Why a Jeep Owner Is Being Sued for a Mechanic's Death During a Dealership Oil Change

-
F9A1C160-64CD-4295-BABD-9E02B53D5BBC.gif
 
RustyRatRod said:
First of all, that's really sad. What a tragedy.

Secondly, I know a "little" about work comp having been through it. I can tell you this. Work comp ain't got NUTHIN to do with helping the employee. It's ALL about protecting the employer. Under the work comp umbrella, employers are almost always completely protected from any sorts of lawsuits dealing with work place mishaps. So that is why the family must seek other avenues. They won't win, though. It's really unfortunate, but sometimes an accident is just that.
Click to expand...

You got the first part right. However, secondly you are full of crap. I have been doing clinical occupational medicine (aka "work comp") for 25 years, and it is BOTH about helping the employee and reducing costs ("protecting") the employer. I have never compromised my medical ethics to cover an employer's ***, although I have been asked to a few times. The patient always comes first, even though the employer is paying for it.

I don't know the particulars of your case, but an injured employee who doesn't get what he or she believes they are entitled to invariably complains about the doctor "working for the company so I'll never get a fair shake". Well, :icon_fU: to you.
 
DrCharles said:
You got the first part right. However, secondly you are full of crap. I have been doing clinical occupational medicine (aka "work comp") for 25 years, and it is BOTH about helping the employee and reducing costs ("protecting") the employer. I have never compromised my medical ethics to cover an employer's ***, although I have been asked to a few times. The patient always comes first, even though the employer is paying for it.

I don't know the particulars of your case, but an injured employee who doesn't get what he or she believes they are entitled to invariably complains about the doctor "working for the company so I'll never get a fair shake". Well, :icon_fU: to you.
Click to expand...
You completely miss my point and go straight to insults. Nice. So You just made the list. I wasn't even talking about the medical end of it. I was talking about the politics of the governmental end.
 
The dealership IS being sued, but as already noted here, the shyster who works on commission, scratch that, I meant the plaintiff's attorney, is suing everyone. Jeep, the dealer, and the unsuspecting vehicle owner. Shake the tree and see which low-hanging fruits fall into his basket, and settle for a fat paycheck. That's what they ALL do.
The article says that the vehicle owner has already offered to settle for his $100K policy limit (which has been accepted of course) and the court has already ordered the dealership to indemnify the owner (i.e. pay the $100K).
 
An unlicensed employee working at a dealership "DRIVING" a car kills another employee?? Damn FN straight lawyers will be involved.
 
Suing for $15M-i hate to say it, but no amount of $$ is going to bring a loved one back to life. My guess is that much $$ will only cause more problems for the family.
 
Lawyers just do their job , it's the legal system that rewards these people when the case should just be thrown out , just like a woman gets paid because she burned her who ha with coffee she put between her legs.
 
Professor Fate said:
Agreed, and I also don't understand how this pertains to Worker's Comp., either- this should be a civil suit for Wrongful Death and negligence... but then again, I'm not a lawyer and I don't play one on TV.
Click to expand...
As a 30 year mechanic with both auto and heavy duty tickets; first said incident happened at work. Thus Workers Comp becomes involved.
To drive during work related hours and business, every employer needed to see my license. Most requested a driver's abstract, which lists accidents, speeding etc. Anyone that does not possess a DL does not drive. Period. These days many young people have no clue how to drive a manual transmission auto. 90% of vehicles sold now are auto equipped.
IMHO, the shop is 95% responsible or more for requesting a person without a license move a vehicle by any means beyond pushing it. The remainder should be on the young man's shoulders for not being responsible to refuse something he was not trained to perform. Bloody awful situation that the children do not have their "prime of life" father and the wife does not have her husband. Not to mention his family.
As a western Canadian, I have been watching Michigan polytics. Bunch of lefty loons. If I lived there, I would have to move to a more level headed state. They are way past Dumbocraps and may be passing the socialists. On board with the WEF communists!
 
65wgn440 said:
I was sure, just by reading the headline, that the article was going to say the customer bypassed a clutch/ neutral safety switch and then the accident happened as mentioned. That would have made a little sense. I'm guessing the older mechanic told the kids to jump in there and fire it up. Terrible tragedy.
Click to expand...
I have worked at dealerships. When you check your car in at the dealer. Usually there is a “lot boy” who parks the car out in service lot after check in, it is not uncommon for a mechanic to come and look at a car during check in to get more info on what needs to happen with a car and let the service writer know. I have done that before. Sounds to me like the lot boy was supposed to move the car but, didn’t know how, and didn’t say, and then, because of his incompetency killed the other guy.
 
HemiSSDart said:
All I know is that lawyers SUCK! The idiot kid who killed the co-worker should be taught about accountability, simple as that! Maybe his parents should be held accountable too...
Click to expand...
That is a terribly biased and prejudiced thing to say. You should know better than to make gross generalizations like that. Typical mental midgetry from a Mopar guy. Why do Mopar fans have to be so dumb? It's really a turnoff.
 
Maybe it makes too much sense, but shouldn't Manslaughter or at least Negligence Causing Death charges be laid against the driver who had no business behind the wheel of the Jeep?
 
Jeep owner had nothing to do with this OTHER than making the mistake of trusting a poorly run dealership to repair/maintain vehicle. A dealership OWNER....SHOULD be responsible for all employees actions while on the clock, or is my thinking too logical?
 
Ok according to the article it says you cant sue a fellow employee. Well heres my issue. This isnt that this is the family of the deceased employee. Huge difference
 
There was a different article that didn't mention "behind the wheel." It stated he was outside the vehicle and put his foot on the clutch, hit start/key, then let his foot off clutch not knowing any better. Initially he put his foot on the brake and tried to start it, but no go there with the safety switch.

Michigan car owner sued after Jeep kills mechanic during oil change

Here's another twist... what if the deceased told him to fire it up... what then... now he contributed to his own demise.

If you want to kill someone? The answer... start a business in michigan and hire them... Pay those WC premiums!

The Jeep vehicle owner has zero liability here. Bucket of crap theory with defendants, toss it at wall, something will stick.
 
4spdragtop said:
Jeep owner had nothing to do with this OTHER than making the mistake of trusting a poorly run dealership to repair/maintain vehicle. A dealership OWNER....SHOULD be responsible for all employees actions while on the clock, or is my thinking too logical?
Click to expand...
You are correct

I think the owner of the jeep could then turn around and sue the dealership

It is backwards, but thats what the excess of lawyers and litigation has turned things into
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
-

Back
Top