Bike Forums

Bike Forums (https://www.bikeforums.net/forum.php)
-   Road Cycling (https://www.bikeforums.net/road-cycling/)
-   -   No longer inspecting frames for crash damage (https://www.bikeforums.net/road-cycling/1174286-no-longer-inspecting-frames-crash-damage.html)

colnago62 06-23-19 01:50 PM


Originally Posted by Sy Reene (Post 20992361)
I don't think so.. ie. the burden of proof resides with the accuser/plaintiff. In your scenario, the accuser would be asked to provide evidence that he/she for example, didn't possibly damage their own frame after inspection (eg. after running thru a deep pothole or whatnot). This is somewhat reminiscent of the JRA threads and warranty claims for frame failures from 'just riding around".

I doubt that would even be an issue. I think you would find a judge or jury would connect the dots and come to the conclusion that there was damage that the shop missed. This is a civil case, the burden of proof is much lower. The Schwinn bike reflector case is an example of why it would probably not even go to court.

JohnJ80 06-23-19 03:44 PM


Originally Posted by colnago62 (Post 20992840)
I doubt that would even be an issue. I think you would find a judge or jury would connect the dots and come to the conclusion that there was damage that the shop missed. This is a civil case, the burden of proof is much lower. The Schwinn bike reflector case is an example of why it would probably not even go to court.

Agree. Especially if some shop says that the frame is good, sends them on their way, the frame catastrophically fails and there is a serious injury.

I can’t possibly see that being a winner for the shop in court with a plaintiff (for example) sitting in a wheel chair and drooling and then watch the shop trying to defend their decision after some industry CF expert or bike expert testifies that damage that is catastrophic is often hidden inside the frame. Doubt that would ever get to court, the insurance company would have their checkbook out right away to settle and then cancel the shop’s policy.

JohnJ80 06-23-19 04:01 PM


Originally Posted by colnago62 (Post 20992840)
I doubt that would even be an issue. I think you would find a judge or jury would connect the dots and come to the conclusion that there was damage that the shop missed. This is a civil case, the burden of proof is much lower. The Schwinn bike reflector case is an example of why it would probably not even go to court.

Agree. Especially if some shop says that the frame is good, sends them on their way, the frame catastrophically fails and there is a serious injury.

I can’t possibly see that being a winner for the shop in court with a plaintiff (for example) sitting in a wheel chair and drooling and then watch the shop trying to defend their decision after some industry CF expert or bike expert testifies that damage that is catastrophic is often hidden inside the frame. Doubt that would ever get to court, the insurance company would have their checkbook out right away to settle and then cancel the shop’s policy.

Kimmo 06-24-19 06:33 PM

Still can't see why a shop can't inspect it, give it a hard time in front of the customer, and say that although more stringent methods are required to pronounce it good, you can't say it's bad after the tests the customer has seen.

Here you go mate, certified not definitely cactus. We don't promise it's good, but it has no obvious damage and you've seen what it survived without a creak.

I say common sense demands a happy medium between bending over for the lawyers and telling customers to go jump.

...

On another note, anyone seen this? ENVE have announced a no questions lifetime replacement policy for original owners of their parts, doesn't matter how the damage happened. And it's retroactive!

https://www.bikeradar.com/news/enve-...nt-protection/

Suddenly their gear is a whole lot better value.

JohnJ80 06-24-19 06:50 PM


Originally Posted by Kimmo (Post 20995201)
Still can't see why a shop can't inspect it, give it a hard time in front of the customer, and say that although more stringent methods are required to pronounce it good, you can't say it's bad after the tests the customer has seen.

Here you go mate, certified not definitely cactus. We don't promise it's good, but it has no obvious damage and you've seen what it survived without a creak.

I say common sense demands a happy medium between bending over for the lawyers and telling customers to go jump.

They can, but it’s beyond stupid to do so. Frankly, any shop that does so after understanding carbon fiber should have their advice be suspect.

...

On another note, anyone seen this? ENVE have announced a no questions lifetime replacement policy for original owners of their parts, doesn't matter how the damage happened. And it's retroactive!

https://www.bikeradar.com/news/enve-...nt-protection/

Suddenly their gear is a whole lot better value.
I’ve always like Enve’s stuff and I love their forks, but this makes me like them even more. Great move for consumers.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:27 AM.


Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.