Crown

Board: Other Sports Cars Language: English Region: Worldwide Share/Save/Bookmark Close

Forum - Thread


    Re: Tesla Roadster

    Negligence of the parents is separate from negligence of Tesla. 


    Re: Tesla Roadster

    CGX car nut:

    Negligence of the parents is separate from negligence of Tesla. 

    I know but we are discussing Tesla here, I don't care about the parents (other than I cannot even fathom their pain and suffering over their loss... Smiley). Blaming Tesla is not really making sense here in my opinion but of course I may be wrong, I don't have all the facts.


    --

    RC (Germany) - Rennteam Editor Audi R8 V10 Plus (2016), Mercedes E63 S AMG Edition 1 (2018), Mercedes C63 S AMG Cab (2019), Range Rover Evoque Si4 Black Edition (2019)



    Re: Tesla Roadster

    The vehicle wasn't being used as intended, and wasn't designed for impacts like that. It has a 5 star NTSB crash rating which is as high as you can get. You stuff a car into a wall at 116 mph and things are going to go wrong. If the crashed at an appropriate speed, would the same thing have happened? Will be interesting to see what happens. Perhaps they should sue the NTSB too. Smiley


    Re: Tesla Roadster

    JoeRockhead:

    The vehicle wasn't being used as intended, and wasn't designed for impacts like that. It has a 5 star NTSB crash rating which is as high as you can get. You stuff a car into a wall at 116 mph and things are going to go wrong. If the crashed at an appropriate speed, would the same thing have happened? Will be interesting to see what happens. Perhaps they should sue the NTSB too. Smiley

    Was the car capable of 116 mph?  If yes, then it was used within the manufacture’s design specifications.  Tesla, namely Musk, has touted the Model S as the safest car ever tested. Other automakers will report the test results without additional clarifiers as that can create litigation issues in the future.  

    This is the world of U.S. tort law and anytime there is talk of tort reform it is thwarted by tort lawyers and their politicians, who tend to be lawyers by training.  Businesses learn to mitigate this risk.  Tesla will settle out-of-court for $10-20 million.  Taking this to trial is too risky as a jury may award the family an excessive amount.  


    Re: Tesla Roadster

    CGX car nut:

    The first count of the suit is against Tesla for removing the speed limit/governor the driver’s parents had asked the company to install.  Tesla Service removed that 85 mph speed limit and never informed the driver’s parents of its removal, which was made at the request of the teen driver.  That is negligence.  

    Again, I dont see how they can shift the blame to Tesla. Tes dealership did what the "client" asked them to, their responsibility ends with if the modification is legal or not. If the parents set a limiter and were responsable they should have either taken upon themselves the responsibility to take the car themselves for the maintenance or at least inform the dealership beforehand not to remove the limiter. The parents are at fault for this, if the passenger's parents want to sue somebody it is them before it is tesla, and even then, nobody forced their son to get into the car so again, not the driver's parents fault either, ultimately it is the driver's fault but he can't be sued since he is dead.


    --

    ⇒ Carlos - Porsche 991 Carrera GTS


    Re: Tesla Roadster

    It doesn't matter one bit if the car is capable of doing 116mph, or 86mph, or 60mph in a straight line.

    That corner is rated at 30mph. 

    With proper driving training, one will easily recognize that corner cannot be taken that fast and needed to slow down to take.

    A 30mph rated corner, probably can be taken just under 60mph for the right driver with the right car, morel likely it will be around 50mph max actually. And certainly not in a Tesla.

    This is common sense. 

    The parents of the passenger is just trying to milk Tesla, as they know they can't milk much out of the parents of there driver.

    Any judge with a tiny bit of common sense would have throw out the suit right away and give those parents a stern speech on wasting money, public's and theirs.

     

     


    --

     

     


    Re: Tesla Roadster

    CGX car nut:
     

    Was the car capable of 116 mph?  If yes, then it was used within the manufacture’s design specifications.  Tesla, namely Musk, has touted the Model S as the safest car ever tested. Other automakers will report the test results without additional clarifiers as that can create litigation issues in the future.  

    This is the world of U.S. tort law and anytime there is talk of tort reform it is thwarted by tort lawyers and their politicians, who tend to be lawyers by training.  Businesses learn to mitigate this risk.  Tesla will settle out-of-court for $10-20 million.  Taking this to trial is too risky as a jury may award the family an excessive amount.  

    Power tools are capable of cutting off limbs, but they aren't intended for that use. It's like suing Dewalt because you misused a tool and lost some fingers. Common sense has to prevail at some point. Regardless, that kid for sure bounced that Tesla off the 85 mph limiter it did have in the past, they were just unlucky on this occasion. If the battery caught fire at a standstill or as a result a collision at a reasonable speed, then I could see merit here.


    Re: Tesla Roadster

    Whoopsy:

    The parents of the passenger is just trying to milk Tesla, as they know they can't milk much out of the parents of there driver.

    Sadly, that is the bottom line of it all.


    --

    ⇒ Carlos - Porsche 991 Carrera GTS


    Re: Tesla Roadster

    Whoopsy:

    It doesn't matter one bit if the car is capable of doing 116mph, or 86mph, or 60mph in a straight line.

    That corner is rated at 30mph. 

    With proper driving training, one will easily recognize that corner cannot be taken that fast and needed to slow down to take.

    A 30mph rated corner, probably can be taken just under 60mph for the right driver with the right car, morel likely it will be around 50mph max actually. And certainly not in a Tesla.

    This is common sense. 

    The parents of the passenger is just trying to milk Tesla, as they know they can't milk much out of the parents of there driver.

    Any judge with a tiny bit of common sense would have throw out the suit right away and give those parents a stern speech on wasting money, public's and theirs.

     

     

    Irrelevant as Tesla’s actions made the car more dangerous by removing the speed limiter from the car without the owners’ permission.  The teen driver was not the legal owner of the car and the Tesla service technician created the liability by carrying out the request to remove the limiter by a minor.  Tesla also created this liability through its ownership of its sales and service channels.  

    This is one of the least egregious product liability lawsuits I have read in some time with its clear demarcation of Tesla’s culpability.  


    Re: Tesla Roadster

    He was 18, not a minor. Old enough to be tried as an adult for crimes, and old enough to vote. Blaming the manufacturer is ridiculous. If he couldn’t be trusted enough to behave responsibly by his parents, they shouldn’t have given him such a car, governor or not.


    Re: Tesla Roadster

    And while the parents might have been the owners of the car, they sent the 18 years old to the shop to do the maintenance in their name and didn't inform the shop about the limiter issue, their negligence, not the shop's.


    --

    ⇒ Carlos - Porsche 991 Carrera GTS


    Re: Tesla Roadster

    CGX car nut:
    Whoopsy:

    It doesn't matter one bit if the car is capable of doing 116mph, or 86mph, or 60mph in a straight line.

    That corner is rated at 30mph. 

    With proper driving training, one will easily recognize that corner cannot be taken that fast and needed to slow down to take.

    A 30mph rated corner, probably can be taken just under 60mph for the right driver with the right car, morel likely it will be around 50mph max actually. And certainly not in a Tesla.

    This is common sense. 

    The parents of the passenger is just trying to milk Tesla, as they know they can't milk much out of the parents of there driver.

    Any judge with a tiny bit of common sense would have throw out the suit right away and give those parents a stern speech on wasting money, public's and theirs.

     

     

    Irrelevant as Tesla’s actions made the car more dangerous by removing the speed limiter from the car without the owners’ permission.  The teen driver was not the legal owner of the car and the Tesla service technician created the liability by carrying out the request to remove the limiter by a minor.  Tesla also created this liability through its ownership of its sales and service channels.  

    This is one of the least egregious product liability lawsuits I have read in some time with its clear demarcation of Tesla’s culpability.  


    No, the speed limiter function is the item that's irrelevant in this case.

    The car is gonna be just as wrecked travelling at the limited speed of 86mph or something vs 116mph. 

    Had the limiter been set as say 45mph and it was removed to go 116mph, then there is a case as a crash at 45mph would probably be a survivable incident. 

    The owner claimed they never authorized the removal, who is to say the operator, in this case, the son, didn't ask to have it removed? 


    --

     

     


    Re: Tesla Roadster

    Let me stress this once more: This law firm is very skilled in transportation matters resulting in personal injury.  They do not make frivolous accusations.   You may disagree with the law but that is a separate matter and one that was addressed in an earlier posting.  There is a need for tort reform in the States but that won’t happen since trial lawyers are major campaign contributors, especially to one political party that protects their interests.   

    Should also mention that the NTSB opened an investigation days following the incident.  Tesla is best served by reaching an out-of-court settlement.  


    Re: Tesla Roadster

    CGX car nut:

    Let me stress this once more: This law firm is very skilled in transportation matters resulting in personal injury.  They do not make frivolous accusations.   You may disagree with the law but that is a separate matter and one that was addressed in an earlier posting.  There is a need for tort reform in the States but that won’t happen since trial lawyers are major campaign contributors, especially to one political party that protects their interests.   

    Should also mention that the NTSB opened an investigation days following the incident.  Tesla is best served by reaching an out-of-court settlement.  

    They are filing the lawsuit before the NTSB has completed their investigation (though it's been going on for 8 months). Did they hire their own experts to look into this in the interim? Seems one would wait for some facts before filing a lawsuit. Surely if the NTSB finds fault lies with the manufacturer, a wrongful death suit would be a slam dunk, no? Did the family retain this firm to represent them, or did the firm reach out to the family and encourage this?

    Full disclosure: I've been watching a lot of Detroit TV stations lately, and see a lot of ads for "America's best trial lawyer", Geoffrey Fieger. Also see a lot of Celino and Barnes ads. This kind of reeks of those guys. Smiley

    https://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/accidentreports/pages/hwy18fh013-prelim.aspx

     

     


    Re: Tesla Roadster

    As previously mentioned, the Corboy Demetrio Law Firm is in a different caliber than the firms you have mentioned.  Their reputation is based on handling aircraft crashes and they employ teams of experts.


    Re: Tesla Roadster

    There is a big difference between how the lawyer/client contact is made.

    If the client think they can win, they find the best lawyer which is suppose to be these guys.

    But if the law firm thinks this case is high profile enough that they can squeeze a settlement out of nothing, they will make contact with the client first and lay out the plans of attack.

    And in this case, they WILL squeeze a settlement out of Tesla with a air tight NDA. The family gets some payout, the law firm gets a big payout, and Tesla pays some to make it go away. 

     


    --

     

     


    Re: Tesla Roadster

    Whoopsy:

    There is a big difference between how the lawyer/client contact is made.

    If the client think they can win, they find the best lawyer which is suppose to be these guys.

    But if the law firm thinks this case is high profile enough that they can squeeze a settlement out of nothing, they will make contact with the client first and lay out the plans of attack.

    And in this case, they WILL squeeze a settlement out of Tesla with a air tight NDA. The family gets some payout, the law firm gets a big payout, and Tesla pays some to make it go away. 

     

    Yep. It's almost comical to think that any of these firms are as altruistic as they would have you believe. It's all about the money. 


    Re: Tesla Roadster

    CGX car nut:

    As previously mentioned, the Corboy Demetrio Law Firm is in a different caliber than the firms you have mentioned.  Their reputation is based on handling aircraft crashes and they employ teams of experts.

    Yeah, no doubt they are high caliber, but still in the same category. The experts they employ are looking for a place to happen, and they've found it here for sure. I would guess they are already heavily invested at this point.


    Re: Tesla Roadster

    JoeRockhead:
    Whoopsy:

    There is a big difference between how the lawyer/client contact is made.

    If the client think they can win, they find the best lawyer which is suppose to be these guys.

    But if the law firm thinks this case is high profile enough that they can squeeze a settlement out of nothing, they will make contact with the client first and lay out the plans of attack.

    And in this case, they WILL squeeze a settlement out of Tesla with a air tight NDA. The family gets some payout, the law firm gets a big payout, and Tesla pays some to make it go away. 

     

    Yep. It's almost comical to think that any of these firms are as altruistic as they would have you believe. It's all about the money. 

    None of the parties involved are altruistic.  In business, one must know the environment and tort risk is why the other automakers are loathe to introduce cutting-edge technology in products.  Tesla, on the other hand, charged right into uncharted territory with a massive battery pack and autopilot.  


    Re: Tesla Roadster

    CGX car nut:
    JoeRockhead:
    Whoopsy:

    There is a big difference between how the lawyer/client contact is made.

    If the client think they can win, they find the best lawyer which is suppose to be these guys.

    But if the law firm thinks this case is high profile enough that they can squeeze a settlement out of nothing, they will make contact with the client first and lay out the plans of attack.

    And in this case, they WILL squeeze a settlement out of Tesla with a air tight NDA. The family gets some payout, the law firm gets a big payout, and Tesla pays some to make it go away. 

     

    Yep. It's almost comical to think that any of these firms are as altruistic as they would have you believe. It's all about the money. 

    None of the parties involved are altruistic.  In business, one must know the environment and tort risk is why the other automakers are loathe to introduce cutting-edge technology in products.  Tesla, on the other hand, charged right into uncharted territory with a massive battery pack and autopilot.  

     

    Neither of which caused the accident.

    It was the massive speed going into a slow corner that caused the crash. 

    Common sense. Simple. Common. Sense. 

    Nothing more.


    --

     

     


    Re: Tesla Roadster

    Whoopsy:
    CGX car nut:
    JoeRockhead:
    Whoopsy:

    There is a big difference between how the lawyer/client contact is made.

    If the client think they can win, they find the best lawyer which is suppose to be these guys.

    But if the law firm thinks this case is high profile enough that they can squeeze a settlement out of nothing, they will make contact with the client first and lay out the plans of attack.

    And in this case, they WILL squeeze a settlement out of Tesla with a air tight NDA. The family gets some payout, the law firm gets a big payout, and Tesla pays some to make it go away. 

     

    Yep. It's almost comical to think that any of these firms are as altruistic as they would have you believe. It's all about the money. 

    None of the parties involved are altruistic.  In business, one must know the environment and tort risk is why the other automakers are loathe to introduce cutting-edge technology in products.  Tesla, on the other hand, charged right into uncharted territory with a massive battery pack and autopilot.  

     

    Neither of which caused the accident.

    It was the massive speed going into a slow corner that caused the crash. 

    120mph crash test


    --

     

    ⇒ Carlos - Porsche 991 Carrera GTS

     


    Re: Tesla Roadster

    Bloomberg report has Tesla forward pipeline...

    1547292548095image.jpeg

    Smiley


    Re: Tesla Roadster

    Update from Elon Musk on SpaceX plans...

    1547292829890image.jpeg

    ...here is the rendering...

    1547292901882image.jpeg

    ...here is the photo...

    1547292949359image.jpeg

    1547292958826image.jpeg

    ...made with kitchen foil? Smiley


    Re: Tesla Roadster

    Latest update from Elon on the Tesla Roadster...

    1547293144093image.jpeg

    Smiley


    Re: Tesla Roadster

    Does not sound like he is worried about lawyers. Lol. 


    Re: Tesla Roadster

    Real world logic seldom applies in the U.S. courtroom and coupled with Musk’s lackadaisical attitude, well you get the picture.   One frightful action, following the Florida crash, was Musk and company adding a speed limit to the cars with a Memorial tribute to the young, irresponsible driver.  https://www.teslarati.com/tesla-model-3-speed-limit-mode-summon-mobile-app/.  That presented in the courtroom is easily positioned as an admission of guilt by the company; the technology existed within the four walls of the company but it wasn’t considered important until after the incident.  This, with a skillful legal team, will be construed as negligence and of a company putting is increasing shareholder wealth ahead of its concerns of safety for its customers.  


    Re: Tesla Roadster

    CGX car nut:

    Real world logic seldom applies in the U.S. courtroom and coupled with Musk’s lackadaisical attitude, well you get the picture.   One frightful action, following the Florida crash, was Musk and company adding a speed limit to the cars with a Memorial tribute to the young, irresponsible driver.  https://www.teslarati.com/tesla-model-3-speed-limit-mode-summon-mobile-app/.  That presented in the courtroom is easily positioned as an admission of guilt by the company; the technology existed within the four walls of the company but it wasn’t considered important until after the incident.  This, with a skillful legal team, will be construed as negligence and of a company putting is increasing shareholder wealth ahead of its concerns of safety for its customers.  

    Then every crash related to excessive speed would imply that the manufacturer is at fault. Maybe sue Ft Lauderdale for having an unsafe road too?


    Re: Tesla Roadster

    If I'm tesla i would sue the parents for beeing to stupid to let teenagers use such a car.....and if they did stole the keys???? who did not stole daddy's keys when young???? I think a lot of us that are close to the 50 did it...

     


    --

    993 c2


    Re: Tesla Roadster

    "SpaceX to Cut 10% of Workforce" (WSJ)

    A SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket carrying a U.S. national security satellite blasting off from Cape Canaveral, Fla., on Dec. 23.

    (12 January 2019)

    Elon Musk’s SpaceX plans to reduce its workforce by 10%, or roughly 600 employees, even as the company seeks to ramp up ambitious projects to develop a super-powerful rocket and deploy thousands of advanced satellites.

    The move, believed to be the most significant cutback since SpaceX gained international prominence about a decade ago, is the latest sign of major strategic and technical challenges roiling the closely held Southern California company.

    Buoyed by a hefty backlog of commercial and government launches, the company in recent years racked up a string of historic space-transportation accomplishments even as Mr. Musk and his management team identified still-more-difficult and expensive goals: sending large spacecraft to Mars and launching more than 11,000 small satellites to provide global internet connections.

    Each of those efforts promise to dwarf SpaceX’s current business, but Mr. Musk has never spelled out how he planned to pay for development, testing and manufacturing costs. His deep-space exploration endeavors currently don’t have any obvious commercial market.

    In a statement, Space Exploration Technologies Corp., as the company is formally called, indicated payroll savings are now part of its financial realignment.

    “To continue delivering for our customers and to succeed in developing interplanetary spacecraft and a global space-based Internet,” SpaceX said, it must become a leaner company. “Either of these developments, even when attempted separately, have bankrupted other organizations.”

    The company also said action to reduce head count “is taken only due to the extraordinarily difficult challenges ahead and would not otherwise be necessary.”

    The move, first reported by the Los Angeles Times, suggests at least a portion of the engineers and other employees who helped devise SpaceX’s reusable Falcon 9 rockets and Dragon capsules are now considered expendable. “We are grateful for everything they have accomplished and their commitment to SpaceX’s mission,” SpaceX said.

    In the past, SpaceX officials have touted the company’s rapid growth in both payroll and facilities spread across the country. Its main production and engineering site is located in Hawthorne, Calif.

    But with the company’s core satellite-launching business projected to decline this year and possibly in 2020—and investment in new technology slated to increase—SpaceX took the uncharacteristic step of acknowledging it confronts greater challenges than it previously indicated publicly.

    Analysts have estimated it could take an investment of more than $50 billion to bring the Mars and broadband-via-satellite ventures to fruition.

    For the shorter term, SpaceX has told analysts, investors and others that it expects cost savings from reusing boosters, noting that its launch business was profitable last year. The company plans to launch two of its Falcon Heavy rockets in 2019, currently the most powerful booster in the world. 

    But in recent months, Mr. Musk, who also is the chief designer and technical officer, has abruptly changed designs for a proposed deep-space exploration system. Mr. Musk previously played down expectations about how quickly his proposed satellite constellation would become operational.

    SpaceX is on track to launch fewer than two dozen satellites overall this year—about half the total number internal company plans projected when they were drafted roughly three years ago. On Friday, a SpaceX spokeswoman declined to elaborate on the prepared statement.

    Link: https://www.wsj.com/articles/spacex-to-cut-10-of-workforce-11547264846


     
    Edit

    Forum

    Board Subject Last post Rating Views Replies
    Porsche Sticky SUN'S LAST RUN TO WILSON, WY - 991 C2S CAB LIFE, END OF AN ERA 2/14/19 1:26 AM
    watt
    331051 2045
    Porsche Sticky The moment I've been waiting for... 2/19/19 8:30 PM
    Enmanuel
     
     
     
     
     
    218350 1122
    Porsche Sticky OFFICIAL: 991.2 GT3 RS (2018) 2/15/19 11:05 AM
    RCA
    146096 2579
    Porsche Sticky OFFICIAL: The new Porsche 992 – a design icon and high-tech sports car 2/20/19 2:12 AM
    KMM
    61585 806
    Porsche Sticky Paint protection film 2/18/19 9:28 AM
    RCA
    16304 149
    Porsche Sticky Child seats in a 991 11/29/18 3:43 PM
    RCA
    14685 35
    Porsche Sticky OFFICIAL: 992 Carrera Cabriolet 2/18/19 11:28 AM
    RCA
    10216 127
    Porsche Sticky Welcome to Rennteam: Cars and Coffee... (photos) 2/18/19 8:51 PM
    Boxster Coupe GTS
    3229 60
    Porsche OFFICIAL: 991 Turbo and Turbo S 1/4/19 7:02 PM
    Topspeed
    486900 4255
    Porsche OFFICIAL: New 991.2 GT3 (2017) 2/19/19 11:40 PM
    4trac
    422409 5222
    Porsche 992 (Next 911 generation 2019/2020) Thread Closed 11/29/18 11:38 AM
    RCA
    317932 3195
    Porsche OFFICIAL: 911 R (2016) 12/31/18 2:19 AM
    DJM48
    286680 2598
    Porsche Cayman GT4 2/19/19 8:00 PM
    dreamcar
    280697 2760
    Porsche OFFICIAL: 911 GT2 RS (2017) 1/30/19 3:10 AM
    ha
    219534 2777
    Ferrari 488 GTB/GTS 1/17/19 8:13 PM
    GoHardGT3RS
    195610 1789
    McLaren McLaren on a winning streak 2/18/19 10:28 AM
    RCA
    191611 3355
    Others Audi R8 V10 Plus (2016 model) - Review (updated Feb 13th 2017) 12/17/18 12:42 PM
    RCA
    157789 2491
    Porsche Boxster Spyder (981) 8/31/18 10:25 AM
    WAY
    144617 757
    Ferrari Ferrari F12 Berlinetta / 599 GTO Successor 5/22/18 9:16 PM
    RCA
    113016 789
    Others VW caught cheating emissions tests 5/3/18 7:52 PM
    CGX car nut
    107928 871
    Porsche Porsche Mission E - the future of Porsche? 2/18/19 1:00 PM
    RCA
    99120 1370
    Porsche Donor vehicle for Singer Vehicle Design 12/7/18 10:15 PM
    Boxster Coupe GTS
    68845 673
    Others Tesla Roadster 2/19/19 4:12 PM
    SciFrog
    57401 1725
    Porsche OFFICIAL: New 991.2 Carrera GTS models 11/3/18 11:09 AM
    bluelines
    48430 477
    Others Tesla Model X Thread Closed 2/23/18 3:41 PM
    RCA
    43579 1122
    AMG AMG GT R 11/30/18 4:10 PM
    RCA
    43142 605
    Lambo Aventador and SV 11/19/18 8:31 AM
    RCA
    40860 472
    Porsche OFFICIAL: New 991.2 Turbo S Exclusive Series (2017) 12/4/18 3:17 PM
    BiTurbo
    40620 650
    AMG Mercedes E63 S AMG (2018) - Short Review (updated on a regular basis) 2/14/19 1:44 PM
    RCA
    40288 387
    Porsche OFFICIAL: New Porsche Carrera T 12/13/18 2:27 PM
    RCA
    39221 804
    268 items found, displaying 1 to 30.