverless vehicle was involved in your crash, the record of what it did belongs to the company that owns it. Call and we will tell you what has to be demanded and how fast. The consultation is free, it commits you to nothing, and you can have it in English or Spanish.
Call (512) 500-2810Medina & Medina Personal Injury Attorneys
6701 Burnet Rd #132, Austin, TX 78757
¿Prefiere leer esto en español? Abogado de accidentes de Waymo en Austin.
This page explains Texas law on automated motor vehicles as it stood on 2026-08-16. It is general information, it is not legal advice about your situation, and it does not create an attorney-client relationship. Nothing here asserts the operating practices, fleet size or safety record of any company. Past results do not guarantee future results. Every case is different.
Free Case Evaluation
Get a free review of your case in minutes.
Free Case Evaluation
Get a free review of your case in minutes.