Van's is being sued

DeeG

DeeG

Cleared for Takeoff
Joined
Feb 22, 2005
Messages
1,011
Location
Cashmere, WA
Display Name
Display name:
DeeG
From the 07-26-2005 issue of the Wenatchee World:


Plane crash victims sue designers, manufacturer

A Quincy couple whose plane crashed two years ago near Pangborn Memorial Airport is suing the designers of an experimental plane and the maker of a fuel injection system.
Orchardist Thomas Bollinger and his wife, Claire Bollinger, were seriously injured July 26, 2003.
The lawsuit filed Wednesday in Douglas County Superior Court alleges Airflow Performace Inc. of Spartanburg, S.C. sold Thomas Bollinger a flawed fuel injection system.
It also claims that Van's Aircraft Inc. of Aurora Ore., designed the model RV-6A experimental aircraft with a flaw that makes passenger shoulder harnesses ineffective when the tail is damaged.
Van's and Airflow officals declined to comment.


http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/GenPDF.asp?id=SEA03LA154&rpt=fa


Seems to me that the person taht installed the part is the one that should be to blame. There is a reason that parts are to be installed according to directions.....
 
DeeG said:
Seems to me that the person that installed the part is the one that should be to blame.
Click to expand...
Oh, no Dee... the lawyers have to target anyone remotely connected with the most available cash is how it works, as I'm sure you know.
Heck, it says right in the manual if you take off the safety wire, be sure to reinstall it or the airplane will crash -exactly as happened!!
 
I'm sure the price of kits will be going up 20% and our insurance will go up as well. Sigh.

Its never anyone's fault, its always the implement's fault. :mad:
 
Clearly, the fault lies with whoever installed the fuel injection system, and didn't safety wire the retaining/stop screw.

If we had the "loser pays court costs including lawyer fees for both sides", frivolous lawsuits like this would decline dramatically.

... Bill
 
Anthony said:
I'm sure the price of kits will be going up 20% and our insurance will go up as well. Sigh.

Its never anyone's fault, its always the implement's fault. :mad:
Click to expand...

Course, I don't know any more than y'all, but Vans did sell a guy here at Addison a faulty part. Actually, the manner in which the instructions directed the install be done, led to an engine failure. Been a long time since I've heard the details, but he showed me the instructions and described exactly what happened. It was a pretty clear error. He landed without incident and fixed it. Told him about the problem and they changed things.

Guess I'm saying, don't be too quick to judge. I hate these lawsuits as much as anyone; 'specially the Carnahan (spelling) deal. But some of these have merit--unless someone knows more details and would like to share them.

Best,

Dave
Baron 322KS
 
flybill7 said:
Clearly, the fault lies with whoever installed the fuel injection system, and didn't safety wire the retaining/stop screw.

If we had the "loser pays court costs including lawyer fees for both sides", frivolous lawsuits like this would decline dramatically.

... Bill
Click to expand...

I would also add hang the losing lawyer. Sure would make them more careful in what they take to court.
 
Dave Siciliano said:
Guess I'm saying, don't be too quick to judge. I hate these lawsuits as much as anyone; 'specially the Carnahan (spelling) deal. But some of these have merit--unless someone knows more details and would like to share them.
Click to expand...

Of Course you are correct Dave. My knee jerk reaction to these law suits is wrong, but you have to wonder that its the new get rich quick scheme of our age.
 
""but you have to wonder that its the new get rich quick scheme of our age.""

I think I'll sue you because you are bad mouthing my retirement system. :)
 
A post-accident inspection of the aircraft revealed that the stop screw holding the valve retaining
face plate on the Airflow Performance Purge Valve Assembly had come loose, allowing the valve
mechanism to separate from its housing. It was further determined that the subject retaining/stop
screw had not been safety wired as required to insure that it would not back out.
During the investigation, it was determined that in May of 2000, the builder had purchased the fuel
flow divider and purge valve as one preassembled unit from Airflow Performance. According to
Airflow Performance personnel, and the pictures in the Airflow Performance Installation and
Service Manual, when such a pre-assembled unit is sent out, the subject valve faceplate retaining
screw is safety wired in series with the two purge valve mounting screws. A further inspection of
the aircraft revealed that during the installation of the fuel system, the purge valve was removed
from its original mounting pad, rotated 90 degrees, and reinstalled on a piece of angle aluminum
that had been riveted onto the original mounting pad. In order to make this alteration, the builder
had to disconnect the safety wire that ran between the two mounting screws and the valve face plate
retaining screw. As found after the accident, the safety wire attached to the two mounting screws
was a completed loop that could not have extended to the faceplate retaining screw. In addition,
there were no further scars or markings that indicated that the faceplate screw had been separately
safetied.
A review of page I-1 of the Airflow Performance Installation and Service Manual, Revision A
revealed a narrative section that made the following statement: Notice how the purge valve stop and
two mounting screws are lock wired together. If removal of the valve is necessary, make sure to
re-lock wire the purge valve stop screw. Failure to do so will result in sudden stoppage of the
engine if the screw backs out."
Click to expand...
I see no way to win, Why bother suing? The buider screwed up, period.
 
Thanks Eamon!! Now, I understand the opinions expressed--more better!!

We'll see how the plaintiff's attorney blurrs the owners responsibility for this one to a "jury of his peers".

Best,

Dave
Baron N322KS
 
Eamon said:
I see no way to win, Why bother suing? The buider screwed up, period.
Click to expand...

The lawyer tries to win by getting it in front of a jury and picking jurors that he/she hopes are sympathetic. Jurors are notoriously unreliable. And the more intelligent folks that will see through the smokescreen do everything in their power to avoid jury duty. A lawyer knows he has a better chance in court than he does buying a lottery ticket.

We need to change the culture in this country away from the "blame somebody else" mentality. That needs to be the culture war.......
 
wsuffa said:
We need to change the culture in this country away from the "blame somebody else" mentality. That needs to be the culture war.......
Click to expand...

Bill. I agree, but 50% (or more) of this country believes this is the lottery and its a way to "get back" at the evil, greedy corporations. Nevermind these same corps make up their 401K plans, so they're basically suing themselves, but what does logic have to do with anything.

Part of Bush's agenda is ending frivolous law suits. I hope this gains more momentum.
 
Anthony said:
Bill. I agree, but 50% (or more) of this country believes this is the lottery and its a way to "get back" at the evil, greedy corporations. Nevermind these same corps make up their 401K plans, so they're basically suing themselves, but what does logic have to do with anything.

Part of Bush's agenda is ending frivolous law suits. I hope this gains more momentum.
Click to expand...

I agree about limiting frivolous lawsuits.

I am ambivilant with the current political approach for a number of reasons. Mostly because a hard dollar-limt approach does nothing to stop irresponsible or unscrupulous people.

I think we need real leadership, and we need to change the culture in this country to one of personal responsibility and ethical behavior. That has to start with the leadership. It has to start with our government & business leaders. As long as citizens see leaders getting away with greed, the citizens will say "why not me too".

Morals and ethics.

We've made progress in changing the culture in other ways... we need to use a similar approach on this, too.
 
wsuffa said:
I agree about limiting frivolous lawsuits.

I am ambivilant with the current political approach for a number of reasons. Mostly because a hard dollar-limt approach does nothing to stop irresponsible or unscrupulous people.

I think we need real leadership, and we need to change the culture in this country to one of personal responsibility and ethical behavior. That has to start with the leadership. It has to start with our government & business leaders. As long as citizens see leaders getting away with greed, the citizens will say "why not me too".

Morals and ethics.

We've made progress in changing the culture in other ways... we need to use a similar approach on this, too.
Click to expand...

Negative, good buddy. It does not start with govt or business. It starts with you and me. If govt should at all factor into this it should be that they get out of the way. Govt has passed laws for this, laws for that, all to reign in the moral stance one may take. They substitute the PC crap espoused by the touchy feely crowd and write laws to make it so. They've redefined words and they've redefined attitudes. They've usurped the responsibility of being responsible.

If an individual were to respond with, "why not me too", it is because they have not yet matured to the point where they choose to maintain the right side of the right Vs wrong debate. How one acts when no one is looking is a truer test of a person than is how one conforms to man's law. Choosing to do right is sometimes very difficult but it derives from personal principals and not from the state. To summarize, the govt exists at the pleasure of the people, the people do not exist to serve govt.
 
Actually, I said government & business leaders, Richard. The emphasis was on "leaders"... as in "business leaders and government leaders". Government is amorphous. It can't lead. Individuals can and should.

People follow examples set by leaders. That's where they learn a moral & ethical compass.

Church congregations don't learn morals by osmosis. They learn from leaders - starting with the Leaders described in Scripture.

Government leaders derive their power from the citizens. In turn, they should set the standard for behavior and ethics. However, when Government is such a morass that outstanding, upstanding folks won't even run for office, there is something wrong.

We have to stop the "get mine" attitude.

Yes, our leaders need to stand up and lead. Hopefully, the next leader will come from one of us that "walks the talk" on personal responsibility, and DEMANDS the same from his/her staff.
 
Eamon said:
I see no way to win, Why bother suing? The buider screwed up, period.
Click to expand...

Doubtful it will end so well. Think Piper Aircraft Corp.

Remember the guy who sued Piper, won, and bankrupted the company? The man purchased a Super Cub and promptly removed the STC shoulder harnesses a previous owner had installed. The man was subsequently severely injured when his aircraft struck a truck parked on the runway--a truck the pilot knew was parked on the runway. The man sued Piper for manufacturing the airplane without shoulder harnesses, and won, and the jury awarded judgement bankrupted Piper Aircraft.
 
Ed Guthrie said:
Doubtful it will end so well. Think Piper Aircraft Corp.

Remember the guy who sued Piper, won, and bankrupted the company? The man purchased a Super Cub and promptly removed the STC shoulder harnesses a previous owner had installed. The man was subsequently severely injured when his aircraft struck a truck parked on the runway--a truck the pilot knew was parked on the runway. The man sued Piper for manufacturing the airplane without shoulder harnesses, and won, and the jury awarded judgement bankrupted Piper Aircraft.
Click to expand...

Agghhh! I hate that case. Its got to be one of the worst for aviation. The jury found that the Cub was a flawed design! After how many years??? Was the plaintiff's lawyer a well known Philadelphia aviation attorney who shall remain absolutely NAMELESS? :mad:
 
Ed Guthrie said:
Doubtful it will end so well. Think Piper Aircraft Corp.

Remember the guy who sued Piper, won, and bankrupted the company? The man purchased a Super Cub and promptly removed the STC shoulder harnesses a previous owner had installed. The man was subsequently severely injured when his aircraft struck a truck parked on the runway--a truck the pilot knew was parked on the runway. The man sued Piper for manufacturing the airplane without shoulder harnesses, and won, and the jury awarded judgement bankrupted Piper Aircraft.
Click to expand...

Well, the someone I know very well was doing some handshaking in Ohio, and his rental car got hit by a Harley. The guy driving it didn't have a registration (too new), the woman behind him- well the guy had just met her and he didn't even know the woman's last name. She has a small puncture wound in the leg, but refuses to sign the papers, it's probably gonna be her meal ticket. He's insured for this, thank god....

No way is the "we" ever gonna lead on this one.
"You never get a bill, until U-WIN. As in 1-800-XXX-U-WIN"
"Where there is never a fee for consultation"
"After all it's your case"

Do you realize how much those billboards and yellow pages ads cost? Those Rolex watches? Those MB 350's. Those....sigh.
 
bbchien said:
Do you realize how much those billboards and yellow pages ads cost? Those Rolex watches? Those MB 350's. Those....sigh.
Click to expand...

If I were going to start on tort reform, the first two things I'd do is to limit/eliminate advertising and implement "losing party pays". I'd also be jawboning for personal responsibility.... and putting pressure on politicians, business leaders, and community leaders to set an example.

After all, when ordinary folks see:
1) Business leaders lining their pockets through shady or unethical practices,
2) Politicians getting junkets and worse from people who want special treatment
3) Bribery among public officials
4) Rich folks buying their way "off the hook" with the best legal advice around (how many folks think OJ was guilty)
5) Sports players acting like children & skating around or busting the law
6) Mayor Daley busting up Meigs in a midnight raid

The ordinary folks think they have a better chance at getting rich with lawsuits than they do with the lottery. And look at the examples that the leaders set.

We really do have a problem in this country. And it isn't going to be easy to fix.
 
One silly lawyer's opinion: attorney advertising is the single worst thing to happen to the profession.

Try watching daytime TV some time.
 
wsuffa said:
If I were going to start on tort reform, the first two things I'd do is to limit/eliminate advertising and implement "losing party pays". I'd also be jawboning for personal responsibility.... and putting pressure on politicians, business leaders, and community leaders to set an example.
Click to expand...

It's a toss up for me but I think I'd put the elimination of "deep pockets" damage award assignments ahead of returning to the "no advertising for legal services" days (that cat's already out of the bag). An individual, corporation, or insurance company should never have to pay more than an amount equal to the judgement times their "responsibility" and if the responsibility is less than 5% they shouldn't even have to pay that. Joint and several liability serves no one except the personal injury lawyers. If the argument that such a policy is necessary for the "poor plaintiffs" to be properly compensated when the primary litigant has inadequate assets, then the rest should come from public coffers, not mostly innocent remotely connected defendants with assets to lose.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top