When automakers, tire companies and parts suppliers place the corporate bottom line before safety, they must be held accountable for injuries and damages caused by their defective and dangerous products. Automakers and manufacturers all along the supply and distribution chain have a responsibility to ensure that the components that go into making a car or truck – and its overall design and functionality – are free of dangerous automotive defects. When an automotive product is improperly designed or defective, those responsible have a duty to do everything possible to identify the problem, alert the public, and make sure that the defective vehicle products are promptly replaced or repaired.
Too often, automakers place profit over safety, resulting in unnecessary hazards on our roads and highways and preventable injuries and deaths. Defective automotive products including defective gas tanks and fuel systems, faulty airbags and supplemental restraint systems (SRS), and poorly engineered safety and structural components, play a role in many of the more than 30,000 traffic deaths and more than 2 million injuries that occur on U.S. roadways every year, unnecessarily inflicting pain and suffering on individuals and their loved ones. Ensuring that automotive products are free from dangerous defects is more important than ever because modern automotive products have become so technologically complex, while our roads have become increasingly congested.
Federal transportation regulations are designed to provide much-needed oversight of this industry, but it’s too easy for profit-driven corporations to employ delay tactics and perform the bare minimum to address known safety problems. Recent headline-grabbing cases include well-documented injuries and deaths related to faulty fuel tanks, defective ignition switches and dangerous airbags.
When government oversight can’t spur manufacturers to correct automobile defects, our civil justice system is designed to hold corporations accountable for the hazards they’ve created. The trial team at Farrar & Ball has successfully sued some of largest automotive companies in the world on behalf of injured clients. Our trial team uses nationally recognized experts to investigate and determine exactly why an automotive component failed and determine who is responsible, from the automotive dealership to the manufacturer or distributor of the defective parts. We follow the trail of evidence around the world, if necessary. Our adversaries quickly realize that we won’t stop until every responsible party is identified and every incriminating document is uncovered.
Contact Farrar & Ball to learn more about our approach to automotive defect litigation.
This video animation demonstrates how steel belts inside a tire without a nylon wedge can generate dangerous amounts of friction. Learn More
Corporate tire industry video documents safety concerns when two new tires are mounted on back of vehicle. Learn More
This demonstrative evidence video animation is used to show jurors the components of a tire and illustrates how tires without “belt wedges” can generate dangerous friction between the steel belts. Learn More
This demonstrative evidence image shows a cross section of a modern tire with liners, belts, nylon overlay and undertread. Learn More
Corporate tire industry video explains safety and performance issues when only two tires are replaced on a vehicle, and how vehicle handling is affected by placement of tires. Learn More
Video created by Carr Engineering Inc. to document a tread separation test with a Ford Explorer. Test shows that even an expert driver with knowledge that a tread separation event is imminent still cannot maintain control of the vehicle. Learn More
A video animation used as demonstrative evidence to illustrate for jurors the components of a tire, including belts, liners and tread base. This animation demonstrates how two belt liners rubbing together can create friction that leads to tire failure. Learn More
Short video documenting an SUV on a test track flipping and rolling, then crashing into a guard rail. Learn More
Demonstrative evidence illustration used to explain to jurors the components of a tire designed with nylon safety strips in addition to steel belts. Learn More
Side-by-side demonstrative evidence used to explain to jurors the differences between a cap ply tire with a nylon safety belt compared to a traditional steel-belted tire. Learn More
Demonstrative evidence showing three different camera angles of a 2001 Mercury Moutaineer performing a controlled maneuver with a defective tire. Learn More