THE LOBBY A gathering place. Introductions, sports, showin' off your ride, birthday-anniversary-milestone, achievements, family oriented humor.

          
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 05-07-2022, 12:34 PM
jhein's Avatar
jhein jhein is offline
Chief Ponti-yacker
 
Join Date: Dec 2020
Location: Oregon
Posts: 971
Default I don't think this is correct

So a technician at a dealership fails to operate a vehicle correctly, killing another technician and they're suing the car owner? I don't see any accusation that the vehicle was modified in any way or that safety systems were disabled. The tech didn't even have a driver's license. And the article says "car kills mechanic". I don't think so. The incompetent tech killed the mechanic.

https://www.foxnews.com/us/michigan-...ing-oil-change

__________________
70 TA, 467 cid IAII, Edelbrock D-port heads, 9.94:1, Butler HR 236/242 @ .050, 520/540 lift, 112 LSA, Ray Klemm calibrated Q-jet, TKX (2.87 1st/.81 OD), 3.31 rear

https://youtube.com/shorts/gG15nb4FWeo?feature=share
  #2  
Old 05-07-2022, 01:22 PM
428goat 428goat is offline
Senior Chief
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Elkhart In. USA
Posts: 443
Default

My car had a accident while getting worked on at a gas station. The station owner and mechanic got sued not me.

The Following User Says Thank You to 428goat For This Useful Post:
  #3  
Old 05-07-2022, 01:38 PM
HoovDaddy's Avatar
HoovDaddy HoovDaddy is offline
Senior Chief
 
Join Date: Jan 2022
Location: Michigan
Posts: 271
Default

The article failed to state that this is a Michigan law. That’s what I read in a different article. I work part time in a school auto shop and we’ve been discussing this law. High school kids moving cars is sometimes scary.

__________________
https://forums.maxperformanceinc.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=585876&stc=1&d=1646964  761[SIGPIC]
The Following User Says Thank You to HoovDaddy For This Useful Post:
  #4  
Old 05-07-2022, 01:48 PM
Sirrotica's Avatar
Sirrotica Sirrotica is online now
Ultimate Warrior
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Catawba Ohio
Posts: 7,194
Default

When you have a service facility, there is insurance called "garage keepers liability insurance", it would come into effect while the car was at the service facility, and during test drives, etc.

Had it in my own garage, for many years, so that even if the vehicle owner had no insurance, myself, or my employees would be covered while the car was in our care. It would also cover any accident attributed to a faulty repair, if it was proven that the work, or parts were substandard. I believe it covered $500,000 for a single event.

__________________
Brad Yost
1973 T/A (SOLD)
2005 GTO
1984 Grand Prix

100% Pontiacs in my driveway!!! What's in your driveway?

If you don't take some of the RACETRACK home with you, Ya got cheated

The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Sirrotica For This Useful Post:
  #5  
Old 05-07-2022, 02:26 PM
jhein's Avatar
jhein jhein is offline
Chief Ponti-yacker
 
Join Date: Dec 2020
Location: Oregon
Posts: 971
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by HoovDaddy View Post
The article failed to state that this is a Michigan law. That’s what I read in a different article. I work part time in a school auto shop and we’ve been discussing this law. High school kids moving cars is sometimes scary.
That's what they alluded to in the article I posted. I understand that may be the law in MI. However, even if true, that would remove liability from the shop, but to assign it to the car owner is bizarre. And if that's the law it should be changed, IMO.

So let's say I hire a contractor to work on my house. And let's say one of his employees makes an error and kills another of his employees. Then I'm liable? Isn't that the whole purpose for only hiring contractors that are licensed and insured to work on your stuff, so they have the liability?

Glad I don't live in MI. Of course, maybe the laws here in OR are just as bad...

__________________
70 TA, 467 cid IAII, Edelbrock D-port heads, 9.94:1, Butler HR 236/242 @ .050, 520/540 lift, 112 LSA, Ray Klemm calibrated Q-jet, TKX (2.87 1st/.81 OD), 3.31 rear

https://youtube.com/shorts/gG15nb4FWeo?feature=share
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to jhein For This Useful Post:
  #6  
Old 05-07-2022, 03:55 PM
81TTA's Avatar
81TTA 81TTA is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: SE Michigan
Posts: 31
Default

It sounds like this is just a convoluted way to get back to the "common sense" resolution to the matter. If the employee can't legally pursue the employer, they go after the "deep pocket" of the owner's insurance. Even though they technically are suing the owner, this is really all about money. And, they know the money (i.e. deep pocket) is with the insurance, not the owner. But, the way to insurance is through the owner. Unless they're charging the owner with something criminal (and it doesn't sound like they are), he's just being dragged along for the ride.

Now, after the settlement with the owner's insurance (or during?), that owner's insurance company will counter-sue the dealership. The owner's insurance company isn't an "employee". So, the legal limitation doesn't apply. The money for whatever settlement will ultimately come from the dealership. In fact, I think the article states as much in the last paragraph. So, at the end of the day, after all the lawyers get paid their cut, things work out largely as they should.

What would be interesting to know is if this would affect the owner in any way. Higher insurance rates, court costs of any kind, dropped/cancelled insurance? Otherwise, this just feels like a typical legal run-around with a sensational headline to get people worked up. Maybe if they started the article with their last paragraph, it might not be viewed as such a big deal?

The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to 81TTA For This Useful Post:
  #7  
Old 05-07-2022, 04:27 PM
jhein's Avatar
jhein jhein is offline
Chief Ponti-yacker
 
Join Date: Dec 2020
Location: Oregon
Posts: 971
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 81TTA View Post
It sounds like this is just a convoluted way to get back to the "common sense" resolution to the matter. If the employee can't legally pursue the employer, they go after the "deep pocket" of the owner's insurance. Even though they technically are suing the owner, this is really all about money. And, they know the money (i.e. deep pocket) is with the insurance, not the owner. But, the way to insurance is through the owner. Unless they're charging the owner with something criminal (and it doesn't sound like they are), he's just being dragged along for the ride.

Now, after the settlement with the owner's insurance (or during?), that owner's insurance company will counter-sue the dealership. The owner's insurance company isn't an "employee". So, the legal limitation doesn't apply. The money for whatever settlement will ultimately come from the dealership. In fact, I think the article states as much in the last paragraph. So, at the end of the day, after all the lawyers get paid their cut, things work out largely as they should.

What would be interesting to know is if this would affect the owner in any way. Higher insurance rates, court costs of any kind, dropped/cancelled insurance? Otherwise, this just feels like a typical legal run-around with a sensational headline to get people worked up. Maybe if they started the article with their last paragraph, it might not be viewed as such a big deal?
Yeah, I got that by the end of the article. But what about all the other stuff that occurs. The fact that the car owner will have that judgment on their record. What about the legal expenses, time and other losses the car owner will suffer? Makes no sense. That's a bad law. And fundamentally, why should an employer be protected from liability in the workplace?

__________________
70 TA, 467 cid IAII, Edelbrock D-port heads, 9.94:1, Butler HR 236/242 @ .050, 520/540 lift, 112 LSA, Ray Klemm calibrated Q-jet, TKX (2.87 1st/.81 OD), 3.31 rear

https://youtube.com/shorts/gG15nb4FWeo?feature=share
  #8  
Old 05-07-2022, 05:09 PM
Stuart's Avatar
Stuart Stuart is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Minneapolis
Posts: 7,938
Default

It's clickbait, and it's being discussed in web boards all over the Internet. Bottom line is it's a quirk of Michigan law, and ultimately it's a way at getting back at the dealer. The car owner won't be on the hook for anything.

The Following User Says Thank You to Stuart For This Useful Post:
  #9  
Old 05-07-2022, 08:05 PM
72projectbird's Avatar
72projectbird 72projectbird is online now
Ultimate Warrior
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: N.E Massachusetts
Posts: 2,003
Default

Whoever's writing Michagan law is smoking some good stuff!

__________________
"Those poor souls have made the fatal mistake of surrounding us. Now we can fire in any direction"

1970 Trans Am RAIII 4 speed
1971 Trans Am 5.3 LM7
1977 Trans Am W72 Y82
1987 Grand National
The Following User Says Thank You to 72projectbird For This Useful Post:
  #10  
Old 05-07-2022, 09:08 PM
HoovDaddy's Avatar
HoovDaddy HoovDaddy is offline
Senior Chief
 
Join Date: Jan 2022
Location: Michigan
Posts: 271
Default

I've lived in Michigan since 1960 and have never heard of this as well as all the people I know. I often think of valet drivers, because they truly don't care how they drive.

I found this explanation the other day when this hit the news. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-mechanic.html

WHY WAS THE JEEP OWNER SUED?
According to Michigan law, the only remedy for employees in cases of injury in the workplace is workers' compensation.

The state law states: 'If someone other than either the worker, the employer, or a coworker is responsible for an injury, that "third party" can be sued,' the Michigan Government website states.

'Thus, if a worker is injured because of the bad design of a machine which the employer purchased from an independent company, the worker can sue the manufacturer of that machine for civil damages.

'If an employer has paid workers' compensation benefits to a worker and the worker later obtains a recovery from a third party, the employer is entitled to be paid back for the workers' compensation benefits it paid to the worker. The employer, however, must pay for its share of the attorney fees and costs in the lawsuit against the third party.'

Source: Michigan Government

__________________
https://forums.maxperformanceinc.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=585876&stc=1&d=1646964  761[SIGPIC]
The Following User Says Thank You to HoovDaddy For This Useful Post:
  #11  
Old 05-07-2022, 11:16 PM
jhein's Avatar
jhein jhein is offline
Chief Ponti-yacker
 
Join Date: Dec 2020
Location: Oregon
Posts: 971
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by HoovDaddy View Post
I've lived in Michigan since 1960 and have never heard of this as well as all the people I know. I often think of valet drivers, because they truly don't care how they drive.

I found this explanation the other day when this hit the news. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-mechanic.html

WHY WAS THE JEEP OWNER SUED?
According to Michigan law, the only remedy for employees in cases of injury in the workplace is workers' compensation.

The state law states: 'If someone other than either the worker, the employer, or a coworker is responsible for an injury, that "third party" can be sued,' the Michigan Government website states.

'Thus, if a worker is injured because of the bad design of a machine which the employer purchased from an independent company, the worker can sue the manufacturer of that machine for civil damages.

'If an employer has paid workers' compensation benefits to a worker and the worker later obtains a recovery from a third party, the employer is entitled to be paid back for the workers' compensation benefits it paid to the worker. The employer, however, must pay for its share of the attorney fees and costs in the lawsuit against the third party.'

Source: Michigan Government
I don't read anything there that assigns liability to the car owner in this case.

__________________
70 TA, 467 cid IAII, Edelbrock D-port heads, 9.94:1, Butler HR 236/242 @ .050, 520/540 lift, 112 LSA, Ray Klemm calibrated Q-jet, TKX (2.87 1st/.81 OD), 3.31 rear

https://youtube.com/shorts/gG15nb4FWeo?feature=share
  #12  
Old 05-08-2022, 07:05 AM
chuckies76ta's Avatar
chuckies76ta chuckies76ta is offline
Ultimate Warrior
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Canada
Posts: 3,078
Default

Thompson reached into the vehicle and pressed brake with his right foot, keeping his other foot on the floor," the plaintiff summary reads. "He pressed the start button. When the vehicle did not start, he took his foot off the brake and depressed the clutch pedal. He again hit the start button. This time the Jeep started. He removed his foot from the clutch, still standing outside the vehicle. The vehicle lurched forward.

This is the key word in all of this: The incompetent tech killed the mechanic.

From what I understand here according to W/C. or OH&S an Employee has to be Competent, and that responsibility falls on the Employer. That's why an employer provides safety training. You don't start a vehicle standing outside the vehicle.
Incompetant Worker.

__________________
68 Firebird. IA2 block, 505 cu in, E-head, Solid roller 3650 weight. Reid TH400 4:11 gear. 29" slick.
Best so far 10.12@133 mph. 1.43 60 ft.
76 Trans am, TKX .81 o/d, 3.73 Moser rearend,
468 with KRE D-ports, Doug headers, 3" Exh.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to chuckies76ta For This Useful Post:
  #13  
Old 05-08-2022, 07:16 AM
Half-Inch Stud's Avatar
Half-Inch Stud Half-Inch Stud is offline
Ultimate Warrior
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: BlueBell, PA or AL U.S.A.
Posts: 18,458
Default

The incompetant worker was not even used to starting riding mowers with the kill switch in the seat.

  #14  
Old 05-08-2022, 08:50 AM
66sprint6 66sprint6 is offline
Ultimate Warrior
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Toronto, ON, Canada
Posts: 1,205
Default

I'm in the construction business and the first hour or so of my day is spent filling out paperwork. Electronically of course. It's all for ass coverage, so when someone points the finger at us, we just turn that finger right around.
One such form may have helped here. It has many names, but we call it a Daily Task Analysis. It lists the task, the work, the risks, hazard rating (low medium high), and finally steps taken to mitigate said hazard.
The bottom line is that this is all part of training. Something that was missing here obviously. A simple orientation would have gone over the awareness and risk of a manual trans vehicle. Around here, sh!t rolls uphill, so the employer would ultimately be on the hook.

  #15  
Old 05-08-2022, 10:15 AM
jhein's Avatar
jhein jhein is offline
Chief Ponti-yacker
 
Join Date: Dec 2020
Location: Oregon
Posts: 971
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by chuckies76ta View Post
This is the key word in all of this: The incompetent tech killed the mechanic.

From what I understand here according to W/C. or OH&S an Employee has to be Competent, and that responsibility falls on the Employer. That's why an employer provides safety training. You don't start a vehicle standing outside the vehicle.
Incompetant Worker.
Exactly what I said. It may be an on-the-job injury, but it's also some form of homicide. Negligent homicide or some such thing, I'm not an attorney and the terminology is different in different states.

__________________
70 TA, 467 cid IAII, Edelbrock D-port heads, 9.94:1, Butler HR 236/242 @ .050, 520/540 lift, 112 LSA, Ray Klemm calibrated Q-jet, TKX (2.87 1st/.81 OD), 3.31 rear

https://youtube.com/shorts/gG15nb4FWeo?feature=share
The Following User Says Thank You to jhein For This Useful Post:
  #16  
Old 05-08-2022, 12:27 PM
burd's Avatar
burd burd is online now
Ultimate Warrior
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: MOTOR CITY
Posts: 1,527
Default

I’m not a judge. Let it play out in court

__________________
🧩 Burds Parts, Finding those Hard to Find PCs, no Fisher Price Toys Here

Just Say No To 8” Flakes

F ire B irds

🇮🇱
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:04 AM.

 

About Us

The PY Online Forums is the largest online gathering of Pontiac enthusiasts anywhere in the world. Founded in 1991, it was also the first online forum for people to gather and talk about their Pontiacs. Since then, it has become the mecca of Pontiac technical data and knowledge that no other place can surpass.

 




Copyright © 2017