Even if it was, removing the limiter only doesn't physically prevent him from go the speed he chooses. As an adult, he still made the decision to go 116MPH in a 30MPH zone.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Tesla sued for teenager crash (out of main)
- Thread starter Joe F
- Start date
Even if it was, removing the limiter only doesn't physically prevent him from go the speed he chooses. As an adult, he still made the decision to go 116MPH in a 30MPH zone.
I am profoundly happy that I don't have to make a living like that.
I am sorry for the families involved, but, to be blunt this case is just an ambulance chaser trying to shakedown the deep-pocketed Tesla. Unfortunately, this happens everyday to large companies. For most other companies (maybe all other companies), these stories do not hit the wires. But, of course, this is Tesla, and the media will make so much more out of this than it is. I am relatively sure this will be on CNBC tomorrow a.m. before the markets open. I am also confident that the case will not be put into perspective, being made out to be much more than it is. This is most likely not a material item to Tesla. But, unfortunately, the ICE loving, short friendly media will likely make it seem as though it is.
The estate is suing. (per original link)
Likely
Tesla in fatal crash was altered to limit its top speed, victim’s aunt says
Edit: clarification due to the lawsuit being by the passenger's estate, not the driver's.
Last edited:
I don't know. It depends how the service report is worded. If it says "returned all settings to factory default per company procedures in section xx.x of the service manual" or something similar and it is signed by the customer then it is a true statement and a bit of a stretch to try to make a case of negligence. Having worked in the medical industry at one time, I can assure that there is careful thought into the wording of service reports.
Further, if there is evidence in the logs that the car was subsequently driven above 85 (or whatever) by the parents then it becomes harder to make claims of not knowing. It is a heart-breaking story that all involved will want to come to a quick resolution.
Lawsuits are hard to avoid if pockets are deep. It was not a wise thing to make the change in the first place were it done without very careful consideration IMMHO. I would think the case poorly conceived (could be wrong IANAL) since I think the easier case would would not even get into the weeds of the service event. Again, such a heart-breaking tragedy.
How the headline can't read " Teach your kids not to drive like maniacs" is beyond me. That fast in any place but a race track (in the USA) is completely insane. If it was in a residential area it is criminal and insane.
I recall pushing around these speeds when I was 18 in my Toyota Tercel. Granted, that was typically around midnight - 2AM on I-5, not in a residential zone, but still. Kids are insane.
Yeah I get that young men tend to be oblivious to risk's...I was as well. That is why it is so important to teach..or try to anyway.
But that fast in a residential area..nope never.
Methinks the assertion will be that the expectation was that the car would remain in control at 85 but instead went out of control at a higher unexpected speed. The issue might be that the car did not act as expected.
This is/was never going to trial. Chances are very good that this a short-inspired endeavor. The principal motive is to get the headline out there for their manipulating cohorts. As soon as this complaint gets anywhere near discovery, they will bail, if not much sooner.
Seems like it did as well as you can expect from a car, stayed in control per laws of physics.
https://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2...-crash-fort-lauderdale-fl-ntsb-investigation/
My first car as a teen was an 81 Tercel. It even had a badge that said 5-speed. A fire-breathing monster that put down 62 horses of fury...
Tesla is sued for a passenger death due to a defective battery
Geee, maybe not buy your 18 year old a car capable of so much speed if you are concerned about it. Bad parenting FTL. Sorry your kid is dead but blame yourself and your kid, not the car company.
If you hit a wall at 116mph in an ICE car I'm pretty sure you are toast as well.
"Chicago law firm Corboy & Demetrio said on Tuesday it filed a lawsuit against electric carmaker Tesla alleging that its 2014 Model S sedan had a defective battery pack that caused the death of an 18-year old passenger in an accident last year.
Last May, a Tesla driven by Barrett Riley with passenger Edgar Monserratt Martinez crashed into a concrete wall and erupted in flames in Fort Lauderdale, Florida killing both the teenagers, according to the lawsuit.
The law firm represents the estate of Edgar Monserratt Martinez.
Less than two months before the crash, Riley’s parents had a limiter installed at a Tesla service center to prevent the vehicle from reaching over 85 mph, but it was removed at another Tesla service visit without his parents’ knowledge, the law firm said here
An additional count in the lawsuit alleges Tesla was negligent in the removal of the limiter.
It added that Riley was driving the vehicle at 116 mph, immediately before the collision.
The lawsuit also alleges that Tesla “failed to warn purchasers of its vehicles of the battery’s dangerous condition.”
The U.S. National Transportation Safety Board had said last year it was investigating the crash.
There have been at least a dozen worldwide reported cases of Tesla S batteries catching fire in collisions as well as while being stationary in the last five years, the law firm said.
Tesla did not immediately respond to a Reuters request for comment."
Geee, maybe not buy your 18 year old a car capable of so much speed if you are concerned about it. Bad parenting FTL. Sorry your kid is dead but blame yourself and your kid, not the car company.
If you hit a wall at 116mph in an ICE car I'm pretty sure you are toast as well.
"Chicago law firm Corboy & Demetrio said on Tuesday it filed a lawsuit against electric carmaker Tesla alleging that its 2014 Model S sedan had a defective battery pack that caused the death of an 18-year old passenger in an accident last year.
Last May, a Tesla driven by Barrett Riley with passenger Edgar Monserratt Martinez crashed into a concrete wall and erupted in flames in Fort Lauderdale, Florida killing both the teenagers, according to the lawsuit.
The law firm represents the estate of Edgar Monserratt Martinez.
Less than two months before the crash, Riley’s parents had a limiter installed at a Tesla service center to prevent the vehicle from reaching over 85 mph, but it was removed at another Tesla service visit without his parents’ knowledge, the law firm said here
An additional count in the lawsuit alleges Tesla was negligent in the removal of the limiter.
It added that Riley was driving the vehicle at 116 mph, immediately before the collision.
The lawsuit also alleges that Tesla “failed to warn purchasers of its vehicles of the battery’s dangerous condition.”
The U.S. National Transportation Safety Board had said last year it was investigating the crash.
There have been at least a dozen worldwide reported cases of Tesla S batteries catching fire in collisions as well as while being stationary in the last five years, the law firm said.
Tesla did not immediately respond to a Reuters request for comment."
You're omitting this part of the story:
According to the report released Tuesday, the car’s lithium-ion battery re-ignited twice after firefighters extinguished the flames, once as the car was being loaded for removal from the scene and again in a storage yard.
The same thing happened to another recent Tesla that reignited a good SIX HOURS later after a flat tire:
Tesla that caught fire in Los Gatos reignites at Campbell auto shop
Same. I did that a few times at 21 in my Trans Am, but never in a farking 30mph zone. If I had just received a ticket for 100+ I sure as heck wouldn't have done it again so soon. Kid was a proper idiot.
Which has nothing to do with the accident suitability. And 12 reports is a lot better than many car lines (albeit with more cars)
Just a note to correct a past post of mine. It is the passenger's estate in the suit, not the driver's.
This is bizzaro world.
I would assume IF a lawsuit were to happen, it would have been against the DRIVER of the car and not the MAKE AND MODEL of the vehicle?
Don't think I want to be in a Bolt hitting a wall at 86MPH either.
Assuming
1.) The Bolt gets up to 86MPH
2.) The battery explodes
we replace Tesla with GM in this lawsuit?
How does this make any sense .Serious question.
Not to mention 116 in a 25-30 zone is likely FELONY SPEEDING.
Yes I understand that maybe if whatever "device" was in place to limit to 85, driver could not have gone up to 116. However 85 in a 25-30 is still probably FELONY SPEEDING as well.
It's like if I find a Smith and Wesson at a friends house and shoot someone - I can sue S&W because my friend's dad didn't lock it up?
I would love to understand how this suit is even possible. Or is it just really a groundless suit?!
I would assume IF a lawsuit were to happen, it would have been against the DRIVER of the car and not the MAKE AND MODEL of the vehicle?
Don't think I want to be in a Bolt hitting a wall at 86MPH either.
Assuming
1.) The Bolt gets up to 86MPH
2.) The battery explodes
we replace Tesla with GM in this lawsuit?
How does this make any sense .Serious question.
Not to mention 116 in a 25-30 zone is likely FELONY SPEEDING.
Yes I understand that maybe if whatever "device" was in place to limit to 85, driver could not have gone up to 116. However 85 in a 25-30 is still probably FELONY SPEEDING as well.
It's like if I find a Smith and Wesson at a friends house and shoot someone - I can sue S&W because my friend's dad didn't lock it up?
I would love to understand how this suit is even possible. Or is it just really a groundless suit?!
If I would have gotten a ticket for over 100 in a 30 at 18 years there would be no more car.
Similar threads
