Newer vehicles collect an incredible amount of data; much more than most drivers realize. Modern telematics systems record metrics like speed, braking behavior, steering input, GPS location, and even impact information. This data is often invaluable in car accident litigation.
However, it also brings privacy concerns to light, along with a new set of challenges relating to access. It also raises questions about admissibility. If you work with motor-vehicle cases, it helps to understand the biggest risks so you can avoid them and achieve the best outcomes for your clients.
Privacy Rules Limit Data Access
Generally speaking, telematics data belongs to the vehicle owner, but it’s not always so straightforward. It may also sit on servers controlled by manufacturers or even third-party platforms. To access it, you’ll need written permission. Some states classify telematics as personal data that can’t be released without the owner’s explicit consent.
This complicates things and creates delays, since insurers may not release anything until they confirm ownership rights. Sometimes, they only share partial logs. When you begin a case, it helps to secure authorization forms early and outline the data you need. This helps prevent discovery bottlenecks later.
Chain of Custody Is Easy to Break
Telematics data can be fragile. For example, some systems overwrite old data automatically, while others require specific tools to extract logs properly. As this Phoenix car accident lawyer notes, experience matters. Get it wrong, and the files may become corrupt and unusable. If the wrong person attempts extraction, it can change the metadata and open the door for a challenge from opposing counsel. This is why it’s critical to maintain a documented chain of custody. Clear records help you defend the integrity of the logs.
Device and Software Biases Affect Interpretation
Not all telematics systems work the same way. Some have certain thresholds before they begin recording. Others only sample speed or braking data at certain intervals. Missing data shouldn’t always be interpreted as the absence of a collision or event, but without context, it’s easy to draw the wrong conclusions. This is where expert support comes in. An engineer or data specialist can give you a clearer understanding of what the data actually means.
Courts Differ on Admissibility Standards
One of the most prominent challenges with telematics evidence is inconsistency in how it’s treated. One judge might view it as technical data that warrants expert interpretation. Another might be willing to admit raw logs without much foundation. Courts might also apply standards used for digital evidence. Consider filing early motions on admissibility to signal to opposition counsel you’re prepared to defend your interpretation of the records.
Endnote
You can use telematics evidence to strengthen a car accident case, but only if you handle it the right way. Various factors affect the usefulness of the data, including privacy rules, custody issues, and system variations. You must also consider questions of admissibility. The key point to remember is to treat telematics logs as sensitive digital evidence, which will put you in the best position to use them effectively in litigation.
