• Welcome to the Two Wheeled Texans community! Feel free to hang out and lurk as long as you like. However, we would like to encourage you to register so that you can join the community and use the numerous features on the site. After registering, don't forget to post up an introduction!

making Beaumont look bad/"Forced to Utilize the Front Brakes" - Merged

Hoop

0
Joined
Nov 22, 2004
Messages
550
Reaction score
1
Location
Beaumont
http://www.motorcycledaily.com/28august09_frontbrake.htm

The local newspaper didn't have the story, but I found it here:

http://www.setexasrecord.com/news/2...-rear-brakes-disconnected-caused-bike-to-flip

Actually, I had a similar experience. I had the shop change brake fluid in both brakes. Got on the bike, and rolled up to stop before turning onto the street, and had no brakes at all. I managed to turn around and not get run over, and went back into the shop to chew someone out. The santa-claus looking dude who worked on my bike told me that he didn't need to bleed the brakes because he had used a pump to pull the old fluid out while he refilled the reservoir. I told him he almost got me killed. He was unfazed. The shop owner (Melody) was also unfazed. I took my bike elsewhere from that point.
 
Re: making Beaumont look bad

Just another squid looking for a payout because he didn't exercise due diligence and inspect his motorcycle before he left the parking lot.

I did the SAME thing, except it was the rear brake that was OVERtightened to the point it was like a light switch. Using my skills gained from years of dirt riding I simply used my front brake which I know provides most of my braking power. I hope the judge throws the suit out, because YOU are ultimately responsible for making sure your equipment functions.

I also find it hard to believe that he flipped the bike with just the front brake.
 
Re: making Beaumont look bad

Assuming any of the article is accurate, his poor riding skills were brought to light because of the shop's incompetence. He'll win the case, unless there are witnesses there to say he was riding dangerously.
 
Re: making Beaumont look bad

what I don't get is how he didn't know his brakes weren't working prior to leaving the facility. You have to stop at some point prior to getting on a road out of a parking lot. At least you have to slow down... idiot, as David said, he'll win (and he shouldn't).

Wayne
 
Re: making Beaumont look bad

Errr... brakes that dont work should be caught by the rider during a pre-ride check....believe its T-CLOCK, or some other fancy acronym like that...:doh:
 
Re: making Beaumont look bad

My guess - Mr. James does not have insurance and wanted the shop to pay for his bike and medical bills (which are likely substantial).

They said no, he hired a lawyer and

Because of the accident, James claims he incurred medical expenses and experienced physical pain, suffering, physical impairment, loss of earnings, disfigurement and mental anguish.

is the result.
 
Re: making Beaumont look bad

Errr... brakes that dont work should be caught by the rider during a pre-ride check....believe its T-CLOCK, or some other fancy acronym like that...:doh:


Or maybe by the shop that did the work!? I can't believe the mechanic that did the work wouldn't test them.
 
Re: making Beaumont look bad

Or maybe by the shop that did the work!? I can't believe the mechanic that did the work wouldn't test them.

Yep, I'm all for personal responsibility in making sure I've got brakes, etc. before I leave the parking lot, but the guy that did the work on the brakes and didn't test them needs a big bite of this crap sandwich as well. :sun:
 
Re: making Beaumont look bad

Yep, I'm all for personal responsibility in making sure I've got brakes, etc. before I leave the parking lot, but the guy that did the work on the brakes and didn't test them needs a big bite of this crap sandwich as well. :sun:

I have had several bikes worked on at Gulf Coast BMW and never once have they allowed me to leave with the bike untli a mechanic test rode the bike.

I was over there once trying to pick up the bike and get out of there in a hurry and told them they did not need to test it and that I needed to get going.

They absolutely refused to let me take it until thay had test ridden it.
 
Re: making Beaumont look bad

So before we hang the rider/attorney too high, I've got to wonder if the rider might be incapacitated or non-English speaking such that he could not accurately relate the argument to a non-riding lawyer. "Forced to use the front brakes" ain't gonna go very far, but other lines of thought may be more salable.

With that said, I do also wonder about a few other things:
1) If front brakes are so dangerous, why aren't they suing Kawasaki to have these deadly apparatus removed from all motorcycles before someone else gets hurt? At least lodge a complaint with NHTSA to protect the rest of us.
2) Out of all the "I went down today" posts on this board, I don't remember any that started with "I was forced to use the front brakes" as the precursor to disaster.
3) How many strikes can the attorney use to keep anyone that knows anything about bikes off the jury?
 
"Forced to Utilize the Front Brakes"

Man Sues Moto-Shop For Being "Forced to Utilize the Front Brakes"

"Don't use them front brakes, son," is what Beaumont, Texas' Daryl L. James' daddy must have said to him when he was a tot. That sparked a chain of events that ended July 30 with a court filing, with James suing his motorcycle shop for negligence when he was "forced to utilize the front brakes," according to the lawsuit.

Information is scanty. Apparently, James dropped off his 2005 Kawasaki Vulcan 2000 to have the rear tire repaired or replaced. He paid for the work and rode out of the parking lot to merge onto I-10 North's frontage road. When he attempted to stop before turning onto the road, he discovered the rear brake didn't work (we're guessing because the mechanic didn't pump the brake pedal after he re-installed the rear wheel), so he was "forced" to use that most dangerous of instrumentalities, the front brake. Really, Daryl? The Vulcan 2K has excellent front brakes: dual four-piston calipers and 300mm discs, but they're hardly roadracer sensitive. Anyway, he must have grabbed that front brake, because the bike allegedly overturned and James went down, suffering "physical pain, suffering, physical impairment, loss of earnings, disfigurement and mental anguish," according to the lawsuit.


James' circumstances highlight the need for basic motorcycle training, which is now mandatory in Texas. The Motorcycle Safety Foundation's Basic RiderCourse teaches two basic skills that might have had James avoid this tragedy. First, doing a basic function check-including brakes-is crucial before each ride. Second, the BRC shows riders how to use both brakes, every time they stop and slow, dispelling any lingering ideas of the front brakes being inherently dangerous. Used properly, they're roughly 70 percent of a motorcycle's stopping power, and are there to prevent-not cause-physical pain, anguish, and all those other expensive damages James is claiming.

:doh:
 
Re: "Forced to Utilize the Front Brakes"

Repost. ...
 
Last edited:
Er, Forced to use the front brakes? How in the world did this guy ever stop in a hurry just using the rear one?
 
Re: making Beaumont look bad

<...>
his poor riding skills were brought to light because of the shop's incompetence
<...>

Thanks, David. I was having trouble expressing my feelings about this case, but that pretty well sums it up.

Cheers,
-Kit
 
I suspect that by "overturned" they meant he locked the front and it slid out from under him.

Even whaling on the front brake of a SS isn't going to make it flip over on its back and that Vulcan is more then big enough to be able to even lift the rear with the front brakes.

Long story short: The shop goofed, and the guy does not know how to ride.
 
My short wheelbase Ducati barely stops with just the rear brake. This guy should have never been on a bike. I'm curious if the brake was just never pumped up or what? It only takes one pump or so before it would work again. I'm curious if there was anything found wrong with the brake after the crash.
 
This kind of incident just reinforces the new law requiring BRC training to get a MC endorsement.
 
Re: making Beaumont look bad

Errr... brakes that dont work should be caught by the rider during a pre-ride check....believe its T-CLOCK, or some other fancy acronym like that...:doh:

I dont believe that one bit. If I paid $208 of my own money I expect my bike to be returned to me in equal or better condition than when I put it in...I blame the shop.


How you flip a vulcan though is another story???
 
and no, the guy doesnt know how to ride obviously.

It would be pretty daunting if there was an oncomin car right at that road and u just found out you didnt have breaks

Also, I dont use that shop AT ALL because they suck
 
Re: making Beaumont look bad

How you flip a vulcan though is another story???

In this case, I believe "flip" is a legal term meaning, "Well, THAT should make it sound dramatic when we go to court."

After all, locking the front wheel and basically "falling over" makes the rider sound like he had some part in it. He fell over, he must not be very good.
 
I just don't understand. On pretty much any bike I have in the garage, I can grab a whole bunch of front brake and never come close to having it flip over. Nor do any of them plow the front end and want to tuck.

There are other cruiser riders in my office that are similarly opposed to using the front brake, and they ALL attended the BRC as a requirement to registering their bikes on post. So the split in my office seems to be between sport riders and cruisers; but just like this guy, I don't understand how the cruiser segment came to regard the front brake as "dangerous".

I suspect two things....

1) This moron applied too much brake at low speed with the wheel turned, effectively taking the fork to full lock to either the left or right before tipping over.
2) His lawyer is an ambulance chaser
 
Re: making Beaumont look bad

...... If I paid $208 of my own money I expect my bike to be returned to me in equal or better condition than when I put it in...I blame the shop.

Expecting repairs have been done properly is also assuming they have been done right....we know what happens when we assume.....:eek2:
We might hope to have our bikes returned to us in good repair, preferably road tested as needed, but once we swing a leg over, it is now our responsibility to check the bike over.
I dont care who worked on it or how much money was involved.
Yes, the shop screwed up, but so did the rider, even before leaving.
Sadly, this clod will prolly win his case against the shop; if he does, it should be with the stipulation that he never touches another bike. :giveup:
 
Had that happened to me, I might have gone days before realizing the rear brake didn't work.

The rear brake is the most unused (well, maybe the horn) function on my bike.
 
On my car I once had an oil change guy put windshield wiper fluid into the brakes. Every brake part from front to back had to be replaced. It took about 3 or 4 stops before the pedal went to the floor. I paid for it all of course.

Now when I get my cars and trucks oil changed, I notice they don't do brake fluid any more.
 
Back
Top