Woman Loses $20,000,000 Lawsuit Against Michelin
- Thread starter SubLGT
- Start date
- Status
I would think she was also driving way too fast for road conditions.
Originally Posted By: Cristobal
I would think she was also driving way too fast for road conditions.
This is a very good point. Over the years, many people I know, including myself, have had violent blowouts. I don't know anyone who didn't pull over unceremoniously and either change the tire or call for help.
I would think she was also driving way too fast for road conditions.
This is a very good point. Over the years, many people I know, including myself, have had violent blowouts. I don't know anyone who didn't pull over unceremoniously and either change the tire or call for help.
ls1mike
$50 Site Donor 2024
I have taken plugged tires down the track at 118 mph. I bet the tire was not in good shape before the plug. I have had one plug fail. All it did was make the tire go flat. Now if the plug didn't hold and the tire wasn't all the great, sure the tire might fail. Not the manufactures fault.
I was towing the 32 foot trailer and I had a blowout occur on the trailer. Didn't even feel it, just heard it. It was so violent that the tire that blew, blew steel belts into the tire in front of it.
Truck didn't move, trailer didn't move.
I was towing the 32 foot trailer and I had a blowout occur on the trailer. Didn't even feel it, just heard it. It was so violent that the tire that blew, blew steel belts into the tire in front of it.
Truck didn't move, trailer didn't move.
I'd be willing to bet the key to this problem is driving on under inflated tires over some period of time.
Those tests a few years ago showing a Firestone SUV tire under inflated, at 26 psi instead of 32 psi at 75% of its rated load capacity and exploding were certainly impressive. Other brand name tires performed almost exactly the same way.
Those tests a few years ago showing a Firestone SUV tire under inflated, at 26 psi instead of 32 psi at 75% of its rated load capacity and exploding were certainly impressive. Other brand name tires performed almost exactly the same way.
- Joined
- Nov 29, 2009
- Messages
- 7,412
Good. Michelin tires are expensive enough as it is. We don't need them passing the cost of a law suit onto the customer.
In addition, tires must only be repaired in the tread area and not on the sidewall. I check my tire pressure every month when overnight cold and also be for any extended highway trip. Ed
Good!
Obligatory woman driver comment.
Woman Loses $20,000,000 Lawsuit Against Michelin
Woman Loses $20,000,000 Lawsuit Against Michelin
gathermewool
Site Donor 2023
Originally Posted By: GiveMeAVowel
Originally Posted By: SubLGT
http://www.moderntiredealer.com/news/411301/product-liability-case-ends-in-michelin-s-favor
......"
Michelin successfully showed that the tread separation on the Uniroyal Tiger Paw AWP preceded the accident and was caused by a number of factors, including an improperly repaired puncture days before the accident as well as chronic under inflation of the tire. The jury determined there was no proof of product liability, and Michelin was found faultless on all claims…"
Good, when YOU are NOT taking personal responsibility for maintaining your vehicle in good safe condition by neglecting maintenance YOU are responsible for your own misery. Glad she didn't get ONE RED CENT....
now the Judge should force her to repay the legal fees incurred by Michelin for the frivolous lawsuit brought against them.
Originally Posted By: SubLGT
http://www.moderntiredealer.com/news/411301/product-liability-case-ends-in-michelin-s-favor
......"
Michelin successfully showed that the tread separation on the Uniroyal Tiger Paw AWP preceded the accident and was caused by a number of factors, including an improperly repaired puncture days before the accident as well as chronic under inflation of the tire. The jury determined there was no proof of product liability, and Michelin was found faultless on all claims…"
Good, when YOU are NOT taking personal responsibility for maintaining your vehicle in good safe condition by neglecting maintenance YOU are responsible for your own misery. Glad she didn't get ONE RED CENT....
now the Judge should force her to repay the legal fees incurred by Michelin for the frivolous lawsuit brought against them.
Yes sir.. Well stated.
My dumb dumb self used to not pay attention to details about my car when I was younger. It never led to anything bad or terrible happening by the grace of God above. But if something had happened the way my parents raised me I would have looked at myself first and foremost.
When I was in my early 20s I started to realize that my cars had problems that could have been prevented at times. Motors developing leaks because I hadn't changed the oil enough had caused the oil to become obviously dirty but also acidic which took out the seals. Poor running due to plugs and wires not being changed, belts broken because I hadn't been paying attention etc.
After my black Ford Probe every car I had after that got taken care of properly. Which was 5 cars in total that did get the care they needed. My 95 Sentra never developed a oil leak at all because I changed the oil every 4 to 5k miles with Castrol Syntec. I got that car with 118k miles and drove it to 240k miles. I changed the plugs and wires in it and it just about always ran very well. I monitored the belts, CV axles, and pretty much all else I could keep my eyes and ears on. My Ford Fusion obviously a newer car did great but I took very good care of it until a deer decided to run out in front of me.
I realized that my responsibility in taking care of my cars was MY responsibility. And that by doing this I would and could keep myself out of trouble with doing right by them. And save myself the aggregation/ headache of such trouble or prevent a number of other problems.
I've spotted my co workers with tires worn down to the cords and told them to get there cars new tires and alignments ASAP. I gave one of my lady co workers at the hospital I worked at a nice digital Gage to check the air pressure in her tires after I noticed her tires were quite low. So now I look out for others too.. Because I've been where they are. Not paying attention and clueless
My dumb dumb self used to not pay attention to details about my car when I was younger. It never led to anything bad or terrible happening by the grace of God above. But if something had happened the way my parents raised me I would have looked at myself first and foremost.
When I was in my early 20s I started to realize that my cars had problems that could have been prevented at times. Motors developing leaks because I hadn't changed the oil enough had caused the oil to become obviously dirty but also acidic which took out the seals. Poor running due to plugs and wires not being changed, belts broken because I hadn't been paying attention etc.
After my black Ford Probe every car I had after that got taken care of properly. Which was 5 cars in total that did get the care they needed. My 95 Sentra never developed a oil leak at all because I changed the oil every 4 to 5k miles with Castrol Syntec. I got that car with 118k miles and drove it to 240k miles. I changed the plugs and wires in it and it just about always ran very well. I monitored the belts, CV axles, and pretty much all else I could keep my eyes and ears on. My Ford Fusion obviously a newer car did great but I took very good care of it until a deer decided to run out in front of me.
I realized that my responsibility in taking care of my cars was MY responsibility. And that by doing this I would and could keep myself out of trouble with doing right by them. And save myself the aggregation/ headache of such trouble or prevent a number of other problems.
I've spotted my co workers with tires worn down to the cords and told them to get there cars new tires and alignments ASAP. I gave one of my lady co workers at the hospital I worked at a nice digital Gage to check the air pressure in her tires after I noticed her tires were quite low. So now I look out for others too.. Because I've been where they are. Not paying attention and clueless
Last edited:
Apparently she thought when she buys tires, manufacturer telepathically increases pressure in tires.
One thing I found absurd in this country are law suits. I always remember that case when that lady sued McDonalds because coffee was hot, and she won. I am not fan of McDonalds and their business model but seriously?
One thing I found absurd in this country are law suits. I always remember that case when that lady sued McDonalds because coffee was hot, and she won. I am not fan of McDonalds and their business model but seriously?
It's amazing how many people drive around on low tires. My kids friend drove his Mom's luxury SUV over while visiting and said it wasn't driving well. So I took a look and the tires looked a bit low so I checked the door jamb sticker and it said 44 front 48 rear. (WOW
) seemed like a lot to me since I am used to 30-32.
SO I hit them with my digital air gauge...they were all 18-24psi. This is on a $75,000.00 SUV. I pumped them up to 44 and let it go. The kids Mom calls and says "Wow thanks my car rides so much better now"
Whiskey Tango Foxtrot
SO I hit them with my digital air gauge...they were all 18-24psi. This is on a $75,000.00 SUV. I pumped them up to 44 and let it go. The kids Mom calls and says "Wow thanks my car rides so much better now"
Whiskey Tango Foxtrot
Originally Posted By: edyvw
Apparently she thought when she buys tires, manufacturer telepathically increases pressure in tires.
One thing I found absurd in this country are law suits. I always remember that case when that lady sued McDonalds because coffee was hot, and she won. I am not fan of McDonalds and their business model but seriously?
Read the facts about the hot coffee case. That was not a frivolous lawsuits. 3rd degree burns and tried to settle for small amounts multiple times, which McDonalds refused. Also, a judge lowered her recovery amount down from the huge amount the jury awarded. The media never lets facts get in the way if a good story though, right?
Apparently she thought when she buys tires, manufacturer telepathically increases pressure in tires.
One thing I found absurd in this country are law suits. I always remember that case when that lady sued McDonalds because coffee was hot, and she won. I am not fan of McDonalds and their business model but seriously?
Read the facts about the hot coffee case. That was not a frivolous lawsuits. 3rd degree burns and tried to settle for small amounts multiple times, which McDonalds refused. Also, a judge lowered her recovery amount down from the huge amount the jury awarded. The media never lets facts get in the way if a good story though, right?
Originally Posted By: edyvw
Apparently she thought when she buys tires, manufacturer telepathically increases pressure in tires.
One thing I found absurd in this country are law suits. I always remember that case when that lady sued McDonalds because coffee was hot, and she won. I am not fan of McDonalds and their business model but seriously?
The initial award in that case was excessive (and was later lowered) but the claim was solid. McDonald's had a history of keeping coffee at temps that were above industry norms and simply paying people off when they got burned, which happened pretty regularly. The claimant had severe burns and was hospitalized as a result. The damages she initially claimed against McD before it went to litigation were relatively minor and I believe were her medical expenses and lost wages.
Read up on it, it is a pretty interesting case.
But in this Michelin case, it sounds like the plaintiff was looking for an undeserved payday. I think her lawyer should face disciplinary action from the BAR (but I doubt that would ever happen).
Apparently she thought when she buys tires, manufacturer telepathically increases pressure in tires.
One thing I found absurd in this country are law suits. I always remember that case when that lady sued McDonalds because coffee was hot, and she won. I am not fan of McDonalds and their business model but seriously?
The initial award in that case was excessive (and was later lowered) but the claim was solid. McDonald's had a history of keeping coffee at temps that were above industry norms and simply paying people off when they got burned, which happened pretty regularly. The claimant had severe burns and was hospitalized as a result. The damages she initially claimed against McD before it went to litigation were relatively minor and I believe were her medical expenses and lost wages.
Read up on it, it is a pretty interesting case.
But in this Michelin case, it sounds like the plaintiff was looking for an undeserved payday. I think her lawyer should face disciplinary action from the BAR (but I doubt that would ever happen).
Originally Posted By: NMBurb02
Originally Posted By: edyvw
Apparently she thought when she buys tires, manufacturer telepathically increases pressure in tires.
One thing I found absurd in this country are law suits. I always remember that case when that lady sued McDonalds because coffee was hot, and she won. I am not fan of McDonalds and their business model but seriously?
The initial award in that case was excessive (and was later lowered) but the claim was solid. McDonald's had a history of keeping coffee at temps that were above industry norms and simply paying people off when they got burned, which happened pretty regularly. The claimant had severe burns and was hospitalized as a result. The damages she initially claimed against McD before it went to litigation were relatively minor and I believe were her medical expenses and lost wages.
Read up on it, it is a pretty interesting case.
But in this Michelin case, it sounds like the plaintiff was looking for an undeserved payday. I think her lawyer should face disciplinary action from the BAR (but I doubt that would ever happen).
I make every morning Turkish coffee.You need to boil water etc. Not sure about industry standards, but I do expect to be hot.
When I am buying Starbucks espresso etc, I always expect it to be hot. It is called: common sense.
Originally Posted By: edyvw
Apparently she thought when she buys tires, manufacturer telepathically increases pressure in tires.
One thing I found absurd in this country are law suits. I always remember that case when that lady sued McDonalds because coffee was hot, and she won. I am not fan of McDonalds and their business model but seriously?
The initial award in that case was excessive (and was later lowered) but the claim was solid. McDonald's had a history of keeping coffee at temps that were above industry norms and simply paying people off when they got burned, which happened pretty regularly. The claimant had severe burns and was hospitalized as a result. The damages she initially claimed against McD before it went to litigation were relatively minor and I believe were her medical expenses and lost wages.
Read up on it, it is a pretty interesting case.
But in this Michelin case, it sounds like the plaintiff was looking for an undeserved payday. I think her lawyer should face disciplinary action from the BAR (but I doubt that would ever happen).
I make every morning Turkish coffee.You need to boil water etc. Not sure about industry standards, but I do expect to be hot.
When I am buying Starbucks espresso etc, I always expect it to be hot. It is called: common sense.
First I want to say I am sorry that there was injury in this accident. No one wants these things to happen. It's a shame someone has to live with the consequences. I do a lot of posting on the internet to try to educate people so these things do not happen - reduce the risk, so to speak.
But, allow me to fill in some of the blanks in this case.
There is something in the write up about the tire failing BEFORE the accident. I suspect that means that it was KNOWN the tire had failed but was driven on in spite of this. I suspect this may have been a deciding factor in the jury's decision. (Alternatively, the reporter could have been misreading the fact that the failure had to occur before the accident took place or the tire wasn't the cause of the accident.)
Second, improper repair: Could be a plug, could be merely a patch - it is unspecified. Yes, anything other than a plug/patch combination is considered an improper repair.
Why? Because improper repairs fail more often than proper repairs.
How much more often? The statistics are hard to come by, but based on my past experience, a properly repaired tire fails about twice as often as an unrepaired tire, and an improperly repaired tire fails twice as often as a properly repaired tire.
Let me state this in a different way: Even properly repair tires are more prone to failure, and improperly repaired tires even more than that.
I think that unrepaired tire failures are currently on the order of 1 in 500,000 to 1 million. Considering there are 900 million tires on the road in the US, that means that there would be about 900 to 1,800 tire failures in a year. Please note that this is ONLY tire failures NOT caused by a puncture or a repair or some other outside cause, but DOES include tire failures for which the cause is unknown, but not suspected to have an assignable outside cause. Also please note that vast majority of these tire failures are a) not perceived by the owner, or b) did not cause an accident.
So the numbers are small - and therefore the risk, but this case illustrates that the consequences can be severe.
But, allow me to fill in some of the blanks in this case.
There is something in the write up about the tire failing BEFORE the accident. I suspect that means that it was KNOWN the tire had failed but was driven on in spite of this. I suspect this may have been a deciding factor in the jury's decision. (Alternatively, the reporter could have been misreading the fact that the failure had to occur before the accident took place or the tire wasn't the cause of the accident.)
Second, improper repair: Could be a plug, could be merely a patch - it is unspecified. Yes, anything other than a plug/patch combination is considered an improper repair.
Why? Because improper repairs fail more often than proper repairs.
How much more often? The statistics are hard to come by, but based on my past experience, a properly repaired tire fails about twice as often as an unrepaired tire, and an improperly repaired tire fails twice as often as a properly repaired tire.
Let me state this in a different way: Even properly repair tires are more prone to failure, and improperly repaired tires even more than that.
I think that unrepaired tire failures are currently on the order of 1 in 500,000 to 1 million. Considering there are 900 million tires on the road in the US, that means that there would be about 900 to 1,800 tire failures in a year. Please note that this is ONLY tire failures NOT caused by a puncture or a repair or some other outside cause, but DOES include tire failures for which the cause is unknown, but not suspected to have an assignable outside cause. Also please note that vast majority of these tire failures are a) not perceived by the owner, or b) did not cause an accident.
So the numbers are small - and therefore the risk, but this case illustrates that the consequences can be severe.
I work at a tire store and the ONLY approved repair by every tire manufacturer is the patchplug. It is also only to be repaired if the injury is within the outer and inner ribs of the tread. This repair is the only repair to keep your tread wear warranty intact. The patchplug is a patch with a rubber plug in the middle sticking through the injury.The tire has to be removed from the wheel to perform the repair. The plug itself kinda melts to fill in around the hole left from the injury and on the inside of the tire a butyl lining is put on the bottom of the patch to seal it. This repair is approved by the Dept.of transportation and safety is good for tires up to a w speed rating(148 mph)
- Status
Similar threads
