Posted on 01/16/2006 3:27:57 AM PST by beaversmom
ROGERSVILLE - The mother of a Rogersville boy who was injured in an accident last year on a new bicycle has filed a $900,000 lawsuit against the bike manufacturer and Wal-Mart, where the bike was purchased.
Elizabeth Burton, 625 S. Armstrong St., Rogersville, is the mother of Eric Burton, who was injured in an accident on Jan. 9, 2005. The boy's sister had received the Roadmaster Mountain Sport bicycle as a Christmas present from their father.
According to the lawsuit filed on behalf of the Burtons by Morristown attorney Gary E. Brewer, on Jan. 9 of last year Eric Burton was riding his sister's new bike on South Armstrong Street, but as he approached the Broadway Street intersection the brakes failed.
The bike didn't stop and continued onto Broadway Street into the path of an oncoming vehicle which had the right of way, the lawsuit alleges. The lawsuit further contends that as a result of the accident Eric Burton was severely injured, was hospitalized and will undergo continuing medical treatment.
Aside from Wal-Mart, the other defendants in the lawsuit include Pacific Cycle, Inc., based in Wilmington, Del., as well as its parent company Dorel Juvenile Group, Inc., which is to be served with the lawsuit in Columbus, Ind.
The lawsuit alleges that Pacific Cycle manufactured the bicycle in a defective condition, making it unsafe. The lawsuit also alleges that Wal-Mart assembled the bicycle.
"The defendant (Wal-Mart) assembled and sold the bicycle in an unsafe condition and design when they knew or should have known by the exercise of ordinary care that the bicycle would be subject to failure," the lawsuit alleges.
The lawsuit seeks $750,000 for injuries and damages and another $150,000 for medical expenses. The defendants have 30 days from the Jan. 6 filing date of the lawsuit to either file a response or seek a time extension.
That never stopped me. The people who used to be pedestrians are mostly all in their cars, which leaves the sidewalks empty for cyclists. If traffic is heavy, I hop on the sidewalks. Of course, I don't ride in the central business district.
I think there are several issues here that may comment more on "What's wrong with America" than simply pointing fingers at evil-doer attorneys and the "Mom and Pop retailer" killer, Wal-Mart. The problem is a combination of Wal-Mart and their suppliers, govenmental bodies giving concessions to Wal-Mart, our court system and attorneys.
Firstly, regarding the attorneys: professional attorneys are as hard to find as hens teeth. I'll use the all-encompassing term, professional, to cover meaning honest, trustworthy, public-serving, etc. That being said, there are so many unprofessional attorneys who cultivate filing frivilous lawsuits that everyone assumes most of these lawsuits are frivolous. I can't comment on the validity of this particular lawsuit because I don't know the details. This case could be either. I have testified as an expert in numerous bicycle-related lawsuits and have seen both.
Secondly, regarding Wal-Mart and Pacific Bicycle Company: These two companies are of similar ilk. They are large, sell cheap products and have hastened the demise of smaller competitors who sold or manufactured higher quality product. While I have no problem at all with the free market, Wal-Mart is not playing on a level playing field with smaller retailers. Wal-Mart recieves concessions, such as tax breaks and special deals on real estate, from most levels of government, and these concessions are not available to local retailers. Wal-Mart is only concerned about selling units and the bottom line. They have no commitment to the community whatsoever despite their ads. Wal-Mart does not care if they sell defective or dangerous merchandise as long as they sell enough to offset paying these pesky lawsuits. In this way, Wal-Mart contributes to the problem of frivolous lawsuits. Pacific Bicycle Company imports huge quantities of very chealy made bicycles that are essentially unfit for regular use. They are made to function for a few weeks or months after purchase and then rust away in a garage. What do you expect from a bike that retails for between $40 and $150? Pacific Bicyle imports these bicycles under favorable arrangements regarding tarrifs, knowing that they have commitments from Wal-Mart to purchase huge numbers of these disposable bicycles. They, likewise, are not concerned about lawsuits as long as there are enough units sold to offset the paying of lawsuits. Additionally, both of these companies fail to recall defective product, fail to notify customers of defective product and fail to stop selling the defective product after they have been notified of a problem. If paying off a certain amount in lawsuit settlements does not reach a certain level where it effects the bottom line, they will not rectify the problem on their own. From a case that I was testified as an expert, I have documentation of this involving Wal-Mart and another of their suppliers of cheaply-made bicycles.
Opportunist consumers see that they can easily collect a settlement from Wal-Mart and/or the supplier. Opportunist attorneys encourage these lawsuits. Our court system encourages the plethora of attorneys. Just look in your local phone book and see how many attorneys are listed in proportion to other professions. The number of attorneys has exploded and the number of locally owned specialty retailers has shrunk. In addition to having to compete to sell product, smaller retailers cannot survive more than a few of these lawsuits, unlike Wal-Mart who endures thousands of these suits. Consumers find it harder to locate quality products locally because Wal-Mart does not sell quality. At the risk of being called a Wal-Mart basher, I'll state that Wal-Mart has had a negative effect on the face of America. I hate shopping there because it is never a pleasant experience (and it could be if Wal-Mart made an effort) but I have to shop there because all of the places that I bought the merchadise are not here any more. It's a "trap".....perhaps reviewing the South Park "Wally-World" episode would be in order here.
Dang! And to think, I used to work on every part of my bicycle, whether it needed it or not! Either I was an amazingly good 8 year old mechanic, or I was really lucky.
I did know enough to make sure my brakes worked, the seat height wasn't going to change mid-ride, and the wheels weren't about to fall off. These were handy tips I was taught by experience.
Post #142 pretty well sums it up!!!!
"Wal-Mart recieves concessions, such as tax breaks and special deals on real estate, from most levels of government, and these concessions are not available to local retailers. Wal-Mart is only concerned about selling units and the bottom line."
Why do you think that is?
Big question for me is, what kind of bike did the boy have? His age was what? Did he normally ride a Walmart kiddee bike with pedal brakes? I'm sure the brakes seemed broken to him when he panicked and spun the pedals backwards waiting for them to activate a brake that wasn't there. Was his sisters bike too big for him? Could his little hands even operate a hand brake? Need a bunch of information.
Yeah, I understand the cost of a decent bike is expensive.
Bikes (beyond a first bike) are more than toys, though. People drop $300 on an Xbox and $50 a game but shudder at spending $500 for a bike. A mountain bike that stands up to hard use on trails is going to be more like $750 to a grand. Even then the frame is generally going to have a lifespan of 3 years. Stress and fatigue from normal use makes maintaining safe equipment more expensive than even an avid biker is willing to spend.
A helmet, riding education, trail ettiquette, and responsibility are also musts.
I didn't have any of those until I was an adult.
Biking just isn't inherently safe, especially when it is done cheaply. Kids and parents should probably both be more aware of that and work to improve safety with a commitment from both sides.
This 'here is your new bike - wheeeee! CRASH!' story just highlights that.
Good for your son though. I love working on bikes, almost did it one summer myself for employment. I feel bad for the builder caught in the middle of this one.
Their numbers are legion, even here on FR.
I just took a quick look at my daughter's bike. She's 7 and we bought it in WalMart for her for Christmas........there is not less than 3 CAUTION stickers on it and in VERY bold letters "Check brakes before riding."
"Why do you think that is?"
Are you asking why do I think Wal-Mart receives concessions or why do I think Wal-Mart is only concerned about selling units/bottom line?
Why they receive concessions.
I believe Wal-Mart has a policy of never settling or making an offer. Wal-Mart goes to court and makes you prove your case if Wal-Mart believes your claims to be false.
"Why they receive concessions."
They receive concessions because they pitch their story to municipalities, saying the they will create jobs, increase tax base, etc. In reality, they don't create jobs, they transfer jobs, frequently from businesses that have closed. And they usually pay less and/or only allow their employees to work a certain number of hours a week (less than 40 hours per week). They usually have minimal benefits. Wal-Mart also employs fewer people per dollar sold than smaller retailers. They may cause a rise in tax revenues for the town that has the Wal-Mart located in it because shoppers will come from outlying areas, but it causes a drop in revenues for the businesses in outlying areas and a consequent drop in tax revenues in those areas.
The bottom line is: There is only "X" amount of merchandise that is going to be purchased at Wal-Mart, or any other retailers. So there is a finite amount of tax revenue possible. It is mostly commodity merchandise. If Wal-Mart sells it cheaper, there is less tax revenue. Wal-Mart has the effect of "consolidating": shoppers buy more at one location and fewer employees to sell the merchandise. Anyone looking for high quality merchandise will need to shop outside of the locale if the specialty retailers were not able to stay in business.
I'm all for the free market but I am not for Wal-Mart gaining concessions that are not available to all businesses, especially since having a Wal-Mart lowers the number of people required to sell the merchandise and Wal-Mart does not create sales of more merchandise, it just takes the sales from other retailers. If a business can't compete on a level playing field, then so be it. Many specialty retailers could compete by providing superior service and products. But since they are working on the slimmest of profit margins, just a small loss of business to Wal-Mart can make it not worthwhile keeping the lights turned on.
Wal-Mart is a great American success story but their propaganda about benefiting the community is 99% lies.
So why do most communities continue to believe them? Why do local/state governments continue to give them concessions?
I've been in two communities where the local businesses were pissed about Wal-Mart and K-Mart moving in.
A few years later, business was thiving in both towns. When people spent less on closthes, etc, they had more money to spend on other things.
And folks who want quality WILL pay to get it.
The last time I went to a bike store, they carried nothing under $500. I'm still riding my $200 10 speed I bought 20 years ago.
No doubt the bike had those idiotic hand brakes instead of the regular back-pedal brake.
While I am in complete agreement with you regarding concessions - I do not believe any company should be given them if all are not granted the same. The granting of them leads me to believe that taxes and regulations were too onerous to begin with.
I do not agree with you regarding the "propaganda" and it being "99% lies."
Surrounding every WalMart I have ever been in new businesses keep springing up, and my experience is that thy actually help local small business with referrals to another location if they do not have the product you are seeking.
Your mileage may vary, but that has been my experience with WalMart in 2 different states.
My experience has been nearly identical to yours, although in one community the local independent businesses were bending over backwards to get WalMart in - they hd seen how similar businesses in other communities had thrived once WM moved in.
>So why do most communities continue to believe them? Why do local/state governments continue to give them concessions?<
Because the town that gives the concessions gets the Walmart for the region.The towns nearby loose the business.Their grocery stores and drug stores close and they loose the tax base.People who live in rural areas across the south have little choice but to shop at Walmart.If you notice Walmart is not a big presence in major cities where they get competition from other major competitors.
Walmart prospers where they can exploit pricing and convience advantages and over small local merchants.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.