Is this something you can sue over?

[Cal_21]

In torts claims you need actual damages.
The air bags not deploying didnt increase the damage to your truck.
If you had smashed up your face you might have had a strict liability claim.
Maybe you can sue the govt. for not putting up a sign on a dangerous curve.

I say he breaks a bottle over his face & busts out his windshield...




lololol jk

 

[JumpBallWinner]

Shut up...You want to sue GM, because your a retard that drives off the road. Luckily your not hurt, thank God for that.

I guess people who have accidents deserve to be hurt in your eyes because they made a mistake while driving? Hell, maybe the government should do away with requiring automobiles to have airbags that way we can teach all these accident having assholes a lessong by increasing the number of them killed. Makes sense.

And I didn't say I wanted to sue GM, it was something the people who have looked at the truck suggested might be something that should be done. I will probably never persue it, even if there is something to persue. Is it not possible that there was something faulty about those model's airbags and that me bringing it to there attention might cause a recall that saves someone else's life.

 

[JumpBallWinner]

In torts claims you need actual damages.
The air bags not deploying didnt increase the damage to your truck.
If you had smashed up your face you might have had a strict liability claim.
Maybe you can sue the govt. for not putting up a sign on a dangerous curve.

Nah, I'm not on a "who can I sue" mission here. Was just curious as to a car manufacturer's liability towards mandatory safety equipment that fails to work in the situations it was designed to in.

 

[bw1]

I guess people who have accidents deserve to be hurt in your eyes because they made a mistake while driving? Hell, maybe the government should do away with requiring automobiles to have airbags that way we can teach all these accident having assholes a lessong by increasing the number of them killed. Makes sense.

And I didn't say I wanted to sue GM, it was something the people who have looked at the truck suggested might be something that should be done. I will probably never persue it, even if there is something to persue. Is it not possible that there was something faulty about those model's airbags and that me bringing it to there attention might cause a recall that saves someone else's life.

I never said you deserve to be hurt because you made a mistake while driving. I even said Thank God you were not hurt. I just think it's fucking ridiculous to think that there's a law suit there.

 

[Stefka]

Nah, I'm not on a "who can I sue" mission here. Was just curious as to a car manufacturer's liability towards mandatory safety equipment that fails to work in the situations it was designed to in.

Maybe you should just file a complaint with whatever agency deals with this type of stuff (I have no idea). They can take your info and maybe use it later.

 

[JumpBallWinner]

I never said you deserve to be hurt because you made a mistake while driving. I even said Thank God you were not hurt. I just think it's fucking ridiculous to think that there's a law suit there.

I think it's ridiculous that someone sued McDonalds over their coffee being hot.

I also think it's ridiculous that a man sued an RV manufacturer becuse the manual didn't specifically state that the vehicle couldn't drive itself, and when he got up from behind the wheel to go take a nap while the thing was still moving, he had a wreck.

There are hundreds of examples that I would label as flat out mind blowingly retarded.

However, I don't find it ridiculous that someone could be bothered by the fact that there might be a line of vehicles out there that when hit head on at higher rates of speed, fail to deploy their airbags, thus possibly costing someone their life, or really screwing them up.

Yes, I was lucky, and I am thankfull to have lost nothing more than a truck. However, the next person who has this happen might not be so lucky.

Would you be ok with it if a loved one was hit head on by some drunk idiot and they were killed or badly hurt because the airbags didn't work? Would you be thankfull if that situation occured, however they weren't hurt because the problem had been brought up prior and had forced a recall to be done, hence preventing the injury or death?

Like I said, it's not something I really planned on persuing. But these are some thoughts that went through my head after thinking of the situation.

 

[eddymerckx]

I think it's ridiculous that someone sued McDonalds over their coffee being hot.


sorry, but mcD deserved to be sued--the served coffee that was just below the boiling point b/c people would put milk in it to cool and not notice that McDs use 50% less coffee than anyone else--and she sued b/c she got 3rd degree burns from it (whereas if it typical coffee only 1st degree burns).

oh, and the judgment was reversed on appeal anyway.

there is a complaint section on the gov't NTSB website--and searchable to see if others have the same problem.

 

[rubberneck]

I was in a wreck last night, totaled my truck. Was on a road I'd never been on before and was unaware of a sharp curve coming up, so I went straight into a yard with trees and proceded to hit one head on. I mean it really destroyed the front of my tahoe, and I had one of those heavy dute brushguards on the front. But my airbags didn't deploy. So far the few people who have looked at the type of damage said that they can't belive that they did't and that I shoud contact GM and possibly file a lawsuit.

Is there a case here?

maybe this is way they didn't deploy...........not sure just saying!

 

[bw1]

I think it's ridiculous that someone sued McDonalds over their coffee being hot.

I also think it's ridiculous that a man sued an RV manufacturer becuse the manual didn't specifically state that the vehicle couldn't drive itself, and when he got up from behind the wheel to go take a nap while the thing was still moving, he had a wreck.

There are hundreds of examples that I would label as flat out mind blowingly retarded.

However, I don't find it ridiculous that someone could be bothered by the fact that there might be a line of vehicles out there that when hit head on at higher rates of speed, fail to deploy their airbags, thus possibly costing someone their life, or really screwing them up.

Yes, I was lucky, and I am thankfull to have lost nothing more than a truck. However, the next person who has this happen might not be so lucky.

Would you be ok with it if a loved one was hit head on by some drunk idiot and they were killed or badly hurt because the airbags didn't work? Would you be thankfull if that situation occured, however they weren't hurt because the problem had been brought up prior and had forced a recall to be done, hence preventing the injury or death?

Like I said, it's not something I really planned on persuing. But these are some thoughts that went through my head after thinking of the situation.

Yea, I'm sure all these "people" that seen your truck and said there may be a law suit here, were just concerened about other peoples safety. That's what you guys were thinking.

 

[Mavafanculo]

In torts claims you need actual damages.
The air bags not deploying didnt increase the damage to your truck.
If you had smashed up your face you might have had a strict liability claim.
Maybe you can sue the govt. for not putting up a sign on a dangerous curve.

actual damages for compensatory

punitive because they fucked up