The Truck Safety Coalition, the Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety, the Center for Auto Safety, and Road Safe America recently submitted a joint petition to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA). The petition requested that the NHTSA begin the rule-making process in order to establish a new safety regulation that would require the installation of an F-CAM system in all trucks and buses that weigh 10,000 pounds or more. F-CAM stands for forward collision avoidance and mitigation braking systems.

Safety advocates petition NHTSA for new regulations

The purpose of the F-CAM system is to help prevent collisions throughout Denver, Greenwood Village and Steamboat Springs Colorado that occur when a vehicle strikes an object in its path. A truck accident lawyer knows that such a system could help to prevent some collisions, but that ultimately technological innovations can be imperfect. Responsibility for preventing crashes always lies with drivers, regardless of what advanced technologies are installed in vehicles.

Even if the NHTSA does move forward with a new rule, the process will be slow and it will be a long time before F-CAM systems are standard. While it may be advisable for the NHTSA to at least start the process, drivers need to continue to be vigilant for obstacles in the path of their trucks, both now and in the future.

Safety Advocates Urge F-CAM Requirements to Reduce Collisions

F-CAM technologies work by using sensors and radars to detect when an obstacle is in the path of an oncoming truck. The systems can brake when the truck gets too close, but they first warn the driver of the impending crash before braking automatically. This gives the truck driver an opportunity to hit the brakes. The systems not only detect a fixed obstacle in the path of the truck, but can also identify when something is traveling more slowly in front of the truck and is likely to be hit if the driver does not change course.

The four safety advocacy groups believe that the NHTSA should mandate the use of these F-CAM systems because too few trucks currently have the systems installed, even though effective technology is already available. Only around three percent of all Class 8 standard tractor-trailers on the road today have some type of F-CAM technology. Since the NHTSA’s own estimates suggest that current generation F-CAMs could help avoid around 2,500 collisions every year, this is far too few trucks on the road with the systems installed.

Safety advocates also believe that if the NHTSA institutes a rule mandating the use of an F-Cam system, it will help spur advancements in the technology. Subsequent generation systems could stop around 6,300 crashes according to the NHTSA’s estimates. If every truck must have an F-CAM system, more research and testing will occur to move forward into a next-generation system that is even more effective.

Although safety advocates have good points and the NHTSA should consider acting, the government moves slowly and it could be months or years before such advances are implemented. In the meantime, drivers should continue to stay vigilant and work hard to avoid causing a crash because they aren’t paying attention or are going too quickly to stop before striking the vehicle in front of theirs.

Contact Bell & Pollock at (877) 744-5900 or visit https://www.bellpollockinjury.com to schedule a consultation with a personal injury lawyer in Denver, Greenwood Village and Steamboat Springs Colorado. 

Contact Us

Call a trusted attorney at Bell & Pollock, P.C. at (303) 795-5900 to get on the road to recovery now. You can also email our firm via the contact firm on this page.

As proud champions of the people, our lawyers are ready to answer your questions, explain the law and your rights, and help you take whatever steps necessary to recover the compensation you’re entitled to. With us in your corner, you can be confident that you have the legal support and representation necessary to successfully resolve your claim.

Don’t delay your recovery for a second longer – and don’t be misguided into thinking that you have to go through the process alone. Our attorneys are here, ready to help – and you won’t have to pay us anything until (or unless) there is a recovery in your case.

Free Legal E-Books

Click on any one of the e-books to access your free copy!

Case Results

WE KNOW HOW TO WIN

CASE: Client was injured by a drunk driver. As a result of the motor vehicle accident, client was rendered a quadriplegic and needed a life care plan.
Outcome: $9,600,000

CASE: Against Insurance company for failure to pay for property damage after a gas and fire explosion.
Outcome: $1,600,000

CASE: Medical malpractice for failure to diagnose a descending aorta aneurism, resulting in death.
Outcome: $1,300,000

CASE: Neck and back injuries from car accident. Client had ongoing symptoms and needed injections for attempted remediation of pain.
Settled for $485,000

CASE: Client was injured in a 2 vehicle collision. She suffered a traumatic brain injury, concussion and multiple injuries to the neck.
Outcome: $6,000,000

CASE: Client was in her car and was T-Boned by a commercial vehicle. Her cerebral spinal fluid leaked and she suffered a concussion and traumatic brain injury with neck and lumbar (low back) injuries. Her neck injury caused radiating pain, numbness and tingling in her arms.
Outcome: $3,400,000

CASE: Client was driving on a rural road when another car crossed the center line and caused a head-on collision in the snow and ice. Client did physical work for a living. Both knees were injured, along with a neck injury.
Outcome: $2,300,000

CASE: Client was driving on South Parker road when another vehicle rapidly changed lanes and rear-ended the client. That vehicle was cited for careless driving. The collision caused a concussion with traumatic brain Injury. Client missed time from work and had a positive correlation between brain scan and neuropsychological test results.
Outcome: $950,000

CASE: Client was rear ended by a dump truck, was then knocked forward and hit another vehicle. Client had a concussion with traumatic brain injury. Client underwent a brain scan which showed hypoperfusion, correlated with her concussion symptoms. Client suffered neck injuries and injuries to her low back.
Outcome: $650,000

CASE: Client was rear-ended. The mechanism of injury from the forces in the collision caused her neck injury and at the same time, damaged her organs inside her throat. Client had swallowing and choking issues.
Outcome: $1,250,000

CASE: Client was in a motor vehicle accident. Both injections in the neck rendered some temporary relief. The Injections were transforaminal epidural steroid injections. Surgery was recommended on the lumbar (low back). The low back was injured by the forces in the collisions.
Outcome: $933,000

CASE: The client was driving in her car and was rear-ended thereby causing injuries to her lower back and neck. Client also suffered a concussion. Client had to undergo facet injections multiple times, through multiple procedures. Client also had cognitive issues which required cognitive training and therapy.
Outcome: $400,000

CASE: Client was entering a highway from an on ramp and was rear-ended by a commercial van. Client tested positive for Thoracic Outlet Syndrome and failed conservative treatment. Client underwent thoracic outlet syndrome surgey, which involved removal of the first rib to attempt to relieve pressure in the thoracic outlet. Client also suffered a back injury.
Outcome: $750,000

CASE: Client was injured by a drunk driver, who crossed the center line of the road. Client underwent multiple surgeries and could not work. Client was late 40s and needed a modified life care plan.
Outcome: $750,000

CASE: Client was rear ended by a tow truck driver who was a diabetic. The diabetic at fault party was a non-compliant diabetic and claimed he had a syncope episode, and was “blacked out”. Client had a preexisting back condition known and the forces from the collision aggravated, or made worse, the preexisting back condition in addition to, causing neck injuries.
Outcome: $350,000

CASE: Client was a passenger in a car where the driver fell asleep on a country road in the early morning hours. The car rolled multiple times. Client had eye injuries, facial injuries and neck and knee injuries.
Outcome: $850,000

CASE: Client was on the job, driving her own car, when she was rear-ended. She suffered a concussion with traumatic brain injury and pursued Workers Compensation Claim.
Outcome: $150,000

CASE: Client slipped and fell on snow and ice in Central City. He suffered back injuries, that did not require injections.
Outcome: $125,000

CASE: Client slipped and fell on snow and ice on a sidewalk in front of a business. She had to have knee surgery and multiple injections in her back.
Outcome: $175,000

CASE: Client was visiting a friend who was renting a house. Client tripped on untreated, dangerous section of deck and injured his back.
Outcome: $150,000

CASE:Client was rear ended and needed fusion spinal surgery. Insurance proceeds were limited.
Outcome: $125,000

CASE:Client was rear-ended and had to have rotator cuff surgery. Insurance proceeds were limited.
Settled for $65,000

CASE:Client was at Denver International Aiport traveling through Denver, slipped and fell and broke her ankle.
Settled for $118,750

CASE:Client was exposed to mold in a multi-family dwelling that was caused by leaking water.
Settled for $125,000

CASE:Motorcycle accident, reconstructive surgery, post-traumatic stress disorder, neurological injuries
Settled for $1,275,000

Testimonials

CLIENTS APPRECIATE US

I could not have made a better decision than to call Bell & Pollock with my case. Dana Miller and her team were the best.
Brian B.
THEY WERE VERY PROFESSIONAL, KEPT ME INFORMED AND DID WHAT I WOULD CALL A SPECTACULAR JOB- THEY SEEM TO PREACH "LEGAL GAME PLAN" AND EVEN WROTE A BOOK ABOUT IT- IT BASICALLY MEANS THEY HAVE STRATEGIES FOR YOU AND YOUR CASE AND I MEAN EVERYTHING WAS SOUND AND ANALYZED.
Jason H.
I appreciate brad and his team the bell and Pollock attorneys are by far the best ones i have ever worked with.
Aliviya D.
Brad Pollock is educated, experienced, and is the world's greatest attorney. Marlena Elsloo helps him focus in on the most important issues.
Kathy T.
He is very professional and we would recommend Mr. Bell to anyone who is looking for an attorney.
Dianna C.
He was kind, compassionate and knowledgeable, but also tenacious when working with the insurance companies.
Michelle K.
I was blessed to be put in contact with Dana, who not only provided me free feedback and counsel when we spoke on the phone, but also took the time to call me back on multiple occasions to check on me.Dana Miller, you are a sweet, caring and amazing person and I appreciate all your help.
Grady C.