Ford was dealt the most severe blow when a jury in Georgia awarded a family $3 million dollars over a defective seatback mechanism in 1984-1994 Tempo models, reports the Atlanta-Journal Constitution Newspaper.
Mary Reese of Augusta, Georgia, was rear-ended in her 1994 Ford Tempo, and the seatback collapsed from the strength of the impact. This caused severe neck and spine injuries for the 76 year old woman, who then passed away 23 days later.
Ford claims the seatback mechanisms were made weaker to help protect rear passenger’s knees from being damaged in an impact. Sounds like a bit of a Catch-22 until you realize that most carmakers have figured out a way to make their seats friendly to rearseat passenger’s knees without collapsing altogether in an accident.
The only thing I can think of is that the Tempo was designed before Ford bought Volvo, which is currently where most Ford safety innovation and design originates. If I was Ford, I would just settle this embarrassing lawsuit that in my eyes has shades of Ford Pinto written all over it. Ford, unfortunately, intends to appeal.
The Ford Pinto, if you forget, was Ford’s economy model from the 1970’s that had a proclivity toward exploding during rear impacts. The problem? Ford designed the car with the gas tank right behind the rear bumper. Any engineer worth his salt should have known that sort of design would be problematic, to say the least.
Ford didn’t handle the fallout from this problem very well. Instead of fixing the problem when it was discovered, Ford bean counters came up with a mathematical equation to figure out if it was cheaper to re-engineer the car or just pay out lawsuit claims. Ford thought just paying out claims would be cheaper. Sadly enough, all that was needed to keep gas from leaking and igniting was a rubber bladder in the gas tank-the cost: $11 per vehicle.
Unfortunately for them, a young boy was severely burned from a resulting fire and was awarded around $20 million in compensatory damages. Thus, the mathematical equation was proved a fallacy and Ford eventually had to recall all Pintos for the repair anyway.
In bad news for the boys on the other side of Detroit, a 2005 Dodge Ram owner has brought a lawsuit representing his now paralyzed 18 year old son. Rodrigo Berriocha allegedly was crippled after his father's 3500 skidded off the freeway and flipped three times, ejecting the boy. Rodrigo was also wearing his seatbelt, which the suit alleges should have saved him serious injury according to a report in the Southeast Texas Record Newspaper.
The lawsuit claims that since the Ram lacks ESC or any sort of rollover control system, the manufacturer is liable for negligence. The government has currently only mandated that ESC programs be installed in all cars and light trucks by the model year 2012. The technology has been in use as far back as 1995 in Mercedes models.
This lawsuit, while sad due to the resultant disability of the young man, is less clear cut in my eyes. Trucks and SUVs have elevated ride heights, stiff suspensions and large tires that all contribute to lower handling limits. Mr. Berriocha was speeding in the Ram 3500 at the time which I think will weigh pretty heavily against his case. When your truck flips three times before landing in a tree, you have to be going pretty fast.
So what do these lawsuits teach us about life in the auto industry and on the road? While some lawsuits have merit and can bring about changes that will save lives, often times they are frivolous attempts to drum up a little cash. One can only hope the law will tell the difference between the two and make the wrong things right. Unfortunately, if you believe that there is a bridge in Brooklyn I would like to sell you!