Widow suing firetruck maker

[x635 4,066]

Widow suing firetruck maker

COURT: She claims it neglected to maintain the engine that crashed in 2005, killing her husband.

10:00 PM PDT on Tuesday, August 5, 2008

By JOHN ASBURY

The Press-Enterprise

The widow of a Riverside County firefighter killed in a firetruck collision three years ago today has filed a federal lawsuit, claiming the manufacturer of the firetruck was to blame for her husband's death.

FULL STORY: http://www.pe.com/localnews/rivcounty/stor...06.487fe3d.html

[xchief2x 79]

When did it become the manufacturer's job to maintain apparatus? Unless that was in the contract, isn't it the department's obligation to maintain their apparatus?

[223Truck 0]

yea that really doesnt make much sense, usually at least to my knowledge, that really has nothing to do with the manufacturer, the buyer has to maintain their rigs...but who knows she might actually win

[Guest alsfirefighter]

I'm sure there is more to this story then just what is in the article. Perhaps it could be something more about the recalls mentioned and such. Or something that wasn't fixed timely or was mising like one of the little "warning" sides that keep popping up more and more on all types of products. Either way if they were at fault I hope they do the right thing and try to make a sensible settlement and I hope she can make comfortable life for her and the brothers kids.

[IzzyEng4 427]

Remember all, this is exactly how Peter Pirsch and Sons went out of business in the early 1990s. A family sued them after a Brookline firefighter fell off / out of a truck made by them. This lawsuit was the straw the broke the camel's back for the financially fragile company and set a precedent in the courts.

[Guest FFNick]

If I recall, the Pirsch situation was based on the fact that the handrail(s) installed by the factory were not within NFPA spec, right?

[TIV48 0]

It would be nice to read the whole affidavit filed in court.

It looks like the attorney is drawing at straws looking to profit from someones loss (wonder what his percentage is).

The news article is like a room that is full of smoke and mirrors.

[mrfixit 0]

It would be nice to read the whole affidavit filed in court.

It looks like the attorney is drawing at straws looking to profit from someones loss (wonder what his percentage is).

The news article is like a room that is full of smoke and mirrors.

just wondering .... are they referring to the jake brake when they say the {aux. brake was left on}? It should have been turned off by the driver. jakes are dangerous when used on slippery surfaces .

Edited August 8, 2008 by mrfixit

[PVFD113 6]

I may be a little out of touch but--the article keeps referring to Spartan. If I am correct, Spartan Motors makes chassis not fire trucks? Maybe in the past they did? As far as I know now--Spartan delivers the cab/chassis to the manufacturer that orders it (to their spec. Cab's are made for Spartan by Marion. The apparatus manufacturer installs the tank, body and pump. Did Spartan make trucks before? Is this the same company? If all is the same as today, then maybe they should be looking at the builder? We had a Ford Tanker built by Amthor's. We had issues with the truck--NOT FORD"S PROBLEM, simply a poorly engineered fire body and such.

Just an opinion, not taking any sides or picking on any manufacturer.

None the less it is still a tragedy.

[SRS131EMTFF 471]

Crimson Fire, a Spartan Company builds truck bodies for Spartan. However, I believe in this case, since the the builder of the body had nothing to do with the manufacturing of cab/chassis (to the best of my knowledge) then the builder of the cab/chassis could be held responsible if this terrible accident was their fault.

Edited August 8, 2008 by bvfdjc316

[Reliance 29]

What seems strange and confusing is that the truck is/was a 1987 model and the accident was in 2005. That is 18 years later. Would it not be up to the municipality or the fire department to see that the vehicle is repaired faithfully when needed. Since when do manufacturers keep repairing and maintaining trucks for departments. Isn't that what manufacturers and dealers are for. Or am I missing something other than he left the aux. brake on and was maybe going a little fast for the road conditions.

[RescueKujo 130]

This accident was talked about when it occured

California Firefighter Charged with manslaughter

The Engineer was acquitted of the charges. I believe the widow is going after the "big money". She probably doesn't want to sue to county and mess up her bereavement benefits. This is California after all, and God gave all it's citizens the right to sue anyone for anything

[Oswegowind 17]

When you sue, you should sue everyone possibly involved so you have a better chance of actually winning something. They probably sued the municipality which owned/maintained the roadway for some piece of the pie.