Google had been asked to update its maps in the nine years before the father of two's death.

Philip Paxson’s family are suing the company over his death, alleging that Google negligently failed to show the bridge had fallen nine years earlier.

Mr Paxson died in September 2022 after attempting to drive over the damaged bridge in Hickory, North Carolina.

A spokesperson for Google said the company was reviewing the allegations.

The case was filed in civil court in Wake County on Tuesday.

Mr Paxson, a father of two, was driving home from his daughter’s ninth birthday party at a friend’s house and was in an unfamiliar neighbourhood at the time of his death, according to the family’s lawsuit.

His wife had driven his two daughters home earlier, and he stayed behind to help clean up.

“Unfamiliar with local roads, he relied on Google Maps, expecting it would safely direct him home to his wife and daughters,” lawyers for the family said in a statement announcing the lawsuit.

“Tragically, as he drove cautiously in the darkness and rain, he unsuspectingly followed Google’s outdated directions to what his family later learned for nearly a decade was called the ‘Bridge to Nowhere,’ crashing into Snow Creek, where he drowned.”

Local residents had repeatedly contacted Google to have them change their online maps after the bridge collapsed in 2013, the suit claims.

  • Deceptichum@kbin.social
    221·
    1 year ago

    Tragically, as he drove cautiously in the darkness and rain, he unsuspectingly followed Google’s outdated directions to what his family later learned for nearly a decade was called the ‘Bridge to Nowhere,’ crashing into Snow Creek, where he drowned

    From the picture I could easily imagine myself falling into the hole if it was dark and rainy.

    • jonne@infosec.pub
      812·
      1 year ago

      Presumably the road to the bridge would’ve been blocked off with signs and stuf? Is there any information about whether the signage was inadequate? Doesn’t excuse Google for but updating the map in almost a decade, but it seems either council or the driver have more responsibility here.

      • Deceptichum@kbin.social
        14·
        1 year ago

        Barriers that were normally placed across the bridge entrance were missing due to vandalism, according to the Charlotte Observer.

        • jonne@infosec.pub
          51·
          1 year ago

          Yeah, that’s definitely more the council’s responsibility then (or those vandals, if they find them).

        • shalafi@lemmy.world
          2·
          1 year ago

          How in hell were vandals able to remove anything?! There should have been dragon’s teeth or something similar blocking the road.

          • nyan@lemmy.cafeEnglish
            2·
            1 year ago

            It sounds like their “barrier” was probably traffic cones or sawhorses—easily knocked over, stolen, or destroyed. What should have been there, but apparently wasn’t, was a double or triple row of concrete jersey barriers. Or something else that was too heavy or awkward to be easily stolen, or destroyed without leaving serious residue. Nothing like hitting concrete chunks all over the road to make someone slow waaaaaay down and take a look around.

            Yeah, I’d say that whoever was responsible for keeping that road blocked off was the major culprit in this. Google is just a “they have deep pockets, and we might be lucky and get a judge who doesn’t know squat about how nav systems work” add-on.