US rider sues Harley Davidson over "missing ABS"

[HenryDorsetCase]

http://www.visordown.com/motorcycle-news-bizarre/us-biker-sues-harley-in-abs-light-case/19709.html


this is weird.

I feel sad for his wife who has skull, brain and facial injuries. Wonder what sort of helmet she was wearing if any?


AN AMERICAN who crashed his Harley-Davidson, causing his wife who was pillion to end up brain damaged, is suing Harley-Davidson as he claims he thought his motorcycle was equipped with ABS.

Jack Wilson, who crashed on Highway 99 in California, told the Highway Patrol that his anti-lock braking system had somehow malfunctioned, however, his bike, a 2008 Harley-Davidson Road Glide was never fitted with ABS.

Wilson claims the icon on the motorcycle's idiot lights suggested that it did have ABS. He also claimed the salesman who sold him the bike gave him an elbow-to-the-ribs-type aside and said 'chicks love ABS'.

Read more: http://www.visordown.com/motorcycle-news-bizarre/us-biker-sues-harley-in-abs-light-case/19709.html#ixzz1gq5bXmlF

[Madness]

There seems to be a huge misconception amongst some that ABS equipped vehicles are somehow miraculously crash-proof(tm). How on earth have the rest of us managed to stay alive without it is what I can't figure out :confused:

[FJRider]

How did they manage to stay alive during the 12,000 MILES they/he has already travelled ... ???

Even vehicles WITH ABS fitted still crash.

[pzkpfw]

"Chick love ABS"?

Abs, maybe, but A.B.S.?!

Weird story.

[Owl]

Wonder what sort of helmet she was wearing if any?

Pass, but should've had one, being in California.

[Fast Eddie]

"Chick love ABS"?

Abs, maybe, but A.B.S.?!

Weird story.

... I think the pun was intentional. ABS/Abs

[Fast Eddie]

As for the case/suing.. Think its a bit limp wristed. Very sad that his wife has permenant damage now. But I'm going to take a wild stab and assume she was not wearing a full face helmet, and possibly no helmet at all to have such severe damage. And they are right. After 15 months of riding and many miles he should definitely know how his bike operates. and lastly. if the light doesnt light up he should have been concerned. even if it did have ABS if they light doesnt come on there is probably a chance its malfunctioning. America eh, you want cheese with that?

[Paul in NZ]

He probably has medical bills up the waazoo by now and has to sue someone ....

Its another "freedom to choose' bullshit thing. Doesnt want to be told to wear a helmet (it was carefully avoided in the article so a good bet she wasnt wearing one) but now wants to tell everyone else to pay for his stupidity...

[FJRider]

... I think the pun was intentional. ABS/Abs

But I dont think he realised it was just a pun ...

[Gremlin]

No doubt Harley riders are a little different.

In the course of 11 months of ownership of my BMW I've had the front and rear (much more often the rear) ABS activate, and I knew upon purchase it really did exist, and I've also turned it off and on now and then...

[Jay GTI]

This is from the land of zero personal responsibility, so this is not surprising.

We can all easily jump to the conclusion the rider is an idiot, his wife just a stupid but in "The Land of the Free", it is up to the manufacturer to ensure even the stupidest person on the planet can operate their motorcycle in a safe manner. No matter how dump the rider was, it's Harley's fault for allowing a situation where he could be that dumb.

Of course I completely disagree with all of the above, but I am very much pro-personal responsibility and hate the constant erosion of civil liberties and personal freedom, because some vocal minority can shout their stupid mantras of "if we save one life as a result of this Draconian measure, it makes the sacrifices everyone else now has to make worthwhile", much louder than I can shout my view of the world.

[Crasherfromwayback]

As much as I hate to say it...if the guy genuinely thought he had abs, I can understand his going HD.

He may've ridden the 12 thousand odd miles safely because he's not until that point had to grab a handful of brakes.

If you suddenly had to, and thought the abs would save your ass...

[oneofsix]

As much as I hate to say it...if the guy genuinely thought he had abs, I can understand his going HD.

He may've ridden the 12 thousand odd miles safely because he's not until that point had to grab a handful of brakes.

If you suddenly had to, and thought the abs would save your ass...

I have to agree. It is not like he is suing because the coffee was hot. Wasn't until I got the car with A.B.S. I even know there was a light that is meant to come on with the ignition. It is possible he thought the light came on when the A.B.S were activated or faulty. If he was lead to believe the bike had A.B.S. and can prove it plus prove that the A.B.S. could have saved his wife then fair enough.
As to helmet, that will be part of HD's argue I guess and dependant on the state laws.

[Paul in NZ]

I disagree. Its NOT HD's fault. Its arguably the salesmans fault but the real fault is their stupid medical system.....

[Crasherfromwayback]

I disagree. Its NOT HD's fault. Its arguably the salesmans fault but the real fault is their stupid medical system.....

I'm not saying the guy wouldn't have crashed anyway, but I still think if you genuinely thought you had it, you may ride differently.

The fucked up medical system they have sure didn't cause the accident though.

[paturoa]

Hmmm, I'm in two minds about this one.

1) I suspect that he did think that the bike had ABS.

Had a good friend that bought a Nissan Terrano import and he was telling me proud as, that it was the new more powerful 3 liter engine and that the salesperson had been really talking it up. Cool says I, and we go out to have a look at it. Here was the old model TD27 model sitting there, so I says to him, "I thought that I didn't realise that they put the 3 litre in the old one, had it been re-powered?" No says he, so I asked to have a look under the hood and sure enough there was the vin plate proudly displaying the TD27 VIN plate. So I showed him that and he didn't seem at all happy!

2) My ignorance or stupidity, is not someone's elses acountability.

Whenever I get something new I "fiddle" with it and even read the manual.

[oneofsix]

Hmmm, I'm in two minds about this one.

1) I suspect that he did think that the bike had ABS.

Had a good friend that bought a Nissan Terrano import and he was telling me proud as, that it was the new more powerful 3 liter engine and that the salesperson had been really talking it up. Cool says I, and we go out to have a look at it. Here was the old model TD27 model sitting there, so I says to him, "I thought that I didn't realise that they put the 3 litre in the old one, had it been re-powered?" No says he, so I asked to have a look under the hood and sure enough there was the vin plate proudly displaying the TD27 VIN plate. So I showed him that and he didn't seem at all happy!

2) My ignorance or stupidity, is not someone's elses acountability.

Whenever I get something new I "fiddle" with it and even read the manual.

Your two minds goes to what makes HD, or at least the seller, suable. Even the law in NZ has clauses to make it illegal for a seller to play on 2) thereby resulting in 1) and because of this your friend would have a case to get his money back. In the HD case money back isn't going to help his wife. He was sold something claiming it had certain safer features and after as crash (make that during) he discovers it doesn't. He was sucked in. defrauded if you prefer, but the cost is now far higher than just the vehicle so to determine fair recompense he must sue.

[Crasherfromwayback]

Your two minds goes to what makes HD, or at least the seller, suable. Even the law in NZ has clauses to make it illegal for a seller to play on 2) thereby resulting in 1) and because of this your friend would have a case to get his money back. In the HD case money back isn't going to help his wife. He was sold something claiming it had certain safer features and after as crash (make that during) he discovers it doesn't. He was sucked in. defrauded if you prefer, but the cost is now far higher than just the vehicle so to determine fair recompense he must sue.

Yeah I think the salesman is very lucky he ain't the one being sued. He should be.

[ducatilover]

So, there I was reading the owners manual on my HD, realising that I do not have ABS.

[oneofsix]

So, there I was reading the owners manual on my HD, realising that I do not have ABS.

you read the manual :shit: I only look at that thing when I need to know something like tyre pressures or how much oil it needs not if it has what feature. And anyhow the manual probabley says it has A.B.S., well model xyz2343478tgke or something does which may or may not be his model but either way is bloody close to it.

[Crasherfromwayback]

Older HD's all had abs anyway. As in...you could squeeze the front brake lever as hard as you like and the fucking things wouldn't lock due to lack of power!

[Gremlin]

I wouldn't trust the manual actually. They are usually produced for the model, ignoring spec level within the model, and the manual itself often states something like "optional, if applicable to your model" etc

[Jay GTI]

Yeah I think the salesman is very lucky he ain't the one being sued. He should be.

That is questionable, there's nothing in that story that states he told the customer that that specific bike had ABS.

[Crasherfromwayback]

That is questionable, there's nothing in that story that states he told the customer that that specific bike had ABS.

I know. Only his word.


"He also claimed the salesman who sold him the bike gave him an elbow-to-the-ribs-type aside and said 'chicks love ABS'."

[Scuba_Steve]

I know. Only his word.


"He also claimed the salesman who sold him the bike gave him an elbow-to-the-ribs-type aside and said 'chicks love ABS'."

& I reckon the salesman said "chicks love abs" Not "Chicks love A.B.S." it's all in how it's said :yes: Which is probably why he's not suing the salesman, that & HD has more monies

[Jay GTI]

& I reckon the salesman said "chicks love abs" Not "Chicks love A.B.S." it's all in how it's said :yes: Which is probably why he's not suing the salesman, that & HD has more monies


Think it might have been more of a reference to the fact chicks might enjoy straddling something that vibrates, like a bike in full A.B.S. mode.

[HenryDorsetCase]

Older HD's all had abs anyway. As in...you could squeeze the front brake lever as hard as you like and the fucking things wouldn't lock due to lack of power!

I took one of the new '48's for a spin a while ago and was well impressed with the front brake. It was better than the brake on the Triumph Scrambler I had at the time. Not as good as my ST-R though.....

[Paul in NZ]

I'm not saying the guy wouldn't have crashed anyway, but I still think if you genuinely thought you had it, you may ride differently.

The fucked up medical system they have sure didn't cause the accident though.

The crash was caused by falling off/running into something but the lawsuit was caused by the dumb medical system...

[HenryDorsetCase]

& I reckon the salesman said "chicks love abs" Not "Chicks love A.B.S." it's all in how it's said :yes: Which is probably why he's not suing the salesman, that & HD has more monies

Some might say............ the typical harley rider is more likely to have the keg than the six pack.

[Crasherfromwayback]

I took one of the new '48's for a spin a while ago and was well impressed with the front brake. It was better than the brake on the Triumph Scrambler I had at the time. Not as good as my ST-R though.....

Yeah they're not bad. Should've tried them when the had the old single piston sliding caliper though.

[davereid]

But I'm going to take a wild stab and assume she was not wearing a full face helmet, and possibly no helmet at all to have such severe damage.

Have you any idea how much safer a helmet makes you ?

Heres a game for you to play

from the graph of year v motorcycle deaths, guess which year we had helmets introduced.

253116

[Crasherfromwayback]

Have you any idea how much safer a helmet makes you ?

Heres a game for you to play

from the graph of year v motorcycle deaths, guess which year we had helmets introduced.

253116

People can twist facts as much as they like...but to think or say you're as safe riding without a helmet is total shit.

[ducatilover]

you read the manual :shit: I only look at that thing when I need to know something like tyre pressures or how much oil it needs not if it has what feature. And anyhow the manual probabley says it has A.B.S., well model xyz2343478tgke or something does which may or may not be his model but either way is bloody close to it.
I lied, I don't have a Hardley... :Punk:
He's a fucking idiot for not knowing if he has ABS or not.


Older HD's all had abs anyway. As in...you could squeeze the front brake lever as hard as you like and the fucking things wouldn't lock due to lack of power!
Not as if you'd be going that fast anyway :bleh:

[davereid]

People can twist facts as much as they like...but to think or say you're as safe riding without a helmet is total shit.

Which fact did I twist ? And whats your guess ?

[Crasherfromwayback]

Which fact did I twist ? And whats your guess ?

I'm not saying you did. But helmet stats are bullshit, as most of them only count deaths, not the permanent brain injuries I've seen due to the lack of wearing one.

[scumdog]

Older HD's all had abs anyway. As in...you could squeeze the front brake lever as hard as you like and the fucking things wouldn't lock due to lack of power!

I've had smoke pissing out from my front tyre once when 'panic braking' - and it ain't THAT new!

[Crasherfromwayback]

I've had smoke pissing out from my front tyre once when 'panic braking' - and it ain't THAT new!

Yeah but if that's on your FXDXT at least you've got two front discs!

[rastuscat]

Common sense died with this guy.

Basically the knobend has crashed his bike then went looking for something to blame.

It's a self defence mechanism, we all use it. We get caught speeding, then we blame the cop for hiding, or revenue collecting, or whatever else makes us feel better.

Sorry for his injured wife, but the guy needs to look in a mirror, man-up and accept that it was his own damn fault for outriding the bikes ability to stop.

This is just like the crazy USA court decision that saw Maccas pay a zillion bucks to a woman who burned herself with coffee from a cup with a warning about coffee.

How can anyone who has a bike not know if it has ABS or not?

[jonbuoy]

He thought it did have ABS that's the point, he thought he was sold a bike with ABS - there was an ABS light on the dash (that never lit up) but I can understand how he is pissed off if it was a crash that could have been avoided if the bike did have ABS (which he assumed he was sold).

[Kickaha]

Have you any idea how much safer a helmet makes you ?

Heres a game for you to play

from the graph of year v motorcycle deaths, guess which year we had helmets introduced.


Do you have a graph comparing crashes for one hundred (or any other number) riders wearing helmets vs one hundred without?

[davereid]

The facts are, that in New Zealand, motorcycle deaths almost doubled after the introduction of helmets, and never came back down.

Lots of things may have contributed to this, '73 oil shock meaning more bikers, nice weather, the arrival of japanese bikes that actually meant you could be a rider not a mechanic, risk compensation, who knows.

But everywhere their is debate about helmets, people think they are magic. That they make you very much safer.

Choosing to ride a motorcycle makes you around 18-20 times (1800-2000%) more likely to be injured in an accident than a car driver.

Wearing a helmet measurably improves things. The NHTSA says about 37% improvement.

If you argue that you can (should) force someone to wear a helmet for a 37% improvement, you must also support the argument that motorcycles should be banned for a 2000% improvement.

[Dadpole]

If you argue that you can (should) force someone to wear a helmet for a 37% improvement, you must also support the argument that motorcycles should be banned for a 2000% improvement.

This is the thinking in ACC after all.

[oneofsix]

The facts are, that in New Zealand, motorcycle deaths almost doubled after the introduction of helmets, and never came back down.

Lots of things may have contributed to this, '73 oil shock meaning more bikers, nice weather, the arrival of japanese bikes that actually meant you could be a rider not a mechanic, risk compensation, who knows.

But everywhere their is debate about helmets, people think they are magic. That they make you very much safer.

Choosing to ride a motorcycle makes you around 18-20 times (1800-2000%) more likely to be injured in an accident than a car driver.

Wearing a helmet measurably improves things. The NHTSA says about 37% improvement.

If you argue that you can (should) force someone to wear a helmet for a 37% improvement, you must also support the argument that motorcycles should be banned for a 2000% improvement.

you must teach statistics.
Shell we also ban bicycles, walking, and cars. But then again you are more likely to commit suicide than die in a road smash so lets just kill everybody and get it over with. :Punk:

[Jay GTI]

who knows.




This, sadly, is the only sensible part of your post.

[HenryDorsetCase]

The facts are, that in New Zealand, motorcycle deaths almost doubled after the introduction of helmets, and never came back down.

Lots of things may have contributed to this, '73 oil shock meaning more bikers, nice weather, the arrival of japanese bikes that actually meant you could be a rider not a mechanic, risk compensation, who knows.

But everywhere their is debate about helmets, people think they are magic. That they make you very much safer.

Choosing to ride a motorcycle makes you around 18-20 times (1800-2000%) more likely to be injured in an accident than a car driver.

Wearing a helmet measurably improves things. The NHTSA says about 37% improvement.

If you argue that you can (should) force someone to wear a helmet for a 37% improvement, you must also support the argument that motorcycles should be banned for a 2000% improvement.

Oh bullshit.

I havent got time now to deconstruct this pseudo logical pile of steaming turd, but you have made a number of sweeping generalisations, and unsupported wild theories, and made a couple of basic errors in "how to construct a logical argument". My favourite so far is the highlighted part.

[davereid]

Well thats up to you.

But I like to champion the right of people to make decisions that may place them at risk. People who choose to ride a motorcycle, climb a mountain or jump out of perfectly good aircraft.

As T.P.T.B. are still playing the game based on making motorcycling the safest it can be with helmets, lights on, and hi-viz.

But one day, this will quietly change.

You will find vehicles of all types rated by safety. Your ACC levy on your 5 star car will be less that the 3 star one.

The focus will change to making travel the safest it can be.

And if we haven't established that its OK to take risks for pleasure, motorcycling will be pushed away.

[Jay GTI]

I agree with the principle you are championing, but I have a real issue with using statistical analysis to "prove" an arguement.

Unless you are simply playing those idiots (i.e. ACC policy makers and the like) at their own game, in which case please continue.

[davereid]

I agree with the principle you are championing, but I have a real issue with using statistical analysis to "prove" an arguement. Unless you are simply playing those idiots (i.e. ACC policy makers and the like) at their own game, in which case please continue.

Thats the point I think. We actually fall into a mindset from which we cant win. If we accept that its OK to stop :

People riding helmet-less for a 37% improvement in safety
People riding without lights on for a 5% improvement in safety
People riding without hi-viv for a 5% improvement in safety

Are we not vulnerable when they propose stopping people riding for a 2000% improvement in safety ?

[Jay GTI]

Thats the point I think. We actually fall into a mindset from which we cant win. If we accept that its OK to stop :

People riding helmet-less for a 37% improvement in safety
People riding without lights on for a 5% improvement in safety
People riding without hi-viv for a 5% improvement in safety

Are we not vulnerable when they propose stopping people riding for a 2000% improvement in safety ?


Cool, I get where you're going. And yes, unless someone questions the statitics we are force-fed by ACC, National or whoever is trying to tell us that enjoying life is wrong, then we will eventually fold and give in.


Lies, damn lies and statistics etc...

[scumdog]

Are we not vulnerable when they propose stopping people riding for a 2000% improvement in safety ?

I'd be worried that it might well pan out like that in the future - enjoy it while we can I say...

[GrayWolf]

I'm not saying the guy wouldn't have crashed anyway, but I still think if you genuinely thought you had it, you may ride differently.
.

That is the scary part of modern driving....Yes stability control, ABS, traction control etc are all wonderfull safety features. They can, and DO save lives, BUT people are driving/riding differently as ABS,tract'/stab' controls will save me. Reality is, you NEED to learn cadence braking, etc. These additions are there for extreme need, not for matter of course driving/riding. I have a bike with ABS, and YES it has activated a couple of times. (both were low speed on bad surfaces)... I guess that if you never activate them, even in an emergency situation? You are driving with skill and control.

[BIG DOUG]

HD owners manuals are pretty good IF YOU READ THEM,I think abs is an option in the states and if he had read the manual he would have read how the abs light will stay on until the first application of the brakes,so no light no abs his fault should have read the manual and about time a jury and judge in the usa used some common sense.

[HenryDorsetCase]

That is the scary part of modern driving....Yes stability control, ABS, traction control etc are all wonderfull safety features. They can, and DO save lives, BUT people are driving/riding differently as ABS,tract'/stab' controls will save me. Reality is, you NEED to learn cadence braking, etc. These additions are there for extreme need, not for matter of course driving/riding. I have a bike with ABS, and YES it has activated a couple of times. (both were low speed on bad surfaces)... I guess that if you never activate them, even in an emergency situation? You are driving with skill and control.

If you believe the government propaganda, that is called "mantrol"

Theres a set of double speak that I dislike quite intensely

[caspernz]

The sad thing with this case is that guy suing HD will have a wife who'll never be the same. Hard way to learn a basic lesson in life me thinks....read the manual and familiarise yourself with your vehicles' features before heading out.....

ABS isn't the magic tool to keep you alive though. It will keep a biker in control, but if you've outmaneuvred yourself it's still gonna hurt. Don't get me wrong, have ridden bikes with ABS and it's on the list of must have features for my next one, but I agree that you'd wanna learn how to ride safely without this feature.

[rastuscat]

Well thats up to you.

But I like to champion the right of people to make decisions that may place them at risk. People who choose to ride a motorcycle, climb a mountain or jump out of perfectly good aircraft.

As T.P.T.B. are still playing the game based on making motorcycling the safest it can be with helmets, lights on, and hi-viz.

But one day, this will quietly change.


I'm a great fan of personal choice. However, only if the result doesn't end up costing anyone else.

So, if you agree to pay for the ambulance, the plastic surgeon, the brain surgeon etc, I'll happily agree that you can ride without a helmet.

Just a thought.

[GrayWolf]

If you believe the government propaganda, that is called "mantrol"

Theres a set of double speak that I dislike quite intensely

no I am not 'quoting' mantrol.... that is more about not exceeding speed and cornering limits... what I refer to is the training at an 'advanced' level to a higher level of awareness and driving skill than the basic..pass my test ability. cadence braking was developed way before ABS was thought of, as an already given example.