My Attorney has a very interesting case

[DOOM]

My neighbor/attorney has a very interesting case coming up. Without going into a ton of detail he is representing a client that was involved in a car accident. The person was a passenger in the car a 1967 Chevelle . The Chevelle owner was at fault lost controll of the car and went into oncoming traffic. The Chevelle folded up pretty bad. His client lost part of right foot and many fractured bones and the driver faired a little better just a broken collar bone. Other car had some injuries also but all left the seen without any major injuries. So here is whats going on. After all the investigating into this accident (the car was in impound for almost three months) it came out that the Chevelle was equipped with a ''non oem'' chassis. He could not tell me the name of the manufacturer. You can imagine where this is going. His client is now sueing the aftermarket chassis manufacturer. Its not looking good for them thats for sure. The insurance company for the manufacturer paid there end and bowed out it was cheaper to do that than fight this in court. Im very interested to see how this turns out.

[DRJDVM's '69]

I'm assuming some part of the chassis failed and that's the reason the guy lost control of the car?

I sure hope it's not placing blame on the chassis company just because it was in the car and that fact allowed the owner to do something stupid and lose control

[ArisESQ]

Without knowing anything of the specifics, I think that unless something on the chassis failed (due to a flaw in manufacturing or even design problem), I don't think the guy's got much of a case. The chassis manufacturer will likely argue that the driver was contributorily negligent as well, so this could possibly get somewhat messy for everyone involved.

[DOOM]

Nothing failed from what I understand . It's coming down to the way the chassis held up in the accident. From what he's telling me came apart like a tin can. They hired a ''consultant'' from the NTSB this suit is no joke thats for sure. There in the process of going over the structural integrity of the chassis. Thats the main focus as it was explained to me . Tried to get more out of him but there was only so much he could tell me.

[OOCustoms]

I can see where this is going, Next thing you know companies will have to crash test their products before being able to sell them on the open market....
I might be way out there but its these kinds of things that lead to more rules.

[ccracin]

It's like with anything, there are some people that can cut and weld and think they can make anything. Just like contractors, a guy owns a pick-up, saw and hammer and they think they are a contractor. Anyone building a chassis,chassis components etc. have some responsibility to produce a safe product. This will be interesting.

[Sieg]

Originally Posted by DOOM

The Chevelle owner was at fault lost control of the car and went into oncoming traffic.

Simple summary of why the chassis failed?

A glass functions flawlessly until the owner loses control causing an impact resulting in catastrophic failure.

[DRJDVM's '69]

Bottom line to me......

Compare the damage and injury that occurred.... vs what would have happened with a completely stock original chassis set-up... If the design resulted in worse physical injury than would have happened with 30+ year chassis design and technology, then maybe there is a case

Otherwise it's crap.... Take responsibility for your own actions...

[Rick D]

Just an FYI; IL law states that a passager in a car can NOT be held liable or at fault for an accident, not saying their going to win this case against the chassis company BUT most likely the chassis company's ins will settle before it gets to the court date.

I know this first hand when my wife was a passager in a car years ago. No aftermarket parts involved but still the same law would apply. According to IL law when you are passager in a car you can't be held liable as you are not in control of the car. She was not looking to rich but wanted to get back the $36k in bills from her injuries. Day before first court hearing the ins company settled because of this law.

Not saying that I agree with what is going on here but just pointing out that the passager will most likely get paid!!

[DOOM]

One thing I find interesting is the state's investigator is the one thats not letting this go. And actually fueled the fire according my neighbor. It was all quite until the inquires started.