| |
Main
Date: 03 Aug 2007 17:26:28
From: Colin Nelson
Subject: Marin Rift Zone Bars faulty
|
Following an accident caused by one side of the handlebar snapping/breaking
off a cyclist took the supplier to the High Court - and won. Judgement here
:-
http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/QB/2007/1667.html
Interesting finding.
--
Colin N.
Lincolnshire is mostly flat ... But the wind is mostly in your face
|
|
| |
Date: 09 Aug 2007 09:04:16
From: fltchrprtt@gmail.com
Subject: Re: Marin Rift Zone Bars faulty
|
On Aug 3, 1:26 pm, "Colin Nelson" <colin.nels...@ntlworld.com > wrote:
> Following an accident caused by one side of the handlebar snapping/breaking
> off a cyclist took the supplier to the High Court - and won. Judgement here
> :-http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/QB/2007/1667.html
>
yes, a proper case here, but it still don't correct the head injury.
why ride like it's a race if you're not getting paid? you get the
same amount of exercise at slower speeds on an amateur bike. a
healthy heart is a healthy heart.
what i see as important: if someone else built the bike, be cautious
and 'over worried', don't trust a bike that someone made and don't
have to ride. And if you build the bike, know what you're doing and
remember that you have no one else to blame.
it's also just plain scary to read a case where a helmet failed under
'normal' riding conditions. especially after being saved by one for
stupid riding.
|
| |
Date: 04 Aug 2007 05:33:53
From: Chalo
Subject: Re: Marin Rift Zone Bars faulty
|
Michael Press wrote:
>
> "Although he was wearing a cycling helmet, Mr Ide
> sustained a very severe closed head injury with
> significant brain damage. He has suffered permanent
> neurological and neuropsychological damage with
> impairment of cognitive function. There was another
> minor injury to the inside of the left thigh about six
> inches above the knee."
>
> One case where a helmet failed to prevent a leg injury.
Thompson, Rivara, and Thompson aren't listening. They've already made
they're point and cashed the checks.
Chalo
|
| |
Date: 04 Aug 2007 04:56:35
From: Michael Press
Subject: Re: Marin Rift Zone Bars faulty
|
In article <8zJsi.1867$ka7.334@newsfe4-gui.ntli.net >,
"Colin Nelson" <colin.nelson2@ntlworld.com > wrote:
> Following an accident caused by one side of the handlebar snapping/breaking
> off a cyclist took the supplier to the High Court - and won. Judgement here
> :-
> http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/QB/2007/1667.html
>
> Interesting finding.
"In general, if you notice at any time a crack or bend
in the frame, stem or bars of your bicycle, stop riding
it immediately. Take it to the dealer where you
purchased the bicycle and have them inspect it for
possible damage".
If a mechanism requires this disclaimer from the
manufacturer, it is not fit for the purpose for which
it is sold. This is prima facie evidence for the
liability of the manufacturer.
"Although he was wearing a cycling helmet, Mr Ide
sustained a very severe closed head injury with
significant brain damage. He has suffered permanent
neurological and neuropsychological damage with
impairment of cognitive function. There was another
minor injury to the inside of the left thigh about six
inches above the knee."
One case where a helmet failed to prevent a leg injury.
--
Michael Press
|
| |
Date: 03 Aug 2007 19:43:28
From: jim beam
Subject: Re: Marin Rift Zone Bars faulty
|
Colin Nelson wrote:
> Following an accident caused by one side of the handlebar snapping/breaking
> off a cyclist took the supplier to the High Court - and won. Judgement here
> :-
> http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/QB/2007/1667.html
>
> Interesting finding.
>
>
classic "experts carefully selected, then tied in knots by lawyers" outcome.
fact: aluminum fatigues
fact: it was used regularly for 3 years in a fatigue environment
fact: it is a mid/low end bike.
and as the old saying goes, "cheap, light, reliable - choose any two."
given the above, and that the manufacturer specifically warns that the
lightweight components: "need to be inspected and replaced
periodically", i'd throw this out. but this case was not about the
facts, it was about the arguments presented by the lawyers.
particularly when they conclude that it was impossible to distinguish
between the handlebar failure as the cause or the result of the accident.
|
| | |
Date: 09 Aug 2007 09:49:47
From: David L. Johnson
Subject: Re: Marin Rift Zone Bars faulty
|
jim beam wrote:
> fact: aluminum fatigues
> fact: it was used regularly for 3 years in a fatigue environment
> fact: it is a mid/low end bike.
1,300 pounds defines a mid/low end bike?
--
David L. Johnson
Let's be straight here. If we find something we can't understand we
like to call it something you can't understand, or indeed even
pronounce.
-- Douglas Adams
|
| | |
Date: 04 Aug 2007 09:07:26
From: Colin Nelson
Subject: Re: Marin Rift Zone Bars faulty
|
"jim beam" <spamvortex@bad.example.net > wrote in message
news:4MmdnQDqlq5Mei7bnZ2dnUVZ_gSdnZ2d@speakeasy.net...
> Colin Nelson wrote:
> > Following an accident caused by one side of the handlebar
snapping/breaking
> > off a cyclist took the supplier to the High Court - and won. Judgement
here
> > :-
> > http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/QB/2007/1667.html
> >
> > Interesting finding.
> >
> >
>
> classic "experts carefully selected, then tied in knots by lawyers"
outcome.
>
> fact: aluminum fatigues
> fact: it was used regularly for 3 years in a fatigue environment
> fact: it is a mid/low end bike.
>
> and as the old saying goes, "cheap, light, reliable - choose any two."
>
> given the above, and that the manufacturer specifically warns that the
> lightweight components: "need to be inspected and replaced
> periodically", i'd throw this out. but this case was not about the
> facts, it was about the arguments presented by the lawyers.
> particularly when they conclude that it was impossible to distinguish
> between the handlebar failure as the cause or the result of the accident.
I can well imagine the 'fun' that lot would have if they were to be involved
in a case regarding 'Spokes, Tension and rims/wheels/hubs - suitability and
safety/reasonable durability issues' .
--
Colin N.
Lincolnshire is mostly flat ... But the wind is mostly in your face
|
| | |
Date: 04 Aug 2007 03:56:03
From: Clive George
Subject: Re: Marin Rift Zone Bars faulty
|
"jim beam" <spamvortex@bad.example.net > wrote in message
news:4MmdnQDqlq5Mei7bnZ2dnUVZ_gSdnZ2d@speakeasy.net...
> classic "experts carefully selected, then tied in knots by lawyers"
> outcome.
Not sure about that one..
> fact: aluminum fatigues
> fact: it was used regularly for 3 years in a fatigue environment
> fact: it is a mid/low end bike.
>
> and as the old saying goes, "cheap, light, reliable - choose any two."
If so, Marin chose the wrong pair : for a mid/low range bike from a
manufacturer like them, they need to choose cheap + reliable, not cheap +
light - and that's what normally happens.
(for one thing, it gives them an excuse to sell their more upmarket kit)
> particularly when they conclude that it was impossible to distinguish
> between the handlebar failure as the cause or the result of the accident.
Not sure about the legal bits of that, but I thought it was reasonably clear
that the handlebar failure was the cause of the crash.
cheers,
clive
|
| |
Date: 03 Aug 2007 17:44:23
From: DanKMTB@gmail.com
Subject: Re: Marin Rift Zone Bars faulty
|
On Aug 3, 1:26 pm, "Colin Nelson" <colin.nels...@ntlworld.com > wrote:
> Following an accident caused by one side of the handlebar snapping/breaking
> off a cyclist took the supplier to the High Court - and won. Judgement here
> :-http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/QB/2007/1667.html
>
> Interesting finding.
>
> --
> Colin N.
>
> Lincolnshire is mostly flat ... But the wind is mostly in your face
I don't like the bars on that bike anyway. This is as good an excuse
as any to get around to changing them. Thanks.
|
|
