Lawful Access, Original Files and Inspection Planning
Where is the car, and who has the original recordings? Give those answers to counsel while there is time to pursue lawful preservation. Repairs may remove physical clues, and a salvage transfer may make the car harder to locate. As a camera continues its normal operation, the recording may be overwritten.
Identify every relevant source
Look for sources that could show the crash or the approach to it:
- Your dashcam and recordings from other drivers.
- Witness phones and nearby business cameras.
- Fleet recording systems and available vehicle modules.
Note the question each source might answer. A recording made only after the vehicles stopped may miss the movement that matters.
For a camera near the crash scene, contact its operator and ask:
- Does this camera record, and does footage of the crash interval exist?
- When will that footage be deleted or overwritten?
- Will the operator preserve the relevant interval?
A preservation agreement does not necessarily grant access to a copy. Counsel must establish permission or another lawful basis to obtain it.
Save the part of the recording that matters to the crash, including anything unfavorable. Keep its original on the device, card, app or account where you found it until preservation has been arranged. A lawyer needs to know if normal use of that device could overwrite the recording.
Preserve context and metadata
A clip received by text may have been forwarded or compressed before it reached you. Where feasible, ask for the native export from the camera system. Keep a note of who exported it, when they did so and how. Record where the camera was positioned, which way it faced, and its time and export settings. Preserve that original and make separate copies for editing.
For example, two cameras might show the same passing truck with these timestamps:
- Camera A: 8:01
- Camera B: 8:02
Both clips show the truck, giving an expert a common event to compare. That event, or another one visible in both clips, may allow the expert to align the recordings after checking the clocks. The 8:01 and 8:02 labels alone cannot establish a sequence. If seconds decide the dispute, ask for the expert's explanation of the alignment and why it is reliable.
A recorder may supply a short interval of values and leave much of the surrounding movement unknown. What is available depends on the vehicle and the recorded event. Scene measurements may help an expert interpret it. The data cannot supply every maneuver, much less establish a medical diagnosis.
Plan vehicle access before testing
Before arranging a vehicle inspection, establish:
- The owner and the person or business holding the car.
- The insurer, salvage status and any planned disposal date.
- The disputed question the inspection would address.
A preservation request does not confer ownership or permission to enter and test the car. Counsel may need an agreement, discovery or court relief.
The written inspection protocol should identify:
- Who will attend and what equipment they will use.
- Photographs to take and the download method.
- How components will be handled, including any destructive step.
- Acquisition files and relevant tool versions to retain.
Give required notice and resolve access lawfully. A short deadline does not authorize seizure or entry onto someone else’s property.
If a component may have failed, retain it and its repair history. The person qualified to reconstruct vehicle movement may not be the right person to investigate that product. Keep evidence that could support other explanations while the cause is still being examined.
Handle missing evidence with a disciplined record
Work out what happened to a missing recording with counsel, starting with these questions:
- What evidence shows there was a recording of the interval that matters?
- Who controlled the recording? At what point was it lost?
- What preservation duty, if any, applied to that person or business?
- Which information did the loss take away from the case, and what harm did that cause?
Counsel must connect the answers to the governing legal standard before asking for a remedy. A missing video does not establish deliberate wrongdoing, and it does not prove the underlying crash claim.
Keep a record of the preservation effort:
- Requests, delivery records and replies
- Retention policies and known deletion dates
- Information about how the recording system worked
- Other evidence that may substitute for a lost recording
Counsel’s investigation may confirm that a recording was lost or establish that none existed. While that question is investigated, continue gathering other evidence of the collision.
An illustrative surveillance problem
Counsel reviewing this hypothetical store clip sees a car entering the intersection but no approach. The timestamp remains unverified. Before using the clip to estimate speed or signal timing, preserve the relevant footage and investigate the export process and the accuracy of the camera's clock. Any estimate must account for those gaps.
Questions clients often ask
Can I repair my car
The repair estimate is a good time to raise the inspection question with counsel. Explain what the shop proposes before authorizing the work, particularly if someone was seriously injured or fault is disputed. Counsel can determine what must be preserved or examined and how that can be arranged alongside the repair process.
Can the lawyer get the other driver's phone
A lawyer cannot simply take the other driver's phone. Any access to relevant information needs a lawful basis and a justified, limited scope. Who possesses the material, privacy concerns, proportionality and the applicable rules all matter.
Does a vehicle download establish fault
A download may help an expert reconstruct the crash when it is considered with other evidence. Counsel still needs to examine what the data leaves out and whether another explanation fits it.
Vehicle data access requires legal authority
Arrange the legal review before anyone connects the equipment. Counsel needs to establish the right to retrieve the data:
- Start by identifying the device, then determine which rules govern access to it.
- For the specified recording devices covered by Texas Transportation Code section 547.615, check the restrictions and the exceptions.
- For federal event-recorder data, examine the Driver Privacy Act of 2015, including its exceptions to owner or lessee consent.
A preservation letter or possession of the car does not, on its own, settle permission to retrieve the data.
Before extracting the data, document the authority to do so:
- Retain the consent or authorizing court order.
- Record who is authorized to retrieve the data and exactly what that authorization covers.
- Specify the files to retain.
- Record who physically holds the vehicle separately from who has rights to its data.
Resolve contested access first. The facility storing a vehicle may not own its electronic information.
Use reliable technical documentation to check the specific recorder:
- Identify the vehicle’s model and year and the module being examined.
- Check what triggers recording and how much time the recorder captures.
- Check when data can be overwritten and whether damage affects retrieval.
Check the requirements in 49 C.F.R. Part 563 for a covered event recorder. They do not ensure that a particular crash or maneuver will leave a complete record. If a field is unavailable, report it as unavailable.
Ask what each digital source can actually prove
Each source has limits worth checking against independent evidence:
- Dashcam: the view from the camera’s mounting position.
- Event data: selected values, which may not explain why a driver acted.
- Telematics: location intervals that may be too broad to resolve a signal dispute.
- Network activity: information that may not identify the person handling a phone.
Match the proposed inference to what that source can actually establish.
Camera, phone, vehicle-module and dispatch records may each use a different clock. Record each source's time zone, offset, treatment of daylight saving and any known clock drift. If an expert uses a shared event to align those records, keep the explanation of how that alignment was made. Putting the four timestamps into one spreadsheet does not show that they refer to the same clock.
The camera's location on inspection day may differ from its location during the crash. Document the mounting position and viewing direction at the time of the crash, with any later move noted separately. An expert needs those facts to measure movement and must explain calibration and uncertainty. Lens distortion, a low frame rate and gaps in motion-triggered recording can all affect a measurement. Drawing arrows on the image does not cure those problems.
Preserve originals and make processing reproducible
Keep the native export, its software player, metadata, export log and system details together. Enhance or annotate copies. A matching hash can help establish that a file has not changed since acquisition. It cannot verify the camera’s clock or whether the export contains everything relevant. Check those questions separately.
Start the download record with the vehicle's identity, the module's location and the battery or power condition. Record the tools and software versions used, and retain the photographs, messages and acquisition files. Identify any step that might change the data. Keep warning messages and inconsistent fields in the record; the expert should explain whether they affect the opinion. Retrieving a file successfully and interpreting it reliably are separate questions.
For electronic discovery, Rule 196.4 addresses the request and the form of production. Counsel also has to consider proportionality and objections. A request for a defined crash interval has a more focused justification than a request to search someone's entire personal device. Depending on the circumstances, a narrower scope, redaction, agreed review or protective order may help obtain relevant proof while addressing privacy.
Missing evidence and spoliation require separate proof
The judge decides spoliation issues under Brookshire Brothers Ltd. v. Aldridge, 438 S.W.3d 9 (Tex. 2014), including duty, breach, prejudice and an appropriate remedy. A recording's disappearance does not automatically entitle a party to an adverse jury instruction. Counsel must apply the decision's intentional-destruction standard and its narrow treatment of negligent loss, and obtain a ruling before asking the jury to penalize a party for the missing material.
Investigate a lost recording in two stages:
- Identify the missing interval and why you believe a recording existed. Establish who held it, how long recordings were normally retained and what notices were received. State which question the missing recording might have answered.
- Investigate whether a backup, second camera, insurer copy, repair shop acquisition, or witness device supplies the information.
Available substitutes can affect the evidence in the crash claim and the appropriate remedy for the loss.
Hypothetical expert and trial plan
In a hypothetical rear-impact case, the driver denies braking. The dashcam appears to show brake lights, but the vehicle download seems inconsistent. Preserve both sources. Have the expert identify whose lights are visible, synchronize the sources and check the field definitions and sampling. That work may explain the conflict or leave a material uncertainty in the theory.
Trial preparation for a recording and expert analysis includes:
- Authentication under Rule 901
- The expert-testimony requirements of Rule 702
- Ask the expert to explain the measurements and calculations.
- Test how plausible changes to the inputs would change the result.
To help the jury follow the analysis, counsel may show the original recording before the display that explains it. Cross-examination can reveal a weakness in a particular step. That uncertainty does not, by itself, make all the digital evidence worthless.
Give the firm the location of the car and original files. Ask what disputed question a proposed download or inspection would answer and what it will cost. Some vehicles won't need a download. Some recordings won't help establish recovery. Trial counsel should be able to explain why the technical work is useful for this case.
Build a preservation plan that fits the evidence
A useful preservation letter tells its recipient which event is involved, what material to keep and what action is requested. Depending on the facts, that might mean a vehicle and its modules, photographs, repair records, dashcam footage or a limited phone or app interval. The scope should have a reason tied to the crash. An entire electronic history is far broader than a defined period relevant to a disputed movement.
Sending the letter doesn't compel the recipient to hand anything over. Nor does asking for a car to be kept give counsel permission to inspect it. After retention comes the access question, through cooperation, a subpoena, discovery, an agreed inspection protocol or appropriate court relief.
Your own files need the same care. Keep the original video before making an edit or posting it, retain relevant messages and ask about inspection before changing the vehicle. Saving only the favorable portions can leave you defending a decision about what to omit, as well as trying to prove the crash.
Find out who owns and holds the vehicle before it is disposed of. Counsel will also need to consider storage charges, the property claim and any transfer for salvage. Seek an agreement that allows a reasonable inspection opportunity. If agreement is unavailable, ask counsel to evaluate court relief. Do not enter the property or take the vehicle without authority.
When a clip arrives, record where it came from and ask for the native file. Find out how it was exported and what changes were made. Forwarding can remove the lead-up, metadata or fine detail through compression. Keep an untouched copy apart from working files, with a record of who received it and where it is stored.
For each custodian, log the material requested, the request date, the delivery method and confirmation, the reply, follow-up dates and the final disposition. Another person should be able to follow the request from that record. Check unresolved entries before expert preparation, while there is still time to pursue missing material. If nobody has answered, the request remains open. Sending it does not establish that the evidence was preserved.
Use video with its limitations in view
A video gives you the camera's view; the driver may have had a different one. Consider the camera angle, lens distortion, frame rate, obstructions, exposure and missing intervals when interpreting vehicle position or the sequence of events. Apparently decisive footage can still need technical review before it supports a reliable conclusion.
Keep the full relevant interval of each recording and the record of how its displayed time was checked against actual time. The clock may be inaccurate or use another time zone. If an analyst aligns two recordings through a shared visible event instead, retain the method's explanation. A reviewer needs to understand that alignment before relying on the sequence.
If a camera recorded the approach but stopped before impact, investigate the parts it does show:
- What was the camera's location and viewing direction?
- What recording mode was used? Are frames missing?
- How did the operator export this file?
- Could another camera have recorded the interval that is missing?
Those details help determine what the footage before impact can establish.
Find out when the account’s cloud recordings expire, and give counsel that schedule and the account controller’s contact details. The footage can disappear even while you still have the camera. Protect removable cards from being overwritten as well. Keep the original file and share working copies; otherwise, repeated compression can leave you with only lower-quality versions.
Before putting the video into a demand, identify a witness familiar with the system or another basis for authenticating it. Measurements and clock alignment may require expert help. If you use an explanatory display, label it and explain the changes made from the original so the recipient can tell the two apart.
Look at the unfavorable footage before settling on an argument or assessing an offer. An odd movement could have an innocent explanation, could affect responsibility, or could belong to a different event altogether. Keep the recording while you investigate. Its meaning should be worked out rather than avoided.
Inspect vehicles and interpret event data carefully
Decide what the inspection needs to resolve before work starts. The relevant evidence may be crush or contact points, tires, brakes, restraints, lighting, a suspected component failure or electronic information. An ordinary cosmetic property claim may not justify the same investigation as a rollover, serious injury, disputed impact sequence, or suspected product defect.
Does this particular vehicle have a stored event that can still be retrieved lawfully? Check the vehicle and module instead of assuming a newer car has usable data. Any short recorded interval needs to be considered alongside the physical evidence and other available sources.
Agree on the inspection arrangements before work begins:
- Experts, scope and equipment.
- Photographs, downloads and component handling.
- Identify steps that could change the evidence and document its condition before those steps.
- Acquisition files and tool versions to retain.
Destructive work requires suitable notice and the necessary agreements or orders.
A report's speed figure is a starting point for questions: What was measured? How uncertain is it? Could tires or the condition of the vehicle affect it? Does it fit the scene evidence? The figure cannot settle negligence or injury by itself. Nor is an impact estimate a medical diagnosis. Connecting engineering findings with medical evidence requires appropriately qualified analysis because those disciplines answer different questions.
Keep the component if you suspect a failure. Counsel and the appropriate expert will need to examine:
- The product’s history, including recalls and previous repairs.
- How the component is alleged to have failed.
- The driver's conduct, including actions before and during the collision.
- What separate proof would be needed for a claim against the manufacturer.
- Evidence that could support another plausible cause.
Product claims can require different proof, parties, defenses, and preservation methods. An initial suspicion does not establish liability. Keep the component and the evidence of other possible causes available for examination.
Before agreeing to salvage, disposal or repairs to relevant components, call the firm. Ask whether the car needs inspection and what can reasonably be arranged. Storage need not always continue indefinitely, but once the car is altered or gone, a potentially important examination may be impossible.
Prepare experts and challenge opinions on their merits
Start with the disputed question the expert would answer. Check whether the expert's qualifications fit that question and whether the proposed method is reliable. Supply the facts needed for the analysis, including unfavorable information. Counsel must understand the method, assumptions and limits well enough to prepare the witness for the questions likely to arise on cross-examination.
Continue preparing the experts while settlement discussions are underway:
- Put the disclosure and report deadlines required by the rules and scheduling order on the calendar.
- Keep track of new evidence and ask counsel whether an opinion, report or disclosure needs supplementation.
- Before the deadline, check that the expert has adequately explained the basis for each opinion.
Waiting for an unsuccessful mediation may leave too little time. Even sound analysis can run into problems when disclosure is late or its basis is inadequately stated.
Match each assignment to the witness’s expertise. The questions differ by discipline:
- Medical experts address the condition and its cause, the prior baseline, alternative explanations, treatment necessity, prognosis and restrictions.
- Reconstruction experts examine the measurements and inputs used to compare possible crash sequences.
- Economic experts base their calculations on supported medical and vocational assumptions.
Any agreement among the opinions must come from the facts. Coordinated overstatement does not supply a missing foundation.
An opposing opinion should be tested through its actual reasoning. Determine what records were reviewed, what information was omitted, whether the method fits the case, and whether conclusions exceed the inputs. A disagreement alone does not make an opinion inadmissible. A focused challenge should distinguish a flaw in reliability from an issue that is properly addressed through cross-examination.
Use the firm’s agreed reporting channel for changes in treatment, work or another incident. Even a seemingly minor change may matter to an expert using an older chronology. Counsel should explain which updates are needed and decide whether a disclosure or opinion needs supplementation.
Before adding an expert, ask which question the work will answer, what it is expected to add and how the cost affects the client. Compare that expense with the issues and the practical recovery available in the case. Several disciplines may be needed, or one may be enough. A larger team does not by itself make the strategy better.
How specialized trial preparation can help your claim
Obtaining the evidence lawfully may help test the insurer's account or expose a weakness before you decide about settlement. Ask the firm to explain that use and the next step: how could the information be admitted if the case goes to trial?
Aaron A. Herbert is Board Certified in Personal Injury Trial Law by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization. You can read about his jury trial experience in the firm's published background and its reported significant recoveries on the case results page. Ask how that experience relates to the investigation your claim needs. No past result promises yours: the evidence, governing law and sources of recovery will be specific to your case.
If you are considering hiring counsel after a Texas crash, request a free consultation with The Law Firm of Aaron A. Herbert PC or call 214 200 4878. Tell the office about the issue addressed in this article and any approaching deadline. Ask who would handle the case, what work is needed, and how fees and expenses are addressed before signing an agreement.
Referral counsel should pass along procedural dates and confirm that the receiving firm has accepted responsibility. A preliminary conversation alone does not establish representation.
Read the Texas car accident claims and litigation guide or return to the Texas Car Accident Knowledge Hub for related resources.
Related car accident resources
- What to Do After a Texas Car Accident
- Fault in Texas Multi Vehicle and Intersection Crashes
- Texas Car Accident Lawsuit and Trial Preparation (Coming soon)
Legal sources
Texas Rules of Civil Procedure effective October 1 2026.
Texas Transportation Code chapter 547 section 547.615.
Driver Privacy Act of 2015 Public Law 114 94 sections 24301 and 24302.
49 CFR Part 563 Event Data Recorders.
This article provides general information about Texas law. Application depends on the facts, policy, court orders, and law governing the particular claim. Hypothetical examples are illustrations rather than reported firm cases.
ABOUT THE ATTORNEY
Aaron A. Herbert
Founding Attorney
Board Certified in Personal Injury Trial Law
Aaron founded The Law Firm of Aaron A. Herbert in 2010 to focus on developing each client's case and seeking its maximum value. For over a decade, he has represented people seriously injured in major accidents and industrial catastrophes, pursuing trial verdicts and settlements while working to reduce the stress of litigation.
Education
- Texas A&M University · B.S., Criminal Justice, 1999
- University of Oklahoma College of Law · J.D., 2002; graduated in the top of his class
Trial experience & approach
Aaron earned numerous jury verdicts at boutique personal injury litigation firms. According to his biography, he spent a year as the top-earning litigation attorney at a firm that frequently appeared in verdict searches as having one of the highest numbers of trial wins in Texas. At another Dallas personal injury firm, he moved from managing pre-litigation attorney to managing litigation attorney over seven years as the firm grew into one of Dallas's largest personal injury firms.
His biography describes a reputation as one of America's most aggressive trial lawyers, with noteworthy recoveries from judges and juries and substantial pretrial settlements. Most of those settlements included confidentiality agreements requested by the defense. Aaron has said the recoveries were justified by the injuries and losses involved, which no amount of money could make someone choose to experience.
His approach combines passion, preparation, persistence and courtroom imagination. He believes a well-supported, engaged and motivated team working cooperatively helps deliver strong representation, with the goal of achieving the best possible result for every client.
Dallas roots, military service & publication
Born and raised in Dallas, Aaron enlisted in the United States Marine Corps after high school and later received an Honorable Discharge. He completed his university and law degrees after his military service and became a lifelong Sooners football fan in law school.
Publication: “Litigating Dog Bite Cases,” Texas Dog Law Seminar, Dallas, 2009.
Professional affiliations & recognition
Professional affiliations and recognition listed in Aaron’s biography:
- State Bar of Texas
- American Bar Association
- Association of Trial Lawyers of America (now American Association for Justice)
- Texas Trial Lawyers Association
- Dallas Trial Lawyers Association
- Dallas Bar Association
- Tarrant County Bar Association
- Million Dollar Advocates Forum
- The National Trial Lawyers – Top 100 Trial Lawyers
Trial experience & approach
Aaron earned numerous jury verdicts at boutique personal injury litigation firms. According to his biography, he spent a year as the top-earning litigation attorney at a firm that frequently appeared in verdict searches as having one of the highest numbers of trial wins in Texas. At another Dallas personal injury firm, he moved from managing pre-litigation attorney to managing litigation attorney over seven years as the firm grew into one of Dallas's largest personal injury firms.
His biography describes a reputation as one of America's most aggressive trial lawyers, with noteworthy recoveries from judges and juries and substantial pretrial settlements. Most of those settlements included confidentiality agreements requested by the defense. Aaron has said the recoveries were justified by the injuries and losses involved, which no amount of money could make someone choose to experience.
His approach combines passion, preparation, persistence and courtroom imagination. He believes a well-supported, engaged and motivated team working cooperatively helps deliver strong representation, with the goal of achieving the best possible result for every client.
Dallas roots, military service & publication
Born and raised in Dallas, Aaron enlisted in the United States Marine Corps after high school and later received an Honorable Discharge. He completed his university and law degrees after his military service and became a lifelong Sooners football fan in law school.
Publication: “Litigating Dog Bite Cases,” Texas Dog Law Seminar, Dallas, 2009.
Professional affiliations & recognition
Professional affiliations and recognition listed in Aaron’s biography:
- State Bar of Texas
- American Bar Association
- Association of Trial Lawyers of America (now American Association for Justice)
- Texas Trial Lawyers Association
- Dallas Trial Lawyers Association
- Dallas Bar Association
- Tarrant County Bar Association
- Million Dollar Advocates Forum
- The National Trial Lawyers – Top 100 Trial Lawyers