Huh? Family Files Lawsuit File Over Death In Recalled Jeep They Never Had Repaired

This one is going to get interesting.

Jeep issues a recall, sends notice family, family never fixes car. Family member dies in crash and recalled defect causes death.

Who is at fault?

Depends on when the parts were available at the dealer. Have a 2003 with factory hitch and first got the recall almost a year ago. Chrysler never got a process or parts to the local dealer until a few weeks ago. Had mine needed a new hitch the dealer said there is a waiting list; get in line. The last Jeep recall on the airbag was also almost a year between notice and the ability for the dealer to do anything. Jeep has a vulnerability with its recall process.

with all these recalls affecting the industry, one wonders if a lawsuit like this might force new industry standards when it comes to recalls. Yes, the recall was issued, but it might beg to ask the question as to who should be responsible for ensuring the recalled vehicles get repaired. I've had recalls issued on cars I've owned and I never received any type of notification. If it's a major safety issue (such as this one or the airbag ones), then should the manufacturers be required to execute stronger attempts to get these vehicles in to get fixed. Prior to this year and GM's, Toyota's, and Honda's issues, I'd say that its' on the owner. But the game might be changing.

@009 What is interesting is how the auto makers have been commented on herein. Jeep announces recalls and takes months to get the parts to do it. If the family had gone in upon getting the notice to get their Jeep repaired there were no parts for months. GM works to get the parts ahead of the announcement and gets blasted for not announcing the recall for 8 weeks. Both my vehicles had the recall work done the same week. GM within a few weeks after the notice arrived. Jeep 10 months after the notice, along with several repeat calls to dealers to see if they had parts. No wonder the public doesn't pay attention.

The family deserves nothing. They didn't care about the safety of their car and money won't make it all better. Instant karma

@ Vette71 - You bring up a good point however all automakers are at risk from the shortcomings in the supply chain, not just Jeep. So the issue remains, did the family attempt to have the vehicle repaired? Odds are no, but if so then a precedent will start with this case. What is reasonable amount of time to repair a recall?

MDarringer, what do you mean the family didn't care about the safety of their car? As soon as she received the recall notice, she did exactly what it said. Then the dealership told her they didn't have the parts. You know nothing about the situation, we do. BACK OFF.

There is no way they tried to get it repaired. Almost certainly they just neglected to follow up. Everyone knows it's far from every recalled vehicle that actually gets repaired because people can't get motivated enough to bring them in. You hear of car manufacturers actually offering incentives nowadays to get people to bring their cars in for recall-related repairs. That should tell you something. Many people just aren't very responsible when it comes to taking care of their vehicles and keeping them safe. Here it was a recalled repair they didn't bother with. Other times it's letting their tires wear down entirely. Or letting their brakes go bad. Or whatever. And it appears that, on occasion, this irresponsibility has a high cost.

I empathize with the family regarding their loss, but I hope they lose this lawsuit handily.

Kayla did everything the recall notice stated to do, read the following article. She was not at fault at all. Quit blaming the victim when you know nothing about the situation. When she took her vehicle in, she was told the part was not available.

http://detroit.cbslocal.com/2014/11/18/lawyer-family-of-pregnant-woman-killed-in-jeep-explosion-to-sue-chrysler/

It's likely they will likely recover something. In most states, you don't have to prove complete fault of the manufacturer - just that they were more than 50 percent at fault. The argument for the Plaintiff's lawyer is simple - if Jeep had made a safe product from the getgo, it wouldn't have needed a recall in the first place. Comparative fault (on the part of the owner) of less than 50 percent will reduce the award, but won't preclude recovery. Additionally, when you throw in the sympathy card that the jury is likely to buy, it tilts things in the claimant's favor. Defendants' lawyers know these things and will urge their client to settle.

It will get settled out of court I would imagine