Being a bus or truck driver on roads is a serious responsibility, and Vehicle Code 21702 establishes strict limits to keep everyone safe. This statute limits the hours commercial drivers are allowed to work to avoid fatigue-related accidents that cause loss of lives.

Drivers of a large truck or a bus should know about these regulations to remain compliant and avoid heavy fines or even license suspension. The combination of required rest breaks and maximum driving hours in VC 21702 is a balance between productivity and safety, safeguarding drivers and the general population.

The violations may have severe consequences, and as a bus or truck accident victim, understanding these laws will help you build your negligence lawsuit against the responsible parties who violated the law. Let us take a closer look at the specifics of Vehicle Code 21702 and understand how it defines safe driving among commercial drivers in California.

Vehicle Code 21702 and How it Prevents Fatigued Truck Drivers from Harming the Public

Vehicle Code 21702 is a key public safety law that ensures that fatigued truck drivers do not cause fatal accidents. In the eyes of a victim, this law is not a list of rules that trucking companies should abide by. The drivers and their employers must provide the bare minimum of care to everyone on the road. This law is pivotal in cases where a truck driver has fallen asleep at the wheel or made a dangerous error because of exhaustion.

This statute protects you, your family, and all other road users from the devastating impacts of an accident involving a truck or bus caused by driver fatigue. It stipulates that a driver's safety is not only their concern but also a matter of public safety. When drivers exceed their physical limits to meet deadlines, they prioritize profits over people's lives. This law exists to prevent that.

Vehicle Code 21702 establishes strict and uncompromising limitations on the maximum duration a driver can spend on the road to avoid fatigue. It sets the following fundamental rules that form a standard of care for all truck drivers:

  • Maximum of 12 consecutive driving hours—A driver cannot drive more than 12 hours without the required rest.

  • Not more than 16 hours on duty — A driver cannot work more than 16 hours in any 24 hours.

This means that despite a driver taking breaks, they cannot spend more than 12 hours behind the wheel, and they cannot spend more than 16 hours at work. These represent the minimum safety standards drivers must follow.

When a truck driver or his/her company fails to adhere to these regulations, they violate the law and their responsibility to the people. When you or a loved one is hurt in a collision with a truck or bus, evidence that the truck or bus driver was acting in contravention of these regulations can be a key part of your claim. It will show that their negligent indifference to safety was the direct cause of your harm. This statute gives you a measurable, objective way to prove that the driver and their employer did not uphold the standard of care they were supposed to uphold to safeguard you.

The Hazards of Driver Fatigue

Fatigued truck or bus drivers are as impaired and dangerous as intoxicated drivers. Fatigue is a significant cause of truck and bus accidents, and it is also a key element in cases of negligence, since it directly links an action of a driver to the breach of duty of care.

Some leading safety agencies, like the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) and the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), have conducted considerable research indicating the significant effects of sleep deprivation.

Their results are overwhelming. A tired driver has a slow response time and cannot react to unexpected dangers like a car stopping in front or an obstacle in the road. Fatigue also impairs the ability of a driver to make proper decisions and process information. They can underestimate speed and distance, not notice road signs, or even have microsleeps, brief, involuntary episodes of unconsciousness lasting a few seconds that happen involuntarily. A truck at 65 mph can cover more than 100 yards in a microsleep.

Researchhas demonstrated that staying awake for 17 hours produces an impairment level equivalent to a 0.05% blood alcohol concentration level. Twenty-four hours without sleep results in impairment equivalent to a BAC of 0.10%, which is higher than the intoxication level in several states. This shows that a truck driver who has gone beyond the limit is, by all means, impaired like a drunk driver.

Fatigued drivers, unlike drunk drivers, cannot be tested by a breathalyzer on the spot, but the evidence is usually found on the road. Being aware of the telltale signs of a drowsy-driving accident can assist you and your legal team in making the connection between your accident and driver negligence.

One of the tell-tale signs of a drowsy-driving collision is a lack of skid marks leading to the point of collision. This shows that either the driver was asleep or had poor reaction time, which failed to make them brake or swerve to avoid the crash. The truck might have slowly veered out of its lane, crossed the center line, or drifted into the shoulder without apparent cause. This is a sign of losing control, as the driver failed to remain focused and attentive.

Fatigue also affects a driver's ability to maintain a safe following distance and respond to changes in traffic flow. This typically leads to a rear-end accident in which the truck driver rams the back of another car at full speed. Accidents involving a truck tipping over or going off the road without apparent cause are most likely caused by the driver falling asleep behind the wheel.

By linking these on-scene observations to scientific facts of driver fatigue, a victim can establish a compelling argument that the driver and their employer did not live up to their obligation to drive safely.

Proving Your Case with Negligence Per Se

Negligence per se is a legal concept that can be one of the most effective tools in your hands when you are the victim of a truck accident caused by driver fatigue. This essential legal principle can streamline your personal injury claim and help you tremendously. In simple terms, negligence per se translates to the fact that an individual is legally assumed to be negligent when they breach a safety statute and, in turn, cause the type of injury the law should prevent.

In a truck crash, this doctrine is instrumental in ignoring Vehicle Code 21702, the statute restricting how many hours a trucker can spend on the road. This law was created to prevent accidents involving tired drivers. Thus, when a driver breaks this rule and causes a crash due to fatigue, the law views that driver as negligent.

In a typical personal injury claim, your attorney must be able to prove four issues:

  • Duty

  • Breach

  • Causation

  • Damages

The most challenging part can be proving the breach of duty. It generally involves making the case that the defendant acted unreasonably in light of how a reasonable person would have worked in the same circumstances. This can lead to a subjective debate. Negligence per se eliminates subjective discussion. Instead of having to argue what a reasonable truck or bus driver would have done, your attorney needs only to demonstrate two things:

  • The driver broke the law—Your legal team will find evidence, in the form of the driver's logbooks, electronic logging device (ELD) data, or even company dispatch records, to establish that the driver was driving the vehicle in violation of the hours of service regulations in the Vehicle Code, section 21702.

  • The breach resulted in the injury—You have to prove that the driver's fatigue, the issue the law was meant to prevent, caused the crash, which resulted in your injuries. This is usually done by linking the indications of a fatigue-related crash (for example, no skid marks) with the illegal acts of the driver.

Under the negligence per se doctrine, your attorney can show that the truck driver's actions were legally negligent. This significantly simplifies establishing the breach of duty aspect of your claim, taking the matter from a debate about “reasonableness” to a clear, factual violation. It is an effective approach that makes your case straightforward, puts the trucking company on the hook, and allows you to pursue the fair compensation you require without the usual legal roadblocks.

The Violation of an HOS

Regarding a truck accident, the battle over justice is typically a race against time to obtain vital evidence. The legal and financial implications of hours of service (HOS) violations are not lost on trucking companies, and they may not have retained data that would reveal their drivers' negligence. That is why the victims must take action as soon as possible and hire an attorney who knows exactly what to look for and how to demand it.

Important Types of Evidence of the Violation

A skilled lawyer will work to build an in-depth chronology of the events that the driver took before the crash. They achieve this by requesting several important pieces of evidence that can be used to prove an HOS violation and that the driver was probably fatigued. The evidence includes:

  • Electronic Logging Devices (ELDs)—These are the most helpful pieces of evidence. ELDs are the black boxes of the trucking and bus industry, automatically tracking a driver's hours of service, driving time, on-duty time, and rest. This information is the most objective evidence of whether a motorist was in or out of compliance with VC 21702.

  • Engine Control Module (ECM) and Event Data Recorder (EDR)—The truck's on-board computer and data recorder record essential information about the vehicle's functioning, including speed, braking, and steering during the minutes before the crash. This data can support a theory of driver fatigue, for example, by indicating the truck was traveling at a steady speed without either braking or swerving immediately before the collision.

  • Paper logbooks—Though less prevalent than the ELDs, some older trucks or drivers might still use paper logbooks. They are not always reliable since they may be easily manipulated, but an attorney can compare them with other records to identify inconsistencies.

  • Dispatch and payroll records—These reports indicate the driver's schedule and the routes on which they were posted. A comparison of these records and ELD data can show whether the company forced the driver to meet an unrealistic deadline, which also led to the violation.

  • Fuel and toll receipts, GPS data, and CCTV footage — This data can be used to independently confirm where the truck was and whether it was moving, which is another source of evidence. For example, a lawyer can cross-reference between fuel receipts to indicate that the driver was on the road when he/she had stated in his/her logbook that he/she was resting.

Why a Spoliation Letter is Critical After a Truck Accident

The greatest challenge in these cases is the risk of spoliation of evidence, where vital evidence is destroyed, altered, or not preserved. Trucking companies do not have to maintain all data permanently. Some records, particularly ELD and GPS data, may be deleted without timely legal action after a brief interval.

That is why the initial and most important act that a lawyer carries out is sending a spoliation letter (or a preservation letter) to the trucking company. This legal request instructs the company to preserve all records about the crash, including but not limited to the driver logs, the black box data on the truck, maintenance records, and all internal communications regarding the collision.

Sending this letter makes it legally binding on the company to preserve the evidence. Failure to do this can be considered a deliberate act of concealing the truth. This may result in sanctions against the company, like a jury instruction that the jury can infer that the destroyed evidence would have been adverse to their case. This tool guarantees the victim the information they require to establish their case and make the negligent parties accountable.

Holding the Trucking Company Responsible

Although the truck driver might be the person who was driving at the time of the accident, the action of a victim is usually aimed at holding the trucking company financially responsible. This is because the company is the ultimate party accountable for its driver's actions and has insurance policies and assets that could be used to fully and fairly compensate a victim of catastrophic injury. The two main legal theories to impose liability on a trucking company due to an accident are vicarious liability and direct company negligence.

Vicarious Liability (Respondeat Superior)

The legal doctrine of vicarious liability (also referred to as respondeat superior, Latin for “let the master answer”) holds an employer legally vicariously liable (responsible) to third parties injured by the negligent acts of its employees, so long as the acts occurred within the scope of employment.

A truck or bus driver working on the job, driving a company truck or bus, acts on behalf of their employer. If the fatigued driver is involved in an accident, their negligence automatically reflects on the trucking company. You do not need to show that the company was negligent. The company is legally responsible for paying damages by showing that the driver was negligent.

Direct Corporate Negligence

Other than vicarious liability, a trucking company may be directly liable in the event of its own negligence. This is when the company's unsafe policy or practices were another contributing cause of the crash. Direct corporate negligence includes some of the following:

  • Coercing drivers—Most companies have unrealistic delivery schedules, reward overtime, and pressure drivers to break hours of service (HOS) regulations to maximize profits. This leads to a safety disrespect culture.

  • Negligent hiring and retention—A trucking company must ensure it vets its drivers. This will include the carrying out of background checks, their driving history, and their safety records. When a company hires an employee driver with a history of safety violations, DUIs, or other dangerous driving, and that employee later causes an accident, the company can be directly liable for failing to hire a safe employee.

  • Ineffective training and supervision—Companies must conduct thorough training and subsequent supervision of their drivers to guarantee they drive safely. An accident due to a lack of proper training in managing fatigue, HOS compliance, or safe driving can be attributed to the company failing to train its employees in the above areas.

By filing vicarious liability and direct negligence claims, a victim can build a detailed case against the company, revealing all the aspects of its behavior or the lack of it that may have caused the crash and your injuries.

Find a Truck Accident Attorney Near Me

Vehicle Code 21702 is an important legal tool that can help avoid the devastating outcomes of fatigue among commercial drivers. This law provides a clear standard of care by holding drivers and their employers liable for ensuring a safe environment on our roads. The restrictive hours of driving and on-duty time in the law offer a direct way to prove negligence in a personal injury case in California.

For victims of accidents caused by fatigued bus or truck drivers, this regulation is a cornerstone of your legal recourse. You must take decisive action to obtain the evidence to create a strong case. We encourage you to contact the legal experts at Truck Accident Injury Attorney Law Firm so that the responsible party is held accountable to the fullest extent. Call us at 888-511-3139 for a case assessment.