The driver claims that he could not shut off the car after a stall. If true and not merely operator error this would be unsettling. It is not stated explicitly whether he tried, or was unable, to put the car into Neutral for the tow. In any case he was an idiot for not setting the parking brake.

IF the car truly was still "powered up" and in Drive, then when the tow truck unhooked, the car would indeed move forward.

The car stalling is a known issue, this "lurching" forward is dubious because, if the car was "shut off" why would it suddenly move? Gremlins?

When people are stressed, they lose their powers of calm thinking. It is VERY possible that, after trying to get the Da*m car going, the driver simply left it in D. It is also possible the tow truck was not on perfectly level ground and gravity did it (this car rolls a lot easier than the average car.

Just some thoughts.

Sounds to me like he puts the fob in the slot (no SmartEntry) and left it there when he walked away (all the warning lights on).

The stall problem is known and letters have gone out. I find it hard to believe that the driver wasn't aware of the problem. Its been all over the news out here. But then he walked away from a fully powered up car. So.... I wonder also if this is a lease car or a company car and the letter is langishing on someone's desk for lack of attention.

I know alot of people don't like the parking break. This would have been a good time to put it on. Just untill it was all hitched up. Also I can't imagine if you push the park button that it would just go into drive by it's self. I'm also guessing that the driver left the car in drive. User error!

In the words of The Simpsons' "Comic Book Guy" - "Longest - post - ever."


I guess I question the gravity of the report. A red flag appears in my mind when I read headlines by a "non-partisan, independent information provider" that contain highly-charged phrases like "runs amok." I don't doubt the incident occurred, but perhaps it wasn't quite the grandiose tragedy the article portrays. The article was not written with the goal of objectivity, but rather it read with a certain dramatic flair.

How sudden was it? Can a vehicle not "suddenly" stall, like stall over a period of twenty minutes or so? And then it unaccountably (meaning the car didn't notify anyone it was going to do it) took off? What was its speed -- and altitude? How fast could that car have been going when it "smashed" into the tow truck? I mean, I know the Prius has a lot of pickup, but come on!

Not if, but when. Not just dangerous (like paper-cut dangerous), but extremely dangerous (like Russian roulette dangerous).

Gasp! Whatever could it be? I must continue reading!

I'm assuming a "serious accident" can include death and the like, so it begs the question: what exactly is worse than a serious accident? That's like the comical redneck quote, "When that durn tornado came past the trailer, I thought we'd be killed, or worse!"

Wait a minute. I thought the car took off and smashed into the tow truck. What gives?

...And you should, too! That's the point of the article, right?

I know, maybe I'm overly-critical when it comes to writeups like this, perhaps because I'm disgruntled that I was told to write articles that same way when I was in journalism school. In my opinion, using artistic license is great when writing a storybook, but not when you are supposed to be presenting the facts, ma'am.

Then there is the reputation and philosophy of the for-profit yet fair-and-balanced organization ConsumerAffairs.com. Their FAQ page is quite an eye-opener.

So... they don't trust anyone but themselves. Got it. A little too paranoid and anti-social, if you ask me. They're non-partisan because they distrust everybody.

I feel so reassured...

In other words, "We're making money through our website ads." Sounds like they have a reason to write up such sensationalist articles - to drive more traffic to their website. The more outrageous, the better.

But really, all it boils down to is, as others have pointed out, use the parking brake!

Driver should have known enough to put on the parking brake.
And if it was really stuck in drive and would not turn off, it would have been wise to disconnect the 12 volts at least, which the tow operator should be able to do.

Just as a point, there are no "slow lanes" on the Dumbarton Bridge. If you're under 65 then you get run over and all lanes move at about the same speed. Especially during rush hour when it is usually 75.

The guy said it started moving once released from the tow truck. If standard policy is to set the brake before starting to release the car, then the operator is at fault.

However, I think this is more of a "Why was the car not deactivated" problem than a parking brake problem. The tow-truck operator should not have towed a vehicle that was still On and in gear, even if stalled. Wind rushing past sensors probably convinced the car it could breathe again, and it un-stalled. Why this kicked in only after being removed from the truck would be nice to know. You'd think the car would have been hard to unchain, if it was pushing forward...

The guy said he left everything on. That was real stupid. Some people don't deserve a Prius. I thought Prius owners were smart.

stuff happens.
oh well.

Some are only smrt. B)

Ah! This is the spelling Dave Letterman uses when saying things like, "Them bats is smrt; they got radar [or is that "radr"?]".

Very scary. I had a similar incident quite awhile ago, but the car was driveable. I took my Prius in for the recall work, and I expect that will have corrected the problem.

People sometimes ask me (I'm a flight instructor) why small airplanes look the same now as they did 40 years ago; notably the Cessna 172. Drawing an analogy from the Prius incident, one can understand why aircraft design is soooooooo conservative.

Fabulous as the Prius is, can you imagine if our driver had been FLYING over the Dumbarton Bridge at 3,000 feet in his "hybrid aircraft"...?

Yeah... It become a very heavy glider, still capable of being steered because there is a physical connection between the operator and the control device (i.e. flaps, elevators, ...) thus it could still be landed.

I know many flight instructors that have hidden fuel cut off switches in the cabin to test a learning pilots ability to over come a sudden problem.

Brandon,

Thanks for the post. "Journalism" has sunk to new lows with the growth in popularity of the internet, and the old saw about not believing everything you read should now be amended to "Don't believe most of what you read." This so-called "consumer affairs" site sounds really sleazy.

How do we know this "event" actually happened. I can find no reference in the cited article to any other publication (reputable or otherwise). The driver is only identified by a first name and last initial. Even if this alleged person were really as stupid as the report suggests, it's rather hard to believe that a tow truck driver would tow a car that was obviously still on: warning lights illuminated, "transmission" in "D", etc. Are the "journalists" at consumeraffairs.com really so credulous as to simply repeat whatever reports they receive from web site visitors, or do they make up these stories themselves? I am inclined to file this story alongside alien abduction stories.

maybe the tow truck driver managed to get it back into d?

good point, danp... they'd be dragging the car on sleds or have it in n...

Something interesting happened yesterday. May or may not shed light. Pulled into a parking lot to park. Was in EV mode. Stopped, put it in park. Wife gotr out just to drop a book off. Level spot. ICE came on to warmup/charge car and the car drifted forward a few inches until it engaged the parking pawl. I felt the bump.

Hmm, this car glides so well that just the torque of the ICE made it move.......