Philadelphia Injury Attorney Blog

In response to the Toyota Corporation sudden acceleration crisis, legislation titled “The Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 2010” is being drafted representing one of the biggest overhauls of Federal motor vehicle safety regulation in a generation. The most recent comparable action was more than a decade ago when Congress passed new safety rules in the aftermath of the rollover problem involving Ford Explorers equipped with Firestone tires. It is likely that this bill will face opposition from automakers particularly for the following: (1) a provision that removes the existing $16.4 million dollar cap for damages; (2) civil penalties against manufacturers for violations of safety laws; and (3) boosting the fine for violations to $20,000 from the current $6,000.

Many provisions of the proposal include:

1. Require an automobile to stop within a certain distance when the vehicle’s engine is operating with an open throttle. This requirement can be met with a brake override system which insures that the brakes override the accelerator pedal.

2. All car companies will be required to install black boxes or event data recorders to record information about the vehicle before and after the crash and the black boxes must be easily downloadable by third parties.

3. New standards for vehicle electronic systems and keyless ignition systems requiring automakers to standardize the way a driver will bring the vehicle under control in an emergency.

4. Raising the cap on penalties that can be assessed against carmakers from $5,000 to $25,000 a vehicle.

5. NHTSA would receive additional funding and new powers including the ability to order an immediate recall if it finds an imminent hazard of death or serious injury.

6. Includes whistle blower protections and promotes reporting of vehicle defects by requiring a sticker on new vehicles with contact information for the NHTSA.

7. Auto executives who knowingly provide false information to federal regulators would be liable for fines up to $250 million dollars.

8. Create a $9.00 fee per vehicle payable by the manufacturer to fund NHTSA and enforcement of the new requirements under the bill.

The experienced Pennsylvania product liability lawyers and Pennsylvania vehicle defect lawyers and Philadelphia car accident lawyers of Reiff and Bily salute Rep. Henry Waxman (D-CA) and Rep. Bobby Rush (D-IL) for proposing this legislation.

As experienced Philadelphia car accident lawyers and Pennsylvania vehicle defect lawyers since 1979, we believe that it is finally time for the government to start holding automakers accountable for hiding defects, as well as for it to promote vehicle safety.

As an experienced car accident and auto product liability lawyer since 1979 and somewhat of a computer geek with a curious mind since childhood, I have to confess that I think the over-computerization and digitization of cars creates risk for drivers. Recently on a flight back from Puerto Rico, I had the opportunity to chat with a pilot on the advantages and disadvantages of an Airbus, which is a fly by wire computerized plane versus a Boeing plane which according to the pilot is more mechanical and not as computer oriented or controlled.

The pilot explained to me that although the Airbus may be more sophisticated in terms of electronics, he had concerns with backup systems if God forbid there was an electronic failure. How many of you have had glitches with computers, remote controls or other less complex systems than those digitized or electronic systems which control acceleration and braking and other systems in your vehicle? It seems that as technology advances, electronics and computerized systems are replacing the more primitive mechanical systems that once controlled automobile functions.

Continue reading "A Practical and Old Fashioned Product Liability Lawyer Expresses Concerns about Computers and Electronics in Today’s Cars" »

With mounting Congressional probes, mushrooming lawsuits and a federal probe into the reporting of sudden unintended acceleration defects, the risk of criminal charges against Toyota has been raised. The legal stakes are high for Toyota because it is the first automaker embroiled in major safety issues since tough new criminal penalties became law after rollover recalls in 2000 involving Ford Explorers and Firestone Tires. The Transportation Recall Enhancement, Accountability, and Documentation (TREAD) Act for the first time made individuals who intentionally mislead federal regulators about safety defects subject to possible criminal fines and/or prison.

Toyota revealed last month that a federal grand jury in the Southern District of New York subpoenaed documents relating to sudden acceleration in various vehicles and braking issues in the Prius. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration is investigating the timeliness of Toyota’s reporting of its sudden unintended acceleration complaints and fixes. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood stated that Toyota could face civil penalties but the grand jury subpoenas signal that the United States Attorney for that district has a criminal investigation underway. NHTSA has often worked closely with the Justice Department in high profile safety investigations. Toyota claims it reported in a timely manner and is complying with all subpoenas. The Justice Department will not comment.

If you or a loved one has sustained an injury due to a Toyota defect, please give one of our experienced Philadelphia car accident lawyers at Reiff and Bily a call for a free, no obligation consultation at 1-800-421-9595 or online at www.reiffandbily.com.

It was astounding to read that Toyota’s training of workers to maintain quality control failed to keep up with the company’s rapid growth according to Toyota President Akio Toyoda in an interview with Major Business Japanese Daily. Toyoda apologized for Toyota’s missteps in dealing with the aspects blamed in dozens of fatalities. He told members of Congress that his company’s rapid growth had “confused” their priority placed over safety.

As an experienced catastrophic injury lawyer specializing in automotive defects, I have been ever aware of the fact that many of the automobile manufacturers continue to place an emphasis on profits rather than consumer safety. I do not believe that Akio Toyoda’s words will bring great comfort to the families of those who were catastrophically injured or tragically killed as a result of deficiencies in training and workmanship caused by rapid growth expansion of his company.

As an experienced Philadelphia automotive product liability attorney, I have investigated cases of sudden acceleration numerous times since 1979. Initially in the early days, I must confess that I believed that mostly driver error was to blame and that I was somewhat suspicious of an automotive product defect. Recent news stories indicate that there have been over 1,500 complaints of sudden acceleration noted on Toyota models, not included in the 5.6 million already recalled vehicles.

My wife drives a new BMW 530 series and I have noticed at least five occasions of sudden, unintended acceleration and have taken the car to the dealer and it is often difficult to replicate the circumstances of the same and I am starting to understand the difficulty that the manufacturers and dealers have repairing the system without a definitive diagnosis.

Continue reading "The Mystery of Sudden Acceleration Continues To Plague Automobile Manufacturers - Some Suggest Cosmic Waves Are To Blame" »

Despite the fact that Toyota is all over the headlines lately with noted auto product defects concerning sudden unintended acceleration, there is light at the end of the tunnel. As an experienced automotive product liability lawyer for over 30 years, I can recall that in 1978 a design flaw caused gas tanks to explode on Ford Pintos when they were in rear-end collisions killing 27 people. An internal Ford memo showed that Ford execs had weighed the cost of recalls ($129 million dollars against estimated lawsuits of $50 million dollars). Under pressure from NHTSA and Ralph Nadar, Ford recalled 1.5 million Pintos in 1978 and the brand was scrapped in 1980.

Fast forward to the year 2000 with the Ford Firestone debacle where tread separation on some lines of tires caused many Ford Explorers to roll over with a reported 250 deaths and over 3,000 catastrophic injuries. Ford and Firestone engaged in an ugly public feud over who was to blame. The response was that Firestone recalled all 6.5 million of its tires on the road and all but 200,000 were brought in and replaced for free. In 2001 Firestone cut ties with Ford, recaptured market share and turned a profit in two years.

Continue reading "Although There Has Been Much Bad News in the Press Concerning Safety of Automobiles, the Good News Is That Traffic Deaths Have Decreased As Automakers Strive To Make Safer Vehicles" »

Although Toyota Motor Corporation’s statements indicate that internal testing has ruled out electronic problems as the cause for sudden acceleration, the automaker is reluctant to provide results from those tests and make employees with personal knowledge of the testing available for professional interviews. As an experienced automotive product liability attorney familiar with the hide and seek game played by auto manufacturers, I am not sure that I understand Toyota’s basis for repeated assertions that it is confident that there are no electronic defects contributing to the incidents of sudden unintended acceleration. Certainly the fact that more than 60 people have complained of sudden acceleration incidents after repairs by Toyota as part of their recall seems to shed doubts on the credibility of Toyota’s assertion. Basic and immediate substantiation of Toyota’s claims is called for and warranted in view of these circumstances.

First we were told by Toyota that the problem was with floor mats and stuck accelerator pedals. Then there were other convoluted explanations. Frankly, I am not so sure that Toyota is even aware of where their problem rests and perhaps they should take some of the money they spend on advertising their integrity and earmark it for a more rigorous testing of their vehicles for possible electronic defects. I am aware of an instance where an expert from the Southern Illinois University stated that he had been able to defeat a key safety feature in Toyota’s electronic throttle safety system.

The automotive product liability law firm of Reiff and Bily is committed to consumer safety resulting from automotive design or manufacturing defects.

As a result of the recent Toyota safety debacle and the massive amount of publicity surrounding these events, the Obama Administration is considering mandating brake overriding crash recording technologies and considering new rules of design of automobiles, including sophisticated and advanced brake technology and black boxes that record crash data and are easily downloaded. U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood stated, “We are looking at the possibility of recommending brake override systems to manufacturers of all automobiles.” The system under consideration would allow the driver to override the accelerator by returning to idle if both the gas and brake pedals are being pressed at the same time, thus preventing an unintended sudden acceleration. Senator John D. Rockefeller has also stated that new laws may be created to expand federal authority over automotive safety issues to ensure that another massive recall does not occur.

While mistakes commonly happen and unforeseen consequences happen in the automotive design industry, one thing is for certain that more teeth and government regulations will go a long way to reduce tragic consequences.

The experienced automobile product liability lawyers at Reiff and Bily are committed to promoting consumer safety.

Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood stated that NHTSA is considering making brake override systems mandatory for all cars going forward as a way of coping with unintended sudden acceleration. We are now learning that many of the fixes by Toyota do not seem to be working and cars are still accelerating suddenly after the problem has allegedly been addressed in dealerships. Toyota has been inserting a shim to repair a Toyota accelerator pedal affected by the recall. The brake override system suggested would inform the engine that if the brake is depressed after accelerating in rapid fashion, such as an emergency or panic situation, that engine power should be reduced. Toyota is putting just such a system in many of the cars it sells in the U.S. starting in the spring. It is also offering to retrofit some models on the road now if the owner wants it done when they bring the car to the dealer for repair under the jammed floor mat recall. Brake override systems would only be added to certain vehicles with electronic throttles and Transportation Secretary LaHood made it clear that the order for implementing them would affect all automakers and not just Toyota.

A sudden acceleration syndrome is something that has affected all of the car manufacturers at one time or another for many years and is not just limited to Toyota. As an experienced automobile product liability lawyer, I have seen this problem on many of the other automobile manufacturers’ cars. Surprisingly, my wife owns a BMW 5 series which apparently accelerated on its own on two separate occasions within the last month and she narrowly escaped injuries to herself and others. When we go to analyze the situation, no trouble codes have been registered or found, yet I am certain that when I was driving the car which was stopped on an uphill grade, the car took off without my foot being on the gas pedal. Unfortunately many of the sudden acceleration problems are difficult to replicate and do not show when the car is connected to a computer for analysis. Many times the situation involves a bad sensor or circuit board which can be affected by elements on the highway or faulty manufacturer design. Specifically, the problem seems to occur when the car decelerates to a stop and the vehicle all of a sudden will buck once or twice with a sudden acceleration of the engines rpms reaching 2,000 to 3,000 rpm. Many times when a sudden acceleration occurs, the brakes do not work quick enough or hard enough to avoid a crash and for the past 10 or 15 years, many courts ruled in favor of the car companies in litigation, blaming the drivers for these accidents. Our law firm has been intimately involved with automotive product defects for many years. We are all too familiar with the manufacturers’ screaming blame game of driver error. As technology continues to advance and mechanical cable throttle is replaced with electronic throttle, software and sensors are involved and as we all know, this apparently is accompanied by technical glitches. Yes, driving by wire technology certainly comes at a cost and the issue here is not really who is to blame but in fact, working together to achieve a satisfactory resolution to this problem so that additional lives are not lost. I believe that the Toyota/Lexus media situation and resulting governmental inquiries and efforts of trial lawyers committed to representing injured consumers will dispel the myth of driver error and perhaps now a little bit of integrity by the manufacturers will be added to the equation.

As an experienced vehicle defect lawyer since 1979 specializing in catastrophic injuries and wrongful deaths, I am well aware of the secrecy that many automobile manufacturers go to in order to protect their product by putting profits ahead of consumer safety. In the last few weeks, there have been a number of outstanding revelations and smoking guns revealed in the Toyota crisis.

Lately another smoking gun has surfaced which will greatly undercut Toyota’s polished reputation for attempting to be holier than thou when it comes to disclosing safety issues and fixing potentially dangerous problems. According to this news story, Toyota apparently bargained with U.S. regulators to limit the scope and cost of its recall. Sources report that internal Toyota documents from July 2009 entitled “Wins For Toyota Safety” state that the firm saved 100 million dollars by convincing the NHTSA to limit an accelerator recall to 55,000 Lexus and Camry models. The Wall Street Journal reported that the Toyota document, by linking safety issues to corporate profits, could prompt difficult questions for Toyota company executives, adding to their problems as a result of the 8 million vehicle recall. This memo highlights Toyota’s aggressive efforts to save money rather than recall cars, putting profits ahead of consumer safety.

As an experienced vehicle product liability lawyer, I salute the national and international news media for calling attention to Toyota’s attempts to camouflage or sweep their situation under the carpet. I am now more than ever concerned that the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration may also have not such an innocent role in that it agreed to this bargaining arrangement with Toyota when their job was to protect the American people from such behavior and irresponsible actions by Toyota.

Problems for Japanese automakers seem to be mounting with the increasing number of recalls in the past few weeks. Toyota has recalled approximately 8 or 9 million vehicles at this point in time, although I am not quite certain due to the fact that every other day there seems to be another recall notice published.

Recently Honda announced a recall of nearly a million vehicles due to defective airbags and overaggressive airbags that have been linked to catastrophic injuries and at least one fatality. Previously Honda announced a recall in 2008 and the summer of 2009 whereupon it was noted that the airbag inflators were producing too much pressure causing airbags to rupture sending dangerous parts towards the driver during an accident. These airbags are manufactured in the United States by a Honda subcontractor.

I recently resolved a case involving an overaggressive and defective airbag which caused blindness in one of my clients. The automobile manufacturer attempted to argue that it was not their fault and that the driver was simply out of position but we were successful countering this argument due to the fact that the driver was belted in the seat and argued that it is foreseeable during an accident that a driver or passenger can be jostled out of position. Frankly, the argument set forth by the automobile manufacturer was in this experienced airbag defect lawyer’s opinion complete nonsense and a red herring attempting to deflect focus from the more significant problem of the overaggressive airbag defect.

If you or a loved one has been involved in an accident caused by an airbag defect, please contact one of our experienced airbag defect lawyers for a free consultation. Don’t believe everything the manufacturers tell you. Our experience has clearly revealed that many of the manufacturers engage in a campaign of deny, delay and defend claims in their continuing effort to place profits over consumer safety.

As experienced product liability attorneys with over 30 years experience litigating cases against the world’s major automotive manufacturers, we at Reiff and Bily have witnessed first hand the practices used by Toyota and other auto manufacturers to conceal and deny serious design and manufacturing defects in their vehicles, emphasizing profits over consumer safety. Now, after years of foot-dragging, Toyota has finally acknowledged major problems with their vehicles which have placed the drivers in jeopardy many times when they take to the roads.

According to news sources, sudden and unexpected acceleration of Toyota vehicles has killed at least 30 people and seriously injured countless others in the last several years alone. One of our clients was driving on a major highway near Philadelphia when her vehicle suddenly accelerated to over 90 mph and nothing she did was able to slow the vehicle. Her car finally came to a stop when she left the road and drove up a steep embankment. Amazingly, she walked away from this incident with only minor injuries. Others have not been so lucky. In California, 4 people were killed when a new Lexus accelerated to over 100 mph, rolled over, and killed all 4 people in the car. Over 800 other incidents involving sudden, unintended acceleration have been documented in the U.S. alone, while hundreds of similar incidents have killed and injured people around the world. The Problem Is Real!!!

Continue reading "Toyota Dragged Their Feet" »

As an experienced automotive product liability lawyer, my legal brethren and myself who dedicate their practices to automotive product liability and consumer safety have been all too frustrated many times over the past few years when we attempt to download the black boxes from Toyotas and other Japanese auto manufacturers. More so than any other automakers that we litigate against, many of the Japanese automakers have placed roadblocks in our path in making data from black boxes accessible. Yoshimi Inaba, the President of Toyota North America, told a Senate Committee on Tuesday, March 2nd that the company would be delivering three data readers to the National Highway Safety Administration on Wednesday, March 3rd and that the company hoped to make the data more accessible to other systems by the middle of 2011.

Quite frankly as an experienced product liability lawyer who has had vast experience with the downloading of black boxes and the evaluation of data, I am curious why only three data readers are only being made available and why the consumer public and experts must wait until the middle of 2011 to receive more accessibility when citizens lives are knowingly in danger. Once again, it seems that profitability is being stressed over public safety in this game of hide and seek by Toyota. I have always believed that if you are confronted with a problem or safety issue, get the facts out there as soon as possible so other innocent victims are not killed or catastrophically injured.

I for one believe that Toyota is “hiding something” and for a company that prides itself on integrity, they are certainly not doing a great job putting their cards on the table as surveys now reveal that more than half of the people out there are less likely to buy a Toyota. On the positive side for major U.S. automobile manufacturers, sales are up but many analysts claim its at Toyota’s expense. By the way, it is important to note that the black box recording devices utilized on Toyotas are not so dissimilar from black boxes utilized on American cars as common safety features. However, one important aspect is that Toyotas can only be read by Toyota technicians with specialized readers which is not the case with black boxes manufactured by U.S. car companies. As I review the congressional hearings, there is a theatrical ring about it. The answer is quite simple, “... without integrity nothing stands.”

You can rest assured that the automotive product liability lawyers at Reiff and Bily and many other fine lawyers committed to the cause around the United States of America will do their best to ferret out the truth in these matters.

At Reiff and Bily in Philadelphia, we have received many telephone calls in the last several days concerning Toyota’s latest recall involving faulty brakes in its best selling Prius. As experienced automotive product liability and catastrophic injury lawyers, we are greatly concerned about this latest problem because properly functioning brakes are perhaps the most important safety feature on any car. In the U.S. alone, Toyota has recalled over 40,000 new Prius and Lexus automobiles manufactured after April 2009, due to problems with the cars’ braking systems. Toyota has announced that there is a problem with their computerized braking system in that there is a delayed reaction from the time the brake pedal is applied until the brakes actually take hold. This problem has the potential to cause severe injuries and even death to the occupants of these brand new vehicles touted to be the most technologically advanced vehicles on the market today.

As experienced product liability attorneys with over 30 years of experience representing catastrophically injured consumers, we take no joy in the troubles that have befallen Toyota, a company that prided itself as a manufacturer of the highest quality vehicles available. Nevertheless, we recognize that this latest problem constitutes a major threat to the health and safety of our clients. If you purchased a Prius or Lexus after April 2009, you should immediately contact your dealer for details on getting this problem fixed.

Continue reading "Toyota’s Newest Problem: Faulty Prius Brakes" »

By now, most people are aware of the recently publicized problems facing owners of Toyota and Lexus vehicles involving sudden unintended acceleration and brake problems. We at Reiff and Bily have recently become aware of new recalls involving 950,000 Honda vehicles involving faulty air bags. Additionally, U.S. regulators are now looking into reports of potential problems involving newer models of Toyota Corollas.

The experienced product liability lawyers of Reiff and Bily have over 30 years of experience representing people who suffered catastrophic injuries or deaths of family members due to defective motor vehicles. As an experienced airbag defect lawyer, I can state that airbags save many lives in car accidents. Recently I obtained a substantial settlement for a young woman who lost her eye due to a faulty airbag.

At Reiff and Bily, we have knowledgeable experts from around the country and we are not afraid to take on the major auto companies. Time after time, we have found that the auto companies put profits ahead of safety.

In a letter from the United States Congress Committee on Oversight and Government Reform sent to Mr. Yoshimi Inaba as part of their investigation into Toyota’s handling of vehicle recalls arising from incidents of sudden acceleration, it was revealed that Toyota deliberately withheld relevant electronic records that it was legally required to produce in rollover litigation. Many of these documents concerned rollover cases where the plaintiff was injured or killed. The letter also goes on to note that Mr. Dimitrious Biller, who is managing counsel of the product liability group of Toyota Motor Sales and in a very senior position in which he lead the defense of some of the largest tort cases against Toyota, particularly rollover cases involving seriously injured victims, did not produce all of the requested documents during the litigation process. Biller was concerned with Toyota’s failure to produce electronic documents in litigation. The documents also indicate that Mr. Biller was concerned that Toyota’s interactions with NHTSA would be discovered. Finally the Biller documents shined light on Toyota’s handling of the sudden, unintended acceleration problem.

In summary, the Biller documents and Toyota documents indicate a systematic disregard for the law and a routine violation of court discovery orders in litigation. People injured in crashes involving Toyota vehicles may have been injured a second time when Toyota failed to produce relevant evidence to the court. This also raises very serious questions as to whether Toyota has withheld substantial relevant information from NHTSA.

As experienced product liability lawyers, we have been well aware of Toyota's posturing for many years and their refusal to play fair in the litigation process. We are currently investigating a number of Toyota airbag and sudden acceleration claims.

As automobile manufacturer Toyota has profitability in the billions, recent recalls and their failure to act sooner to issue recalls indicate that they have emphasized profits over consumer safety. Recently Toyota announced a massive recall due to faulty acceleration. However, it has now also surfaced that officials in the United States and Japan are looking into additional complaints regarding a brake system which has also failed.

As an experienced Philadelphia vehicle defect lawyer, I have been aware of defect problems with Toyotas for many years and feel that Toyota has been less than forthcoming about problems with their cars putting its customers at risk for substantial injuries or death. Unfortunately in many past legal cases Toyota was adamant about having litigants sign confidentiality agreements in an attempt to put a hamper on negative publicity concerning their product.

The Philadelphia vehicle defect and product liability law firm of Reiff and Bily has a successful track record representing individuals who are harmed or killed due to dangerous defective products with a focus on the automotive industry. Consumers have a right to expect that when they purchase an automobile it is safe.

If you or a loved one has suffered catastrophic injuries or death resulting from the use of a Toyota, please contact one of our experienced Philadelphia car accident and vehicle defect lawyers for a free, no obligation consultation at 1-800-421-9595 or online at www.reiffandbily.com. Reiff and Bily has been committed to consumer safety since 1979.

According to U.S. Recall News, vehicle manufacturers announce 43 recall campaigns involving the risk of injury or death in January alone. The vehicles concerned range from passenger cars, motorcycles, RVs and buses. The vehicle defect lawyers at Reiff and Bily have been busier than ever fielding phone calls from consumers concerned about their safety due to the risk of crash and resulting injuries or death.

If you or a loved one has sustained a serious injury or death due to a vehicle defect, the experienced Pennsylvania product liability law firm of Reiff and Bily is offering a free consultation to discuss your rights and help you to further investigate the problem.

Since 1979, I have successfully represented injured consumers against major automobile manufacturers on behalf of clients who sustained catastrophic injuries or fatalities as a result of defectively designed cars. Unbelievably, there is not a single government group that has responsibility for assuring the public that cars and trucks are safe similar to the situation as it exists with the Food and Drug Administration or the FAA who extensively test products before they hit the market.

In the last month, Toyota has recalled in excess of 8.5 million cars and evidence reveals that Toyota was well aware of numerous defects in these vehicles for many years as was the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. As a matter of fact, State Farm Insurance Company noted that it warned the federal government about a disturbing trend of vehicle caused accidents involving Toyota Motor Corporation as far back as 2007. The insurer stated that it contacted the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration in late 2007 and had been in touch with a regulator an unspecified number of times since then.

Last summer a former Toyota lawyer alleged that Toyota had concealed evidence from courts and from the government in a systematic and ruthless fashion. Toyota’s marketing experts were quite adept at portraying an image of integrity and social conscious with the Prius. Unfortunately, actions speak louder than words and perhaps once and for all the concerted efforts of trial lawyers and the outrage of consumers will be enough to generate support for true and realistic safety regulation in the automobile industry.

This experienced automobile defect lawyer who has fought for clients who have sustained catastrophic injuries or fatalities for many years would like to see a system where vehicles have to pass regular safety tests prior to entering the marketplace and have their designs examined by government regulators with teeth similar to the FDA prior to entry to the marketplace. The car is no different than a new drug being introduced to market for the safety of precious lives.

As an experienced Philadelphia airbag defect lawyer, I receive many calls each year from people whose airbags failed to aggressively deploy or for some other malfunction. Two days ago, I received a call from a client whose airbag deployed in an improper fashion yet she did not sustain an injury serious enough for us to warrant taking her case. At that point, she was more interested in having the airbags replaced on the secondary market due to the fact that she could not afford to take her car back to the dealer for a proper and more costly repair. She discussed with me the possibility of buying airbags or airbag parts on eBay and having a mechanic friend of hers install them.

Curiously, I went to eBay looking up parts and accessories concerning airbags and saw that I could buy a pair of airbags for $39.99. Quite a considerable difference from the manufacturer’s retail price. What concerned me most was the fact that if an airbag was not installed correctly or by a qualified installer, the passengers would be subjected to risks of catastrophic injuries including death. For a used airbag to operate properly, a qualified installer must install the used airbag in accordance with the vehicle manufacturer’s specifications. Noticeably, there was a disclaimer on the site of the airbag seller that stated “the installer of a used airbag must test whether the used airbag will function properly. The purchaser of a used airbag from the seller agrees to accept all risks of damages or injuries including death relating to the use of a used airbag.”

As an experienced airbag defect lawyer, I can state that airbags save many lives in car accidents and I would strongly advise against anyone purchasing a used airbag over the web and having a neighborhood mechanic install them without properly investigating the situation. Safety and injury prevention is of paramount importance and airbag installation requires expertise. One should never shortcut on their health or safety.

For many years the experienced automotive product liability lawyers at the Philadelphia-based law firm of Reiff and Bily have successfully investigated and litigated many cases against most of the world’s major automobile manufacturers. As an automotive product liability lawyer familiar with many of the defects in automobiles which cause catastrophic injuries and death, I am often consulted by clients and friends of clients requesting which is the safest car and which company has the most integrity. For years, the Prius was one of the benchmarks of “anti-status” automobile manufacturer integrity. When one thought of Prius, we thought of an automobile manufacturer with a conscious and who had integrity with regard to protecting the environment and an eye looking forward to the future. If one goes to Toyota’s website, it is noted “Toyota’s integrity, passion, and innovation extend beyond their vehicle manufacturing. We also believe in helping people improve the quality of their life and their communities.”

Recently Toyota has been on the offensive noting that the Los Angeles Times published an article that wrongly and unfairly attacks Toyota’s integrity and reputation. While everyone has been quick to point the finger at Toyota’s spiraling problems, trial lawyers, as well as U.S. regulators, have been aware of Toyota’s dragging its feet on safety issues as well as fixing defective gas pedals. While Toyota initially came out and stated that the acceleration problem was due to faulty safety mats, this experienced automotive safety product liability lawyer will state that it’s simply not just about the floor mats. Recently, in August of last year, a former managing counsel for Toyota filed a lawsuit against Toyota alleging that Toyota destroyed evidence in hundreds of automobile product liability lawsuits. The lawsuit claims that Toyota destroyed evidence in a ruthless conspiracy to keep the information secret. So much for integrity.

Reiff and Bily is currently investigating cases of sudden unintended acceleration affecting a large number of Toyota cases. Reiff and Bily investigators and attorneys clearly dispute the argument that this problem was entirely linked to floor mats. Last evening Toyota announced a recall of the Prius for alleged faulty braking issues. With all of the recent recalls and confusion owners of affected Toyotas must consider whether or not the manufacturer is really as trustworthy and full of integrity as they advertise and would like you to believe.

Chrysler and The Office of Defects Investigation of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration announced that more than 24,000 late model Chrysler and Dodge vehicles are being recalled in order to repair a defective or missing part that could possibly result in unexpected brake failure. The vehicles involved in this recall includes some 2010 models of Chrysler Sebring, Dodge Avenger, Dodge Nitro, Jeep Liberty, Jeep Commander, and Jeep Grand Cherokee. Dodge Ram trucks manufactured in 2009 and 2010 are also included in the recall.

The recall stems from a potentially faulty brake booster rod retaining clip and Chrysler noted that some of the vehicles may have even been built without the clip. The brake booster retaining clip is part of the brake hydraulic system and is essential to brake function as it maintains consistency in performance. Without the clip, as factory workers in Mexico and Toledo witnessed, the brakes could completely lose power. The result would be a full speed accident with catastrophic consequences. The Mexican workers watched as a Dodge Ram heavy duty completely lost its brake power during testing. Workers in Toledo also discovered malformed clips in Nitro and Liberty models being manufactured in their plant.

Chrysler has indicated that it will install or replace the retaining clip free as the safety recall will begin. Consumers can contact the National Highway Safety Administration’s vehicle safety hotline at 888-327-4236 or visit www.safercar.gov for more information.

As an experienced Philadelphia car accident and products liability lawyer since 1979, I see many cases where an inexperienced lawyer goes for the “easy A” and settles a potentially large personal injury case while failing to recognize other avenues and theories of recovery. Commonly in serious car accident cases there is often an element of defective product design or product failure involved such as a seat back failure, seat belt failure, or airbag failure. Each year these types of product defects lead to serious and catastrophic injuries by thousands of Americans. Although a governmental agency known as NHTSA is supposed to be addressing these problems, I find that they drag their feet and are not as aggressive as they should be.

Recently the Los Angeles Times published an article entitled “Auto Safety Agency Labors To Keep Pace” noting that the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration has looked into forcing automakers to build stronger seats and considered new rules in the 1990s but declined to issue them due to automakers’ objections that the matter needed more study. In 2004 the agency formally shelved the issue. The largest fine ever issued by NHTSA for a seat back defect was $1 million dollars which is small change for auto manufacturers with billions of dollars in annual sales.

Despite NHTSA investigating sudden acceleration problems involving Toyota and Lexus motor vehicles since 2003, the problem persisted, ultimately leading to a massive 4.2 million vehicle recall that was initiated by the automaker in the hopes of putting the matter to rest.

If you or a loved one have been involved in a serious car accident, it pays to seek an experienced lawyer familiar with not only simple automobile crashes but also with the complexities of automotive product liability litigation. For a free no obligation consultation, please contact one of our experienced Philadelphia car accident lawyers at 1-800-421-9595 or online at www.reiffandbily.com.

Harley Davidson informed the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) that they discovered a product defect that could affect 111,600 motorcycles being recalled for consumer safety according to a notice posted on December 11, 2009. Harley Davidson is recalling the 2009/2010 Touring, CVO and Trike Motorcycles due to a hazard where fuel tanks may leak after a crash causing fire, injuries or fatalities.

Also on the subject of potential fuel leak hazards, Subaru announced a recall of 5,700 of its 2002/2003 Impreza WRX models due to potential fuel tank hazards which could cause a fire under extremely cold temperatures according to the safety organization. Subaru had received close to a 1,000 complaints from consumers who reported a fuel leak or the smell of gas, as well as a report of fire.

If you own any of the vehicles involved, you are well advised to take your vehicle to a Harley Davidson or Subaru dealership for the recall. The Philadelphia product liability law firm of Reiff and Bily specializes in cases involving catastrophic injuries and fatalities involving defective motor vehicles and the integrity of their fuel systems.

If you or a loved one has been injured as a result of the same, please contact one of our experienced defective product lawyers for a free consultation at 1-800-421-9595 or online at www.reiffandbily.com.

The National Highway Traffic and Safety Administration is questioning why Honda and the Takata Corporation, the airbag supplier to Honda, did not include vehicles from a second recall in an earlier recall concerning airbag defects eight months before. The initial recall centered on a problematic airbag deployment according to a Honda spokesperson. This recall in November 2008 involved 3,940 Accords and Civics from the 2001 model year. Yet recently Honda recalled 440,000 Accord and Civic vehicles for a potential lethal airbag defect. The second recall was expanded in July to include 2002 Accord and Acura vehicles due to the fact that the airbag inflator was rupturing from too much pressure, sending metal fragments from the airbag into vehicle occupants, resulting in multiple injuries and death.

The experienced airbag defect lawyers at Reiff and Bily recently completed another case involving a similar defect with another automobile manufacturer causing the driver to lose her vision. As defective airbag lawyers with concern for consumer safety and knowledge of the automobile industry, we are somewhat concerned that Honda allowed these potentially unsafe vehicles to remain on the highway, putting profitability over the safety concerns of its consumers.

For more information please visit the NHTSA website at www.nhtsa.gov or visit www.safercar.gov for the latest recalls and defect investigations.

Normal force of an airbag deployment is over 200 miles per hour. Many times airbags deploy at a greater velocity and often deploy late. Frequently this is a failure of the airbag sensor or other components involved in the deployment of the bag. Recently we completed a car accident case involving an over-aggressive and late airbag deployment causing the phenomena known as “bag slap” which resulted in the loss of an eye of our client despite a minimal impact. When we think of airbags, we normally do not consider the case of individuals getting killed or seriously injured. However, due to defective airbags, many times catastrophic injuries and fatalities occur.

Reiff and Bily has had experience litigating defective airbag cases involving non-deployment, late deployment, and over-aggressive deployment. If you or a loved one has suffered from a serious or catastrophic injury, or a wrongful death due to a defective airbag, please contact one of our experienced car accident and product liability lawyers at 1-800-421-9595 or online at www.reiffandbily.com.

In another verdict against Ford Motor Company on Wednesday, October 14, 2009 a jury awarded $8.5 million dollars after a 4 1/2 week product liability trial. The lawsuit was filed in 2005 alleging that the Mercury Mountaineer SUV was unstable and prone to roll over. The 22-year old passenger (victim) was ejected from the vehicle during a rollover and as a result sustained brain damage, broken bones, a collapsed lung, a fractured skull, paralysis to her left arm and hand, and a right leg amputation. The trial lawyers contended that Ford Motor Company negligently designed, manufactured, produced, and distributed the Mercury Mountaineer which caused the accident.

The Mercury Mountaineer was alleged to be inherently defective and dangerous as the model does not possess sufficient stability to prevent it from rolling over on its side and roof. Allegations were made at the trial that Ford Motor Company was aware of this defect but failed to make adequate corrections. Trial attorney Willie Gary stated that Ford Motor Company took a calculated risk by manufacturing defective vehicles.

We salute the efforts of Willie Gary as well as other attorneys in the fight against Ford Motor Company and other motor companies who continue to place unsafe vehicles on the road knowing that they are dangerous, selecting profits over safety and seemingly making calculated decisions to take their risks in the courts.

Under the bankruptcy plans that were approved for Chrysler and GM, thousands of American consumers with pending claims against these companies alleging that the design, manufacturing, and product defects in their cars caused their wrongful death or catastrophic injury will be forced to bring their claims to the bankruptcy courts.

Under the bankruptcy plan for Chrysler, all consumers who purchased Chrysler vehicles before Chrysler emerged from bankruptcy will likewise be relegated to bring claims in bankruptcy court if a defect in one of those vehicles caused a catastrophic injury or death. There are approximately 30 million Chrysler vehicles currently on the road that were purchased before the new Chrysler was established.

New GM on the other hand has accepted responsibility for injuries or deaths caused by defects in old GM vehicles as long as those claims were not pending before the new GM emerged from bankruptcy. That means that Chrysler is the only car company in America that will not stand behind the safety of its vehicles. There will be virtually no money in the bankruptcy court to pay any sums to tort claimants who have cases against Chrysler, LLC and only a small sum available to tort claimants against General Motors Corporation.

Continue reading "Pending Death And Injury Claims Against Chrysler and GM Result In Inequities" »

According to the Chrysler bankruptcy plan, families driving any Chrysler now on the road (approximately 10,000,000 vehicles), whose occupants are severely injured in a collision or because the car was not made safely, will have no recourse for damages against the old bankrupt Chrysler or the new successor company. The GM bankruptcy proposes the same result. There are approximately 30,000,000 GM vehicles on the road.

The Center For Justice and Democracy has stated that these results represent a cruel abandonment of catastrophically injured victims and that they are completely avoidable during any bankruptcy and also that in bankruptcy most injured victims are not regularly discarded especially when there are known products on the market that will continue to severely harm or kill people.

The Philadelphia automotive product liability lawyers at Reiff and Bily strongly feel that the actions of the government in allowing this situation to exist will deprive hundreds of thousands of people who have been injured and have lost their sole means of support the opportunity to have their day in court. Consumers in pending suits are not the only people who will be affected if the companies are shielded against product liability. Future liability lawsuits will also be barred against Chrysler and GM for vehicles sold before the companies’ reorganization.

If the automobile manufacturers are not held liable for the known defects, which have catastrophically injured as well as killed many innocent victims, they will literally be getting away with murder.

In the last few weeks, two major U.S. automobile manufacturers filed for bankruptcy protection, namely GM and Chrysler. Last week Federal Bankruptcy Court stated that product liability suits against the “old Chrysler” be wiped out as the new company would have no further responsibility for injury and wrongful death claims linked to automotive defects and product liability on cars sold by the “old Chrysler.”

Since 1979, the Philadelphia product liability lawyers of Reiff and Bily have represented individuals and the families of individuals who have been killed and catastrophically injured as a result of design defects of automobiles produced by these manufacturers. I had first hand experiences with families who have lost their sole means of support or with individuals who require life time medical treatment who now potentially have the inability to collect monetary compensation and are unable to sustain themselves or pay for necessary medical treatment. We have been able to successfully prove in the past that all of the major automobile manufacturers were aware of various and numerous risks associated with these design defects and although a cheap fix was available many times the manufacturers put profits over consumer safety. We have interviewed ex-employees from the manufacturers who have come forward to express the knowledge that many of the vehicles on the road today are unsafe for real world conditions. It is estimated that the Chrysler Corporation currently faces approximately $600,000,000 in liability claims which are in jeopardy. My understanding is that the new corporation has agreed to honor consumer rights such as warranty and lemon law claims. They will have no further responsibility for injury and wrongful death claims linked to product liability defects in cars sold by the old company.

The consumer safety and product liability lawyers of Reiff and Bily join with other trial lawyers in the United States to fight for the rights of injured consumers and seek compensation for the victims who deserve it the most.

Nissan Motor Company has recalled thousands of Frontier Pathfinders and Xtera vehicles from the 2005 to 2009 model years to replace potentially defective airbag sensors that are vulnerable to damage from winter weather and road salt. More than 240,000 SUVs and trucks were recalled to fix the problem that could prevent the airbags from deploying in a crash.

In states where winter time salt is used, the mixture of snow, water and salt can enter the crash zone sensor and cause rust, interrupting the signal and preventing the airbags from deploying. Nissan says that the recall involves 242,720 vehicles sold in 20 states, including SUVs and trucks sold in New Jersey and Pennsylvania.

The Philadelphia product liability and airbag defect law firm of Reiff and Bily has handled many defective airbag cases involving defective sensors. During a car accident, airbags should deploy automatically to cushion the driver and passengers to reduce the likelihood of death or serious injury. Unfortunately, as we have to often seen, airbags can malfunction. In fact, we are currently working on a similar case involving a Nissan vehicle resulting in a life changing catastrophic injury.

If you have been injured in a car accident as a result of a defective airbag, please contact one of the experienced defective airbag lawyers at Reiff and Bily at 1-800-421-9595 or online at www.reiffandbily.com for a free consultation. We have the knowledge and experience in investigating and prove your airbag injury case. We represent clients throughout Pennsylvania and the United States.

A press release issued by Mercury Insurance Group on September 16, 2008 presents five excellent safety tips for parents faced with the challenge of choosing the first car for their teens. The suggestion from the Mercury Insurance Group focus on safety, which also helps to lower the cost of auto insurance. The personal injury and automotive safety and vehicle defect lawyers at the Pennsylvania personal injury law firm of Reiff and Bily salute Mercury Insurance Company for their suggestions and promulgation of automobile safety.

According to the Mercury Insurance Group press release, new teens spend countless hours dreaming of owning their first car. A fast sports car conjures exciting images, while an SUV has ample room for all of their friends and both vehicles have one thing in common, neither is a good choice for teens.

Mercury suggests setting ground rules that may ease the polarized view points shared by parents and their teens.

Tip 1: Watch the speed. Driving fast cars with turbo chargers and high horse power continue significant risk. Since car accidents are the leading cause of death among 15 to 20 year olds, 1/3 of those accidents are attributable to speeding. Any fast car is an unwise choice. A good choice is a vehicle with a 4 cylinder engine and an average horsepower which costs less to insure and may save lives.

Continue reading "THE MERCURY INSURANCE GROUP PROMULGATES FIVE TIPS DESIGNED TO PROTECT YOUNG DRIVERS TO FOCUS ON SAFETY ALSO HELPS TO LOWER THE COST OF AUTO INSURANCE" »

Getting in a car accident is dangerous enough without having to worry about the possibility of your car being engulfed in flames due to a design defect. Fuel-fed car fires are a real danger and often do more harm than the actual crash. The Pennsylvania fuel-fed fire lawyers at the Philadelphia law firm of Reiff and Bily have been researching and handling numerous automobile related injury cases since 1979.

The National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) reports that during 2004, fire departments responded to an estimated 266,500 highway-type vehicle fires. These fires claimed 520 lives and caused $969 million in direct property damage.

The Ford Pinto is a prime example of how a defect can result in fatalities. The defect was in the design of the strap on gas tank that made it susceptible to leakage and fire in low to moderate speed collisions. Not only did Ford know of the defect and the possibility of a fuel-fed fire, but they continued to market the Pinto. Innocent lives were lost because Ford marketed a dangerous design. Ford ended up recalling the Pintos and tried to make them safer. Additional information on the Pinto recall is available.

Continue reading "Fuel-Fed Auto Fires" »

Over the years, airbags have become a mandatory safety device in all new cars. There is no question that along with using a seat belt, many lives have been saved due to airbags. Airbags are meant to prevent the occupant's head from striking a part of the vehicle and spread the force of the impact across their body. Due to the speed of airbag deployment and the chemicals used, there is always the possibility that airbags do more harm than good. Believe it or not, airbags often do not operate properly causing serious injury and deaths that could have easily been prevented. Philadelphia product liability lawyer Jeffrey Reiff and the experienced Pennsylvania product liability lawyers at Reiff and Bily have been researching and handling automotive and defective airbag cases for many years.

Airbags were developed in the 1950’s, but it was not until the 1980’s that airbags became mandatory in new cars. The driver’s airbag is found within the steering wheel, which protects the driver from hitting the wheel or dashboard. During an auto accident, four collisions may occur: (1) between the vehicle and the other object; (2) between the occupants (restrained or unrestrained) and the interior of the vehicle; (3) between the occupants’ organs and the enclosing body wall or cavity (such as the brain and skull); and (4) between occupant(s) and any loose objects in the vehicle.

Airbags and seatbelts are meant to protect collisions between the occupant(s) and the interior of the car. Airbags work when the car decelerates very quickly, as during a collision, and a sensor triggers a chemical reaction that produces a non-toxic gas that inflates the airbag. When the airbag deflates, dust and gasses are released into the car. These gasses and dust can cause asthma, chemical injuries (burns), or other irritations and breathing problems. The entire process of inflating and deflating the airbag takes less than a second.

Airbags need to react extremely fast to a collision, especially if an occupant is not wearing a seat belt. Airbags can deploy at over 200 MPH to protect an unrestrained occupant. Since airbags have to deploy so fast, injuries could occur from the extreme speed at which the airbag inflates. Injuries can occur to the eyes, head, chest, or limbs and could result in scaring, paralysis, blindness, loss of hearing, broken bones, severance of a body part, or even death.

Continue reading "Airbags: Possible Injury in Preventative Safety" »

There is nothing quite like taking a short trip to the grocery store and coming back to your car engulfed in flames. It could even happen in your own driveway or garage, day or night. It is being reported by AutoWeek Magazine that Ford is still having some cruise control fire-causing issues. Ford has recalled almost twelve million vehicles since 1999 to repair the fire-prone defective cruise control system and recently reiterated the recall of 9.6 million cars and trucks on its web site. It is reported by the Detroit News that Federal regulators are looking into 130 complaints that fires occurred in the engine compartments of Ford Windstar mid-size vans from the 1995-2003 model years. The fires can occur either during use or while parked.

Continue reading "The Hidden Danger of Fire May Be Lurking in Your Automobile" »