Long Travel BS Thread

It’s clearly not an argument of don’t do it. We all have modified shit. I street drive mine daily. Street drive 1,000hp cars as well. It’s the simple fact that your chances of having your pants sued off are 100x greater driving something modified vs something stock. End of discussion.

 

Do you know if the sentencing was made worse because of the modifications or would the outcome have been the same if he was driving a stock minivan?

 

If they’re 100x greater we should be able to produce some examples is all I’m saying. It’s opinion otherwise. It’s definitely worth the discussion in case the worry is worthwhile.

 

It's as simple as this. An OEM bumper is designed for impacts, and part of this is testing to for pedestrian safety, as is the gap between the top of your hood and contact with the engine for a crumple safety margin. Nissan for example mitigates this in the GTR by having pop-up actuators that are fire in an accident to bypass falling under the minimum.

If you hit a pedestrian with an aftermarket steel bumper vs an OEM unit and it results in injury or death, any good lawyer is going to at best have you require declaring bankruptcy....and if a death occurred, you're likely sitting in a cell for a long long time. I don't think anyone on TW has examples of this, it's just plain as day going to happen.

 

Yup. And during giant lawsuits in a situation like this. Many times an NDA is used. So you absolutely won’t hear about it.

But good lawyers drool over paydays like this.

 

According to 2021 NSC report there were approx 13,200,000 car crashes that year alone. Looking for one throughout time in which a legal outcome was made worse for the driver of a modified vehicle simply because of the vehicle modifications. We owe it to ourselves to know exactly what the risks and odds are, right?

 

Dude. A woman got 2.7 million dollars from McDonald’s because their cup didn’t say her coffee was hot and she burned herself.

A company worth 187 BILLION couldn’t hire a lawyer good enough to win.

Don’t be so naive lol. This country is 100% sue happy and people win stupid money over doing stupid shit every day.

 

Still looking for an example. Just one at this point. Gotta be out there. I’m not arguing against the possibility of lawyers tearing people to shreds. Obviously people are sue happy. Sue happy and winning are two different things. Need facts not conjecture to see if the worry is valid.

 

Add Carolina squat to your search for court cases. At least we have full visibility on our rigs. Pedestrian under a squatter would be ugly.....Hope this conversation never involves any of us.

 

Good point. Maybe there’s a case involving a squatter since that led to legislation. I hope none of us get involved in it either, therefor it’s important to truly know what’s at stake and make a well informed decision on if it’s worth the risk. I’m just trying to get people to think. We are all in the “daily driving some modified shit” boat like a lot of folks out there. Would be good to know what’s potentially at risk

 

Not saying there arent ambulance chasing lawywers, but...
Nope. This was a smear campaign by McD's. A damn good one at that.

"The plaintiff, Stella Liebeck (1912–2004),[2] a 79-year-old woman, purchased hot coffee from a McDonald's restaurant, accidentally spilled it in her lap, and suffered third-degree burns in her pelvic region. She was hospitalized for eight days while undergoing skin grafting, followed by two years of medical treatment. Liebeck sought to settle with McDonald's for $20,000 to cover her medical expenses. When McDonald's refused, Liebeck's attorney filed suit in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Mexico, accusing McDonald's of gross negligence.

Liebeck's attorneys argued that, at 180–190 °F (82–88 °C), McDonald's coffee was defective, and more likely to cause serious injury than coffee served at any other establishment. The jury found that McDonald's was 80 percent responsible for the incident. They awarded Liebeck a net $160,000[3] in compensatory damages to cover medical expenses, and $2.7 million (equivalent to $5,600,000 in 2023) in punitive damages, the equivalent of two days of McDonald's coffee sales. The trial judge reduced the punitive damages to three times the amount of the compensatory damages, totalling $640,000. The parties settled for a confidential amount before an appeal was decided.[4]"


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liebeck_v._McDonald's_Restaurants

 

It's just a really thing to Google because of all the ambulance chasing law firms polluting results. There are attorneys that specialize in chasing aftermarket modified vehicles in accidents, though.

There is lots of case law for aftermarket modifications leading to criminal and civil complaints in cases of e.g., street racing. The one I remember vividly might have been the first incident in CA because an NSX driver was charged with manslaughter after a head-on collision and CHP determined that the aftermarket modifications likely contributed to the victims death. It's also happened in Australia.

"Detective Hardiman’s concluded that the modification to the engine, engine control unit, rear differential, brakes and suspension, all of which were intended to increase the power and/or performance of the vehicle, … “would have made it behave significantly differently to that of a standard model, making it easier for loss of control to occur if driven inappropriately. Without experience and/or prior knowledge of these modifications, this vehicle would have been dangerous to drive."

It's super painful to Google because different states legislate it differently. California uses "modified vehicle", NJ uses "non-street legal vehicle", NV uses "aftermarket attached vehicle", etc.

Here's a case where insurance declined coverage because modifications weren't disclosed:

"Hanes relies on Jones' allegation that Hanes was negligent in failing to consult "competent people to determine or otherwise insure" that the modified vehicle would be safe for its intended use.[9]"

 

Great find! I think that’s a pretty clear case.

 

I remember watching a short doc on that and being shocked to see how valid her claim was. I always thought it was ridiculous, but she had every right and was totally justified in my book after watching that.

 

$520 later... This set is getting lots of anti seize and proper maintenance

 

I think you could have bought a new kit with all the coin you have thrown at that one to rehab it . . . .

 

I think that’s pretty true for all of them honestly. All the little things add up fast. Usually about 2k in parts a year to prep mine at least.

 

True, but his were mostly a result of shitty manufacturing/design rather than wear and tear from use.

 

Yeah. That stuff isn’t fun at all. And really all depends on how they are used.

 

I poo a little when I see 4Runners for sale with pretty much everything I’m doing to mine for about 2/3 the cost and none of the sweat equity required lol

I keep telling myself I like the project to justify the terrible math. I mean who wants to buy a lego set that’s already built?