09:12:31am, Saturday, April 27, 2024
|
Would this be accepted in court?
|
legal jeopardy?
|
Hypothetical- A hot farm, limited/light pro, super farm has a bad chassis failure resulting in severe injury or death, OR some freak occurrence happens where a spectator gets hurt from said chassis failure.
Would the fact that components are not allowed (not counting PPL Light Pros) be sufficient for a jury to find the pulling organization/sponsors liable for the injury or death? |
|
Re: Would this be accepted in court?
|
Moderator Registered: 03/25/2008 Posts: 1,446 |
That's a good question, however should all components be SFI certified. What standard do we go by with a components. Can the builder be held liable, can the driver/team owner be held accountable? Dick Morgan www.PULLOFF.com Independent Pulling News Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/22/2024 04:20AM by Dick Morgan. |
|
Re: Would this be accepted in court?
|
Registered: 04/04/2008 Posts: 1,522 |
Who pays in car racing when people get hurt ?
Most places have in writing posted somewhere that your on your own |
|
Re: Would this be accepted in court?
|
Moderator Registered: 03/25/2008 Posts: 1,446 |
You can have all the signs, paperwork, release forms that you want that will not stop you from part of law suit. Sure you might win but lawyers do not work for free. Dick Morgan www.PULLOFF.com Independent Pulling News |
|
Re: Would this be accepted in court?
|
Cancel Culture
|
It's a shame that there is even a conversion about this started. But in this day in time, it is a real fact. So, what if a farm tractor frame breaks in a farm stock pull and hurts a crowd member, does the law suit fall on the tractor manufacturer? What if the manufacturer is out of business, like IH or MM or any of the classics? This seems like a rabbit hole and the big insurance companies should know the answer. |
|
Re: Would this be accepted in court?
|
Registered: 03/25/2008 Posts: 2,526 |
First question I'd ask... Is there an SFI (or other engineered) spec for a component chassis that can prove beyond a reasonable doubt that a component chassis is safer? I've personally seen a component tractors lose wheels. The truth is, there's no spec, they can be homemade and there is no safety standard that has to be meet other than saying it must pass tech which isn't exactly an engineer standard.
I'd also ask... Was the original casting modified? If so is there any spec on the amount of modification allowed? Jake Morgan Owner, PULLOFF.COM Independent Pulling News This page is a free service. The cost is covered out of my pocket. It takes a great deal of time and a fair amount of money to keep this website going. Donations for: photos, classified ads, forum discussion, etc... are appreciated. Side Note: We are no longer accepting PayPal donations. They have changed their terms of service and stated they would fine PayPal users for spreading "misinformation" and "hate, violence, racial or other forms of intolerance that is discriminatory". PayPal did not provide definitions for some of these vague terms. Woke corporate policies regarding "misinformation" could result in an automatic fine of $2,500 which would have been removed directly from the customer’s PayPal account. PayPal did backdown from some of their policies but quietly implemented portions of them in later terms of service. A financial institute has no right to monitor social media accounts or speech. This is unacceptable and I'll no longer do business with PayPal. |
|
Re: Would this be accepted in court?
|
Pllnfn
|
I have heard several times over the years that fans are accepting injury risks just by attending a motorsports event. Fan injuries and deaths can occur obviously. But once problems surface within a sport, that sport must take steps to make their sport more safe. Therein lies the possibility to be held liable. I'm not attorney, but I think it has to be that way otherwise it would be tough to even put on any sort of motorsports events. I'm sure promoters can weigh in with more expertise. |
|
Re: Would this be accepted in court?
|
Registered: 03/25/2008 Posts: 2,526 |
A smart lawyer would go after the lack of wheel tethers well before he'd argue about the chassis. Since there's no spec on a component chassis there's no evidence they are safer. Since wheels have come off of mods and component tractors it shows there's still an issue with loose wheels and nothing has been done to address that issue.
The fact that tethers are already in use in monster trucks and indy car (and have been for a while now) it would make it extremely easy to show negligence on the part of the organizations for a known issue. Sorry, but component rules don't necessarily stop wheel coming off since there's no guidelines on how things are built. Jake Morgan Owner, PULLOFF.COM Independent Pulling News This page is a free service. The cost is covered out of my pocket. It takes a great deal of time and a fair amount of money to keep this website going. Donations for: photos, classified ads, forum discussion, etc... are appreciated. Side Note: We are no longer accepting PayPal donations. They have changed their terms of service and stated they would fine PayPal users for spreading "misinformation" and "hate, violence, racial or other forms of intolerance that is discriminatory". PayPal did not provide definitions for some of these vague terms. Woke corporate policies regarding "misinformation" could result in an automatic fine of $2,500 which would have been removed directly from the customer’s PayPal account. PayPal did backdown from some of their policies but quietly implemented portions of them in later terms of service. A financial institute has no right to monitor social media accounts or speech. This is unacceptable and I'll no longer do business with PayPal. |
|
Re: Would this be accepted in court?
|
Pllnfn
|
You make a good point. But then there's this from the end of last year's Indy 500. There's still just a lot of risk involved with attending any race or pull. |
|
Re: Would this be accepted in court?
|
TOM
|
While the wheel may have flown (not because of tether) but where the tether was attached, that is the worlds apart from not even having them mandated. IndyCar revised the rule immediately afterwards to improve it. Meanwhile, the leading pulling organizations are scrolling through their cell phones.... |
|
Re: Would this be accepted in court?
|
Where's the spec?
|
Something I was trying to tell everyone a long time ago! |
|
Would this be accepted in court
|
Registered: 03/26/2008 Posts: 494 |
Boy, the original post sure morphed quickly from a chassis failure to a pet peeve of wheel tethers. I will add to what Dick wrote regarding signs, waivers, posters, forms, etc. That is spot on. From personal experience, a few years back a promod snowmobile drag racer from New York was killed at US 131 Dragway ( I believe IHRA sanctioned at the time) during an event. A chassis component failed and he was catapaulted over the barrier and died on impact with the ground. Jason got a summons for the lawsuit filed by the family. Jason originally had the motor that was in the sled, but had sold it to another person, who sold it to another person, who sold it to the racer. The motor wasn't even what caused the accident, but since it was capable of making that sled go 150 mph or so, he was subpoened. Luckily, because it had changed hand so many times, Jason was relieved of any consequence. I relate this because it goes to show how far down or up the chain the "responsibility" goes when a catastrophic event happens. |
|
Re: Would this be accepted in court?
|
Truth
|
Where possible, the builders, pullers, and promoters need to be insuring themselves against these types of injuries. The injuries are foreseeable and pulling (like racing) is inherently dangerous. This is one of those instances where the law is probably not gonna let the little guy—the fan—be caught holding the bag.
Insurance policies will usually include coverage for defending the suit. That way, when your engine explodes and severely injures someone, and when the injured's health insurer wants to recover some of the million dollars it now has to spend on the person you accidentally maimed, it's your insurer on the hook for the settlement and defense and not you. If certain parts of the pulling ecosystem can't get policies to cover them... I guess it's up to that individual whether it's worth the risk to participate in the game. |
|
Speaking of courts......
|
TOM
|
When safety items like wheel tethers are proposed, some people have gotten on here and talked like freak accidents are just part of life and should we wrap the spectators in bubble wrap or something.
Consider another court, the basketball court and court storming. Several weeks, some tubby chick ran into Caitlyn Clark. A few weeks ago, when Tulane beat Memphis, a Tulane idiot fan actually hit a Memphis player during a court storm. The Memphis guy wisely turned and walked away. Today, Duke's best player got injured during a court storm. What does this have to do with pulling? Consider in NCAA basketball, the potential for injury is not unforeseen. If a play gets inured during a court storming, the school, the conference, and NCAA could be on the hook for millions of $ (in Kyle Filapowski's case, while I suspect he will be ok, had his knee or something else been hurt bad, you're talking about the loss of a guaranteed NBA contract if he's a first round pick, plus future potential earnings). What if someone had a knife intent to harm the player instead of a cellphone taking video? Nobody in pulling is going to sign an NBA-level contract, but an injury due to lack of safety precautions could bankrupt the organization and promoters just as easily. Just as NCAA/conferences/universities should easily foresee the potential dangers of a court storm, pulling should be able to foresee dangers of runaway wheels and other safety weak links. Then it will not be a basketball court, it will be in a court of law with expensive attorneys and a likely unsympathetic jury. |
|
Re: Speaking of courts......
|
Just Sayin’
|
And then, something like this happens at a monster truck show over the weekend.
[www.dailymail.co.uk] |
|
Re: Speaking of courts......
|
Pllnfn
|
Reminds me of the Monster Truck announcer who stepped out onto the track and was ran over while talking on a wireless mic. Very tragic. |
|
Re: Speaking of courts......
|
Pllnfn
|
Here is a video of the incident I was referring to. |
|
Re: Would this be accepted in court?
|
Registered: 04/04/2016 Posts: 110 |
What you have spoken about here is a Component Chassis for example for a Super or Pro Stock type Tractor, not a Mod or TWD. Comment made there is no proof that a Component Chassis is safer/stronger because there is no spec. I know what your getting at, but not one of mine, or any of my reputable competitors(Builders) have had a Component Chassis Break or fail, while many AG Chassis have failed over the years. That's the proof, easily provable in Court. I do not know of a single Component Chassis failing, yes front wheels have broke off, I had a Franklin Spindle that obviously had been cracked prior to bolting it onto a Mod Chassis crack further, almost came off. Years of Competition without this type of failure is the best Proof. Again I know what your getting at, I've seen backyard Engineering and Junk Yard parts put together that I wouldn't ride on, and I think that needs to be addressed. A spec can be written, ok, are you going to mandate Magna-fluxing all used parts for cracks, how is that proven, bout as iron clad as the old Clutch inspection program. Far as Tethers, if the Ski Bars are built per the spec, or beyond I don't think they are needed, since we went to the new spec and also many with air rides, I haven't had a single front end break causing a wheel to come off. Again I said if they are built to the spec, not all are.The rules we have are pretty darn good if followed. Larry Richwine and John Mears over the years wrote some good rules, myself and other builders where a big part of that process and I'm proud from that side of Pulling we haven't seen any injuries I'm aware of. This 50+ Year Old Cast Iron has got to go, its very dangerous, I don't feel we should use it in any class, and no that doesn't mean I need you to buy a Chassis from Me, we are 2 years behind now. None of these parts were designed to run 1000+ Horsepower through them... None!
BB |
|
Re: Would this be accepted in court?
|
Pullinfan4255
|
I mean one could argue this is just as serious as a wheel coming off?
[youtu.be] |
|
Re: Would this be accepted in court?
|
Registered: 02/27/2019 Posts: 20 |
Not to stir too much, but didn't we see a component LSS split a couple of years ago? Rear end and driver stay with the sles and the engine and front wheels went down the track. Cracked just in front of the cage. |
|
Re: Would this be accepted in court?
|
Registered: 06/16/2017 Posts: 240 |
Bone Twisters frame broke in Tomah not that many years ago also. |
|
Re: Would this be accepted in court?
|
Moderator Registered: 03/25/2008 Posts: 1,446 |
Bob, I totally agree that there are many great builders, however there are some people that don't understand the stress load that component chassis goes through going down the track. The never ending search for weight reduction can lead to some serious issues. I think that builders such as yourself and others would be concerned about those that do not build up to the standards that you and others stive for.
. Dick Morgan www.PULLOFF.com Independent Pulling News |
|
Re: Would this be accepted in court?
|
lewis c
|
Where those component parts originally built for one thousand 2 3 4 5 thousand horse no way. Neither is the tubing used for the chassis, rack and pinions for the steering. And those 30.5 tires, how good is the insurance organizations that you carry? |
Website Statistics
Global: Topics: 38,628, Posts: 229,690, Members: 3,325.
This forum: Topics: 37,067, Posts: 225,899.
Global: Topics: 38,628, Posts: 229,690, Members: 3,325.
This forum: Topics: 37,067, Posts: 225,899.
Our newest member JD_8520
