Topic: Toyota Found Not At Fault For 2006 Camry Fatal Crash

[Autos_Editor]

Los Angeles jury pins blame on other vehicle that hit Camry before acceleration

Read More...

[Noto]

I'm always happy to see some justice in this world - as a litigator, I will never, ever take on class actions.  In theory, they are great in every way; rather than having 100+ litigants bring actions separately (ultimately increasing the likelihood that judgments may not be the same), a class of individuals bring a single action to determine the merits of similar cases.

This incident was outside of the recalls - so it couldn't be part of a class action.  Still, the decision appears to suggest that this action was brought to lay some blame on Toyota, who ultimately was not responsible for the untimely death. 

I may be a litigator, but I am not a fan of useless litigation (and the costs associated with same).  This was a fishing expedition to get money, not a way to hold Toyota responsible to ensure it doesn't happen again (what class actions are, in part, intending to do).

[redman]

For those who want to learn more about how Brake Override System function:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JIzGeH6c9ls

I find that ridiculous that negligence/stupidity of drivers somehow has to be mitigated by technology and manufacturers or be at fault.

[paul246]

I know an elderly woman that drove her Camry through a masonary wall several years back.

She was the worst driver, even when she was young. Everyone else on the road had to watch out, for her.

Of course, being aware of Toyota in the news, she immediately claimed the car had accellerated out of her control, but she didn't seek litigation against Toyota.

In the meantime, her driver's license had expired.... only took eight attempts to pass the road test to get it reinstated.

[dkaz]

She got it reinstated? Seriously? Time to get a bus pass! Old people with their sense of entitlement to their drivers licenses.

Shall we reopen discussion about what happened to the out of control Lexus that killed the driver and three passengers? To this day I still find it hard to believe that a police veteran didn't think of just stomping on the EDIT: brake. Uh oh, I'm in trouble.

[Noto]

She got it reinstated? Seriously? Time to get a bus pass! Old people with their sense of entitlement to their drivers licenses.

Driving is a privilege, not a right - time to fail more people (it'd just increase profits of DMVs everywhere any way - not so bad )

[Black Hatch]

Uh oh.
Toyota found liable in this OKC case...
http://wot.motortrend.com/oklahoma-jury-finds-toyota-liable-in-sudden-acceleration-case-419973.html#axzz2imhZ4WgI

[tooscoops]

gawd damn....

i hate these cases... firist off, i believe that accidents happen. unless something is 100% someone else's fault (rare that someone doesn't at least have a chance to avoid the accident or prevent it), sorry for your loss.. it's tragic. but how is getting 3 million dollars make it better? if the passenger died of cancer, do you get 3 million from the hospital? or a heart attack, will mcdonalds pay 3 mil? it was already proven that the acceleration was due to things that the driver should have been able to compensate for or prevent... take some of the blame and responsibility yourself people. bad things happen in the world... deal with it... don't look for every bad thing to somehow be countered by something good like a big payout.

[Black Hatch]

Although I think Toyota should not be 100% liable, Toyotas tend to have "mellow" brake feel.
The travel distance/sensitivity of the brakes seems to require alot more force than say Mazda brakes which some people might say are twitchy/touchy.

[Noto]

Uh oh.
Toyota found liable in this OKC case...
http://wot.motortrend.com/oklahoma-jury-finds-toyota-liable-in-sudden-acceleration-case-419973.html#axzz2imhZ4WgI

Ha ha, sucks to be the Plaintiffs - Oklahoma has a cap on non-economic damages at $350,000.  A Jury of Yo' Peers is often unaware of the law, that's why Lawyers can't sit in a jury (woo hoo!). 

gawd damn....
i hate these cases... firist off, i believe that accidents happen. unless something is 100% someone else's fault

If it makes you feel any better, the jury's verdict doesn't include what is known as "contributory negligence," wherein the driver, if found to have contributed to the loss, will have the jury award reduced by whatever percentage that contributory negligence is found to be.  So, if Toyota is 75% at fault, and the driver is 25% for not shifting into neutral, turning off the car, or whatever else Defence counsel argued, then Toyo would only be responsible for 75% of $3,000,000.00, which is $2,250,000.00 - and then reduce any portion above $350,000 for non-economic losses.  In a case where the person died, a $3,000,000 jury award for 'compensatory' damages will likely be less than $500,000, less legal fees

Worry not, Tooscoops!

[quadzilla]

Although I think Toyota should not be 100% liable, Toyotas tend to have "mellow" brake feel.
The travel distance/sensitivity of the brakes seems to require alot more force than say Mazda brakes which some people might say are twitchy/touchy.

I don't understand this comment. What does brake feel have to do with any of this?

[johngenx]

I agree that Toyota brakes have a slower engagement point at the top of the pedal.  It makes it easier to drive smoothly in the city.  However, it means you have slightly more travel before full engagement of the brakes.  I found it took about five minutes to become accustomed to when driving.  Anyone that can't cope shouldn't be driving.

Many people I see on the roads everyday should have their licenses pulled.

[aquadorhj]

so if i read the situation correctly, the driver ran thru an intersection and ran into an embankment? 

so, why/how did the passenger die?  if i recall correctly, 2006.     or for that matter, anything built after 1995 had dual air bags so passenger did have it.  did the passenger wear seatbelt?   if so, how did only the passenger die?   if not, fukc the retard, he/she deserves to die for stupidity.

also, from what speed did the car "unintentionally" accelerate from intersection to embankment? 
from standing still, at an intersection, with my 333 HP i can maybe get to 50 km/h if flatout go bonkers from 1st gear by the end of the intersection.   
so, if it WAS say, 06 V6 camry with 210 HP, it will probably go not quite as fast into intersection..  but that speed is less than 40 mph...  any car can crash at that speed and pretty much be safe.

there are many things i don't understand in this world, and i guess this will be one of them. 

[Noto]

Many people I see on the roads everyday should have their licenses pulled.

+1, +1, and +1 again...but fixed ^

[Fobroader]

I dont get this, why do we need all these systems to overcome the severe deficiencies of moronic drivers. Im sorry, the car shouldnt brake, steer....anything for you. You are driving, you should have your wits about you and be giving your full and undivided attention to the task at hand. Also this "unintended acceleration" business is complete and utter BS. I had the throttle stick on my old truck when I first bought it, I floored it coming onto a high speed route and the pedal remained on the floor after I backed off, poop came out, but I managed to throw the truck into neutral, got off the road, popped the hood and manually pushed the throttle back to idle, lubricated the cable with washer fluid (only thing I had) and replaced the cable the next day. People had time to call 911 and talk for minutes on end to the operator, thats enough time to sort out a solution by yourself, how hard is it to throw the car into neutral, put your hazards on and pull to the side?!?!? Let the engine blow, who cares, if you cant get it shutdown, but stop the car for the love of god.

[Noto]

...
how hard is it to throw the car into neutral, put your hazards on and pull to the side?!?!? Let the engine blow, who cares, if you cant get it shutdown, but stop the car for the love of god.

For a lot of those mentioned earlier, whose licenses should never have been issued, or should be revoked, they don't have a solid understanding of how vehicles work - they have no idea what to do in the event of a stuck pedal, etc.  (to be honest, they have no idea how to use anything in their cars *face palm*)

Still, just because we understand and/or have logic, doesn't mean everyone who drives does.  It's unfortunate that driving is allowed so easily - it's a privilege, time to be treated as one.

[Fobroader]

...
how hard is it to throw the car into neutral, put your hazards on and pull to the side?!?!? Let the engine blow, who cares, if you cant get it shutdown, but stop the car for the love of god.

For a lot of those mentioned earlier, whose licenses should never have been issued, or should be revoked, they don't have a solid understanding of how vehicles work - they have no idea what to do in the event of a stuck pedal, etc.  (to be honest, they have no idea how to use anything in their cars *face palm*)

Still, just because we understand and/or have logic, doesn't mean everyone who drives does.  It's unfortunate that driving is allowed so easily - it's a privilege, time to be treated as one.

The thing is if they pressed on the brakes hard enough the car would have slowed down, this is a Camry/Prius we are talking about, not a E63 AMG. If you dont know how to react in an emergency situation, then again, no licence.

[Noto]

The thing is if they pressed on the brakes hard enough the car would have slowed down, this is a Camry/Prius we are talking about, not a E63 AMG. If you dont know how to react in an emergency situation, then again, no licence.

Again, I'm very against all this flak that Toyota got about the accelerators.  In no instances should anyone have died if they had even a basic understanding of how to drive a car.

Still, I have to disagree with you, in part.  Though I agree that holding the brakes would slow the car down, the brakes would eventually fade/fail.  I took my driving lessons in a Ford Focus back in the day, and the instructor had a separate brake pedal in the passenger foot-well.  When she pushed on the pedal, the car slowed greatly, but did not come to a complete stop.

Either way, especially with the floor mats being the issue, I think Toyota should be 0% liable.  If there were internal faults causing the pedal to stick, they should be liable, in part, but only to the extent that a reasonably skilled driver would think to bump the car into neutral or try to shut off the engine (turn the key, hold the power button, etc).  I'd attribute liability at 50% in the event of an actual widespread mechanical/electrical fault at the negligence of Toyota and a driver that failed to mitigate the loss by attempting to slow the car by any means possible (parking brake, slamming on the brakes, neutral, or turning off the car).

[tooscoops]

yeah, i still can't understand the toyota acceleration issue. floor mats being jammed up is not the manufacturers fault. every time i get in my car, i shift my rubber mats down... AND i don't install them over top of the carpet mats.

it would be like doing a recall because when factory installed tires get bald, you are likely to lose control. at some point, you are responsible for taking care of your car.

[Noto]

I believe there were some subsequent findings in a few investigations (paid for, obviously, not by Toyota, but rather by litigants...i.e. horsesh!t claims) that found a part that 'could' warp/overheat/who cares and cause the accelerator to stick.  I don't believe the final cause of every reported malfunction was the mats.

With that being said, my 2010 Corolla was subject to the recall.  They shaved down my gas pedal, but made no internal changes (unless they left that out of the invoice). ...so I'm not really sure what is up, yo.