On July 23, a crash took place between a Bliq remotely operated taxi and another vehicle just off the Kristiine intersection in Tallinn's Kristiine district. No one was injured in the accident.

A 24-year-old man was sitting in the car, but he was not driving the vehicle. The Hyundai was being driven approximately 15 kilometers away in Jüri, in Rae municipality, Delfi reported.

Remotely operated vehicles have been providing taxi services in Tallinn for almost a year, and there are fewer than 10 currently operating in the capital. Fully autonomous, or driverless, vehicles are still not permitted in Estonia. Currently, the Transport Board requires Bliq to have a safety driver in the car at all times, Eesti Ekspress reported.

Under the law, the operator holds the same responsibility as a driver sitting behind the wheel. This also applies to last week's first traffic accident.

Janno Tobi, head of the patrol unit group at the West Harju Police Department, said the remotely operated vehicle approached an intersection, but the traffic light turned red. The vehicle stopped on the pedestrian crossing. "The remote operator, or driver, then decided to continue driving anyway and accelerated," Tobi explained.

Vehicles in the other lanes saw this and gave way to the remotely operated vehicle. However, a vehicle travelling in the bus lane could not see the remotely operated vehicle approaching because it was obscured by the other vehicles, resulting in a collision at the intersection.

Claude Kaasik, head of PZU's motor insurance group, explained that responsibility for remotely operated vehicles lies with the operator who is actually driving the vehicle. "Even if they are in another building operating the car with a joystick, they are effectively the operator and are responsible if the vehicle causes an accident," Kaasik said.

In a written response, Bliq said the vehicle's technology and technical systems functioned correctly and that the accident was caused by human error.

According to both the Transport Administration and a lawyer, the Traffic Act is sufficiently flexible to allow the use of remotely operated vehicles, and no separate legislative amendments were made to enable their introduction. So-called grey areas may arise in the event of technical failures.

Sworn advocate Albert Linntam said that if there are more driverless cars, questions may arise as to which technical requirements should apply in any given situation.

"What happens if, for example, a traffic accident occurs because of some kind of malfunction that could not have been foreseen?" he added. Linntam said that in the end, everything comes down to what the particular driver should have done differently.

From a legal standpoint, the use of remotely operated vehicles is regulated, but society may not yet be ready to place its full trust in the technology.

Tobi said that no drivers are currently taught how to take self-driving vehicles into account in traffic. "If we take the white delivery robots driving around, many drivers and pedestrians still don't know how to take them into account because these things simply aren't discussed," he said.

--

Follow ERR News on Facebook and Twitter and never miss an update!