Posted by Paul Cook in Kempner, Texas on Sunday, March 04, 2007 at 12:32:03 :
In Reply to: used radial tires - let the buyer be informed posted by mike stone the COTWM on Saturday, March 03, 2007 at 12:17:25 :
Not to offend anyone here, but all these posts ignore the fact that there is a segment of our society called lawyers. They do not build or install tires. They do not select the wrong tires for the application or overload them. But when someone has done these things and there is a problem, the lawyers are employed to fix the problem.
The "fix" is almost always seeking money from an offender. We were all reared to believe that trail juries are made up of our "peers" but the likelihood of having a jury of Power Wagon owners is really pretty low.
The lawyer will not be portraying the Power Wagon owner as the decent individual we know most of us are. Instead, the lawyer will try to convince a jury of people who have never seen a Power Wagon that these are closely akin to the televised monster trucks and their owners' sole purpose is to crush all lesser vehicles.
A key element in establishing the Power Wagon owner's liability is to show negligence. The lawyer will say that the Power Wagon owner was negligent when he or she ignored safety standards established by the tire manufacturers. They will not miss the opportunity to include compliance with safety standards of aftermarket wheel manufacturers if possible.
Tire and wheel manufacturers also have employed lawyers to protect them and establishing overly conservative recommended safety standards is a major part of that.
This generally eliminates the "deep pockets" guys and means each of us could stand alone in one of these legal proceedings.
Also, you need to read the Disclaimer on this site. By advocating that someone ignore safety standards in an applicable post, you have the risk of being included if the suing lawyer determines that you have "deeper" pockets than the primary defendant - perhaps you own a business whose assets could be targeted.
I am not a lawyer. I did work 36 years for the US Government where my work was guided by legal policies. I had been in the field some years when the Miranda vs. Arizona case changed the way we conducted investigations. My work was under constant legal scrutiny and I often was at risk of standing alone if any aspect of my job performance might be adjudged as violating performance standards. This included driving a government vehicle hundreds of miles on public roads many days. The US government is "self insured" and there was a time that I could have been sued for damages resulting from a vehicular accident without any help, even legal representation. It has always been very important to me that I avoid any actions that might be adjudged as being negligent and thereby making me liable in a law suit.
When someone on this Forum warns you about a safety issue, it is not in your best interest to argue the matter, particularly since your arguments closely follow the potential arguments of the lawyer who might be suing you. Instead, say thank you.
Follow Ups: