Foo - This is so far past the pale...

Really? (http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2011/03/01/state/n194150S13.DTL&tsp=1)

I've seen the woman drive her FWD vehicle away with a "boot" affixed, but this?

???

Btw, endured an interesting *or not* "I rode therefore I am a cyclist--but it was because of the DUI" occurance today.

Dying for a 2002 Buick? Hmm.

Wow that's terrible.

So who's at fault here. Via, Song........ or the bank?

So who's at fault here. Via, Song........ or the bank?

Via

How do you get trapped under a car that's attached to a tow truck? Maybe she was trying to unhook it?

So who's at fault here. Via, Song........ or the bank?

Song.


Song said he lost sight of Via and assumed she had moved away as he pulled the car

Sorry, "assumed" is not good enough when you're operating heavy machinery.

We had kind of the opposite case here. Man shot the repo guy with an ak-47.

http://www.wrdw.com/crimeteam12/headlines/Atlanta__man_found_guilty_in_repo_man_shooting_111419014.html

What is wrong with people? Nevermind, don't answer that.

Song.



Sorry, "assumed" is not good enough when you're operating heavy machinery.

Via should have known to get the hell out of the way of heavy machinery....even my dog knows that. not to mention why the vehicle was being repo'd in the first place.

Via should have known to get the hell out of the way of heavy machinery....even my dog knows that.

True, but ultimately it's the responsibility of the tow truck operator to ensure he is operating it safely. This is no different from a semi trailer that right hooks a cyclist; we always claim someone operating a motor vehicle is ultimately responsible for doing so in a safe manner.


not to mention why the vehicle was being repo'd in the first place.

Irrelevant to culpability.

True, but ultimately it's the responsibility of the tow truck operator to ensure he is operating it safely. This is no different from a semi trailer that right hooks a cyclist; we always claim someone operating a motor vehicle is ultimately responsible for doing so in a safe manner.



Irrelevant to culpability.

actions have consequences....so not irrelevant. Now, in this case, the consequences were very severe.

Sounds like neither of them was completely in the right. What do you bet the husband sues the bank that hired Song?

Song.
Sorry, "assumed" is not good enough when you're operating heavy machinery.
Normally I would agree with you. Had he backed over her, clipped her with his side, or had she been a young child, sure. On the other hand, talking to an adult human, and getting in a vehicle, then driving it forwards (probably looking forwards) it isn't reasonable to assume they have gone under the vehicle. I also wouldn't be surprised if she waited until the driver turned away in order to disguise the fact that she was messing with it.
Saying this is his fault is like hiding in your garbage can, waiting until the robotic arm on the truck comes to pick it up, and then blaming the truck operator for injuring you when you get dumped with the trash.

So who's at fault here. Via, Song........ or the bank?

Are you asking who should be at fault, or who will be found to be at fault in today's no personal responsibility nanny-state?

If you are asking who should be at fault, it should be the woman for crawling under the car after being told by the driver that he wouldn't be unhooking. If you are asking who will be found at fault, it will be the tow driver, because most people seem to have been absolved of taking responsibility for their own actions.

Buick is obviously at fault here.

Normally I would agree with you. Had he backed over her, clipped her with his side, or had she been a young child, sure. On the other hand, talking to an adult human, and getting in a vehicle, then driving it forwards (probably looking forwards) it isn't reasonable to assume they have gone under the vehicle. I also wouldn't be surprised if she waited until the driver turned away in order to disguise the fact that she was messing with it.
Saying this is his fault is like hiding in your garbage can, waiting until the robotic arm on the truck comes to pick it up, and then blaming the truck operator for injuring you when you get dumped with the trash.

I see your point, but frankly we're both into the realm of conjecture at this point; we don't really know what happened.

Buick is obviously at fault here.
Not just Buick, but the Buick that was being towed.

I would sue the pants off of GM and whoever made the tow truck.

I would sue the pants off of GM and whoever made the tow truck.

:roflmao: +5

Doesn't that mean you'd be suing yourself as we as a nation collectively own GM?

Doesn't that mean you'd be suing yourself as we as a nation collectively own GM?

Yup, right into oblivion.