Paul Walker's daughter sues Porsche over father death

Greebo

Greebo

Greebo

Caporegime
Joined
20 Jan 2005
Posts
45,777
Location
Co Durham
http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news...s-father-burned-death-crash-n435306?cid=sm_fb

Just saw this headline this morning and I really think the US have gone way to far over what you can sue for.


She is suing Porsche as its didnt have safety features fitted to some other cars in the range.


Since when did a manufacturer have to make every car it builds to the same safety levels and features?


One of the issues she is claiming for is the fact that the car "failed to install its electronic stability control system"


Has this got any chance of been successful?
 
Last edited:
She is 16, sounds to me like a predatory lawyer is doing this. However the wife of the driver of the crash tried to sue and got nowhere, so I imagine this will get the same result.
 
Lawyers lubing the daughter up, with the off chance Porche will join in with more lubing, be it settling it out of court due to bad press or a judge actually siding the daughter. Either way, the lawyers win.
 
If the model in question was fitted with the minimum legally US required safety equipment and had passed the safety tests required before a vehicle can be sold in the USA, there is no case to answer.

No car on the planet is going to allow the occupants to simply walk away after hitting a concrete lamppost and a tree at over 90 mph.
 
I don't get how they can sue for an unsafe vehicle when it was proven he was travelling way over the speed limit? End of the day it was his own fault.
 
Terminal_Boy said:
No car on the planet is going to allow the occupants to simply walk away after hitting a concrete lamppost and a tree at over 90 mph.
Click to expand...

I think thats the point. If they had been in a different car or even a different Porsche they would have lived. And clearly there are safer cars where people do survive these crashes.
 
It's not against the law, but the GT doesn't have stability control, like you would find on a lot of super cars these days, it meant to be a race drivers style car which you need a level of skill to not spin out.
Can't blame Porsche for that though.
Other American cars like the Dodge Viper also don't have ABS, SC, or TC so it's not just Porsche, they are aimed at enthusiasts.
 
The website, quoting legal documents, says his seatbelt "snapped Walker's torso back with thousands of pounds of force, thereby breaking his ribs and pelvis," and trapping him when the vehicle caught fire.
Click to expand...

That's the issue here.

The driver being incredibly irresponsible is not the subject, it's the fact the vehicle crashed and he supposedly could not escape.
 
Greebo said:
I think thats the point. If they had been in a different car or even a different Porsche they would have lived. And clearly there are safer cars where people do survive these crashes.
Click to expand...

If the driver hadn't been driving too fast and lost control, they'd be alive.

No-one's suing the driver's parents for producing a human that didn't comply with the traffic laws, so why sue Porsche for producing a car in 2005 that did comply with all the safety regulations?

That later cars may offered increased passenger protection is neither here nor there.
 
Terminal_Boy said:
If the driver hadn't been driving too fast and lost control, they'd be alive.

No-one's suing the driver's parents for producing a human that didn't comply with the traffic laws, so why sue Porsche for producing a car in 2005 that did comply with all the safety regulations?

That later cars may offered increased passenger protection is neither here nor there.
Click to expand...

Don't get me wrong, im not defending the lawsuit. I just think its silly that you can sue a car maker for not every car has the same safety features.


It either passes the country's safety tests or its doesnt. End of story.


The fact that this case can even be filed just boggles the mind.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom