I wasn't going to continue this, but couldn't pass this one up..........

Read Darren's 'Terms and Conditions'.

Guess who's just sh*t himself about liability????

All the guff says that you are responsible for what you put on your car, regardless of who you bought it from, and what they told you it can do.

He even goes so far as to say you have got to test it yourself, prior to fitting!!!!.

And he says he can sell you what he wants, of any standard and suitability, then wash his hands of it.

Your 'terms and Conditions' don't absolve you from your Statutory Obligations, Darren, no matter how officious and daunting your 'T&C's' may appear to be.

The only thing you can do is put a Big sticker on your parts, just like Wilwood, and all the yank manufacturers.
WARNING: FOR RACING USE ONLY. or WARNING: NOT FOR USE ON PUBLIC ROADS.

Get some Product Liability Insurance, then engineer your stuff properly! Are you a member of STATUS? Dr.George and Denzil and the team would be more than happy to test and certify your products.

All that guff wouldn't stand up in court. Get a refund from the solicitor who told you it will.

You make it. You sell it. You're responsible for it.

Cheers,
Syd.

Just wait until Euro Law gets its grubby hands on us. You won't be able to 'pass wind', without taking responsibility for emissions and standards!!!!

[Edited on 26/10/04 by Syd Bridge]

bet this ones going to run!

quote:

---

Originally posted by locogeoff
bet this ones going to run!

---

To anyone that buys anything
http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio1/onelife/legal/rights/consumer.shtml
dont know if the link will work interesting though.

Syd,

You are a complete ar*e and a definite stir for stirs sake.

I don't normally take exception to peoples postings, I try to take a balanced view.

However your continual stirring and downright snide comments are shameful.

You make yourself out to be the 'peoples champion' whilst all the time taking great joy in doing nothing constructive for other builders but instead stirring up trouble.

This site is supposedly for people who are constructing Locosts et al and are happy to give useful advice.

Even if a product is tried and tested and still fails, you are the type to gripe and want blood. Parts fail, even in normal use.
If we all follow the american litigation lead there won't be a kit car industry soon.
Litigation and blame culture by 'greedy people' almost destroyed the private aircraft industry in america.

There are some manufacturers who are already prepared to leave the kit car parts field and only produce finished vehicles.
A great loss to all.

There are small operators out there who cannot get liability insurance, not through their fault but the insurance industry exorbitant premiums making them unviable.

Rob Lane

[Edited on 26/10/04 by Rob Lane]

Syd WTF are you a member of this forum??
Your helping no one with constant trouble making...

I suggest you spend more time building your car or driving it, whichever stage your at!

Cheers

[Edited on 26/10/04 by SeaBass]

Im sure Darrens stuff is engineered correctly, and is 'fit for purpose'. As that is what it all comes down to isnt it? I dunno I'm no legal expert.

If you buy stuff from him then modify it then its your fault if it busts in use. But AFAIK if you buy something like (for example) wishbones then they should fulfil their purpose as wishbones i.e they will do what they are designed to and will withstand a certain amount of abuse allowed for by the saftey factors in the design. Basically if they fail you are entitled to some form of replacment or whatever. Like i said i dont know the ins and out but i think thats what its about?

Just a thought Darren, if you are worried about legal action if anything goes wrong (as it seem what this is about?), then you should probably consider becoming a limited company. Then if someone tries to sue you for some reason then you yourself are safe from losing any personal effects (like your house!) to pay compensation. Disadvantage of course is it costs money and is a lot of paerwork to becom a ltd company...bonus is the personal security it offers the owner/managers. If you are a sole trader currently (or in a partnership) then you are responsible for paying legal stuff, and if you cant afford to pay then your belongings can be used to pay the bill... then again im sure you are already aware of this.....?

And just for the record i think Syd is stirring again.... he may be right? but i think he could have said what he thinks without being so offensive. Anyway lets not start an argument with Syd, as i seem to remeber doing this several times already....

Anyway thats my 2p worth

Cheers
David

From the BBC pages as linked to by Barrie,

What does the law say?
One of the most important laws governing your rights as a consumer is the Sale of Goods Act 1979. Like many laws it has evolved to keep up with changes in society so the Act now includes the 'amendments' the Sale and Supply of Goods Act 1994 and the Sale of Goods (Amendment) Act 1995.

This is a wide-ranging piece of legislation that applies to both new and second-hand goods.

It protects consumers by ensuring that:

Goods are of 'satisfactory quality' - products must last a reasonable time and be free of defects
Goods are 'as described' - a trader or advertisement must honestly describe the product. If, for example, you buy a CD that turns out to be counterfeit then you have a case against the trader that sold it.
Fit for purpose - products must do what the supplier says they do.


I think the key one here is the last one where by it must do what the supplier says it will do.

[Edited on 26/10/04 by colmaccoll]

OK, following logically on from Syds post.

I would warn all who are offering advice or who would assist someone in making a Locost, that they could be held liable should anything happen to that Locost.

Reselling components applies also.

Anyone who has supplied anything to Syd for his Locost build should lookout.

I for one, am now stopping any posts that would help or contribute in any way to a Locost build.

I could be held responsible.

Limited Company will not help a case where negligence by design is cited.

They will go for the Directors personal assets.

I hope Darren or MK or Luego will look closely at their Terms and include "Not for use on Public Roads" it's the only way to deal with the issue.

Some people are always out to get whatever they can and accept no personal liability for their actions. That unfortunately, is the era we live in.


[Edited on 26/10/04 by Rob Lane]

Like i said im no expert...was just a suggestion. All i know is that Ltd Co offers more protection than just being a sole trader. So we have been led to believe on our business planning module anyway...

Litigation era...another import from our American cousins....

quote:

---

Originally posted by Rob Lane
I for one, am now stopping any posts that would help or contribute in any way to a Locost build.

I could be held responsible.

---

I would be supprised if Syd is building anything,as with this attitude he will never dare to take it on the road.If he does I hope that the suspension bolts are securely tightned as a wishbone falling off has got to be worse than it bending.
I would also like to know how Syd has so much knowledge of future legislation and euro laws?
Paul.

quote:

---

Originally posted by SeaBass
Syd WTF are you a member of this forum??
Your helping no one with constant trouble making...

I suggest you spend more time building your car or driving it, whichever stage your at!

Cheers

[Edited on 26/10/04 by SeaBass]

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by flak monkey
Litigation era...another import from our American cousins....

---

I have on a few occations recieved excellent customer service, or even full replacement on an "for off road use only" part. I bought a new turbo for my focus last year, and within 100 miles of the installation the intercooler started to leak. The company that sold me the turbo spent almost 4 straight hours with me on the phone trying to resolve the problem, hunting down possible leaks elsewhere in the system, The only thing they asked of me to replace the intercooler was to pay for shipping it to them, as soon as they recieved the old one they shipped me a new one, and bit the cost of shipping to me a 2nd time.

I find that most companies here in the US are like that, they will bend over backwards to make right what they did wrong.

Well, I've just added a disclaimer to my posts here...

David

I would like to add to this thread but i don't think it would be a good idea at the moment .............


cheers woodster

quote:

---

Originally posted by ned
I don't want to be associated as a cousin of Americans, especially that Bush bloke.

---

hmm. not sure about that pete Alan is ok, as I gather he actually used to live in england, but he was from up north, so that's borderline in itself



Ned.

<rant>

Another day, another manufacturer.... if we carry this on, then as said - it will restrict if not kill Kit Car manufacturer's.

All of the major mass manufacturer's do not put a CE mark on their products for a reason. It's fit for purpose... therefore assumed as safe by the typical motoring fraternity, we are literally putting our lives in their hands.

However, if they did put a CE mark on it and some chav got into it and caused chaos. Who becomes liable, the driver or the manufacturer?

No manufacturer of cars can gaurantee 100% it's safe operation either kit or mass produced. Anyone had a BRAND NEW car that works perfectly?


If you buy a Kit Car or Kit, common sense tells you it's down to your skill and interpretation as a builder to make it as safe as you see fit. Therefore, you must accept an element of risk in it's manufacture, a kind of disclaimer.

The Lotus 7 design is flawed in it's very nature, that's essential to it's character - lets all be sensible and not succumb to the US's system of claim culture. Let the companies get on with what they do best - stop the knocking and calling. In the end it does us all no good.

<rant over>

Time to post...... Not been holding back but away packaging up a lovely Melon Yellow kit for a nice Swedish customer.

Its good to see that you have in the main understood the reasoning behind the new terms and conditions added to the website. An new line will be added saying that all parts are for racing purposes only.

As such i'm sure you will all understand that they don't preclude me from acting the nice guy that i am. If you purchase something from me and have a problem, you can all rest assured that as ever i will bend over backwards to correct the error. What i will not take responsibilty for is being made the target of an easy money claim by the likes of Syd and buddies.

My disclaimer overstates for obvious reasons that the customer must take responsibility for the suitability of the components that they buy for their intended use.

As you will all appreciate from the almost universal praise for the quality of the parts that i supply, i don't make and supply tosh. Neither am i un-qualified or in experienced.

My CV once again:-

Bachelor of engineering, Mechanical Engineering
3 years Design engineer for Dynamic Suspensions Ltd, responsible for advanced suspension systems design for F1, WRC, DTM and Le Mans prototypes, as well as Dodge Viper and Prowler, Shelby Series One and CSX road cars.
6 years Design Engineer for John Barnard, firstly at Prost, then laterly working on behalf of Porsche, McLaren, Jaguar, BAR, Ferrari. Designer of composite crash structures, composite, titanium, and steel suspension components, brake system and transmission/rear crach structures.

5 years running GTS tuning, touch wood as yet no item has been retuned as faulty, or failed.

My terms and conditions are in reaction to the attitudes adopted by the minority and supported by Syd.

Ltd company doesn't offer protection for directors in these kind of cliam under the new government law. I'm currently protected by far more than any insurance or Ltd company status would possibly allow.


Kind regards,

Darren

For those who don't think I actively contribute constructively.............

There are many who I correspond with via u2u who would say different.

It's just that I prefer to keep any advice and methods on a one-one basis.

Darren,
you completely misunderstand my intent. I DO NOT, in any way, support the 'ambulance chaser' law fraternity. To me they are anathema, abhorrent, the lowest form of life. And the cause of high insurance premiums.
On the other hand, the insurance companies will take someone they see to be liable, to court to recover their own payouts. I used to work for a man who owned insurance companies. He sold them, because he didn't like the way the industry was going.( And Lloyds)

My aim is to make people aware of what they are using. The manufacturers must stop plagiarism(and I'm not pointing at you, as your parts are unique), and properly engineer their products.

STATUS has been around for years. There is absolutely no reason why any manufacturer of kit parts should not spend the few hundred pounds to have their critical parts tested by STATUS, to ensure integrity. Just being a member doesn't mean your output is above reproach. You (meaning any manufacturer)should do as I put previously.

Get your critical parts tested, and show the certificate. For your own peace of mind, if nothing else.

Syd,



[Edited on 26/10/04 by Syd Bridge]

Keep it up Syd

then none of us will have a kit car

And few thousand people will be out of work.

Still never mind eh?

Chris

Syd, you were pointing the finger and did single out Darren and his products!

Overall I agree with the outcome of this discussion and that it has brought to the front the conditions of use and disclaimers etc.
However the way you went about bringing it to point leaves a lot to be desired!

If you were to buy a suspension component that was designed for a sidevalve engined car with a max HP of about 50hp and then used it in a car with a big block Chevy pushing out 500hp would you be suprised if it broke? It may well hold up to pottering about, but it's life cycle would be drastically reduced.
Fit for use can have such a wide range of meaning depending on your viewpoint. From the guy with the 500hp that he considers normal to the guy with 50hp. After all that is what these cars were designed for in the first place. The fact that with little modification they can tolerate more HP and higher cornering forces is tribute to the construction and design of these cars.

Whatever happened to the trial and error method of improvement in this country? It used to be the main way of development for amatuer and professional alike.

It seems now that if someone somewhere along the line never predicted a possible use or abuse of one of their components they have the weight of the world dropped on them from a great height!
A very sad state of affairs indeed.

Terry

Aldo i generally agree with what Syd had said,i think a U2U to Darren would have been the right way to do it instead of the open forum.
You (Syd) at least have given the impression that this was a personnal attack on Darren.
NEVER,never awake a sleeping dog!!!!!
Enjoy the kitcar/amateur car built scenery as long as it lasts in it's true nature cause the beginning of the end allready has started.
It only takes one idiot in the right (government) place to destroy this last bit of car freedom.
I dont think it was your intention Syd but your little post has started something that probably is ireversible.
It will not be long before people have to sign a disclaimer for any part they like to buy from anybody.
Is this good or bad, i dont know but it certainly will not improve the friendship and "lending a helping hand" mentality among the locost builders.
(I'm getting to old for this sh#t)

quote:

---

Originally posted by Rob Lane


I for one, am now stopping any posts that would help or contribute in any way to a Locost build.

I could be held responsible.

---

I just hope the blatently obvious malice Syd has spread about doesn't indeed bring about the demise of the otherwise friendly and trusting Locost comunity.
I think by and large (Syd excepted) the members of this forum have at least a modicum of intelligence and will deduce from recommendations and others' posts which are good buys and which are not.
A very good example is the recent petrol tank failure episode. Most people will now be aware of which tanks are more suitable than others.
It isn't sufficient to follow like sheep and build a car identical to one that someone else has completed and is currently driving. It's the responsibility of each individual to sattisfy themselves of their car's roadworthiness.

The bottom line is, no matter what a supplier tells you (I have the utmost respect for Darren and his operation BTW), each individual must satisfy themselves that the goods they're purchasing are suitable for their intended use. If that means the items will be physically modified or used in a "custom" manner, then they again, must glean sufficient information and assurance from this forum or elsewhere that the products are suitable for the intended purpose. In the good old days, the farrier that made your horse lame and throw its shoes got no further business nor recommendations.
It should be no different these days, the onus should be predominantly on the buyer.
That's not to say the provider has no responsibilities, of course they do, but it's virtually a crime on its own to expect the supplier to fork out for your laziness or incompetence in ascertaining if the goods are suitable or not.

I've no ax to grind, but Hugh's point triggered something that's been nagging me about these two threads. I think it's country/cultural differences. IIRC from my ancient schooling, here in Ontario we have a different legal structure due to the influence of Canada starting off half French and half British.

We were taught in that a subject matter expert has a moral and legal responsibility to ensure that their advice is correct, and someone taking that advice has the right to assume it is. The advisor is liable for any damages incurred if it is not, even if such advice is offered for free.

In Ontario, Darren with his qualifications would certainly fall into that category, as would many of the other manufacturers. I don't remember talking about it in school, but I suspect that anyone selling parts for locosts would be seen as experts and such parts would be expected to work safely and properly. I know signing off on a design as a p.eng here is taken quite seriously and requires some serious insurance.

While I agree we need to use common sense while building, I certainly can't tell by looking at a wishbone where the stresses are and if it's safe for use - I heartily support that moral/legal responsibility thing we have over here, whether I'm giving or taking advice.

It also struck me as ironic, given the subject of this website, that this topic would come up at all - buying parts is surely counter to the original intent of building a locost. Of course it also struck me as odd when it became accepted that being competitive in the locost racing series required a professionally built chassis and engine... Not that I'm naive about our hobby, just surprised at how far we've come. One thing is clear - if you build the whole thing yourself, you know who to blame if there's a failure .

quote:

---

Originally posted by ned
hmm. not sure about that pete Alan is ok, as I gather he actually used to live in england, but he was from up north, so that's borderline in itself



Ned.

---

I'll second that ALAN

NEVER have I been so annoyed with someone on this site as to want someone thrown off! If Syd doesn't shut his mouth he will cause truble for all kit owners with rules and regs as in other countries!
His slagging off of Darren is pathetic and the saying it is not personal is sick..
I wish I had the CV that Darren has,and I haver never met him or spoke to him.
If syd was in business as I have been he would know that someone attacking peoples reputations as he is doing is personal!
I SAY WE HAVE A DEMOCRATIC VOTE TO THROW THE TROUBLEMAKER OFF!
YES I THINK THIS IS SO SERIOUS AND A DANGER TO ALL OF US!!!!

DEAN C..

Perhaps Syd was right,we have GOD to thank after all!

Going the religious tour is'nt gonna help anybody!

Cita,You 've took the words right out of my mouth.

Ahh humm

Live & let live, and that includes you Syd

god??????????????????????????????

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cita
god?????????????????????????????? [
/quote]


GOD? ................. if it took you 6 days and 1 day off to create the earth ........ a locost should be a piece of p*ss

---

Peteff - 1/11/04 at 11:43 AM

you're trying to put a stupid engine in it.. Anyway he's god, not with a capital 'G'. You shouldn't expect too much from a minor deity.

---

greggors84 - 2/11/04 at 08:28 PM

Syd,

You say you contribute to the forum, then why keep your advice to a one-one basis? Surely that is the point of the forum, or are you worried someone might sue you for something you advised them?
Maybe you could have a little disclaimer with your advice?

Fair enough trying to point out safety stuff to people, but you should aim it at certain people. You should know that people wont listen to you, and your whining as many many people have dealt with darren and are very happy with him and his products.

---

Marcus - 2/11/04 at 08:57 PM

This may be of interest, if something is marked 'for competition use only' or words to that effect and you have an accident, whether it was this components fault or not, your insurance may be void!!
My dad's an assessor for insurance companies, and tells me that they look for any way out of a claim, a recent case involved a Saxo with Michelin racing tyres on, was hit by another car, the insurance refused to pay out to Saxo driver as the tyres were not intended for road use!!

Marcus

---

stephen_gusterson - 2/11/04 at 10:12 PM

that sounds fair.

its not like tyres arnt important!

atb

steve

---