Product Liability Lawsuit against Toyota - Research Paper Example

Product Liability Lawsuit against Toyota With the emergence of the concept of societal marketing, the deviation between quality and expectation has been narrowed down. The awareness extent among the customers or purchasers has created a real deal for manufacturers as well as for the law enforcement authorities. In the near past, history sighted a very strange phenomenon with a vehicle manufacturing company which is one of the top car manufacturers. It is the turn point towards Toyota incorporation (Rowe, 2011). They had to call the sold vehicles back due to foot break design fault. The issue was basically raised back in 2009 after a horrible accident in San Diego that killed a family of four members who were travelling in Lexus, which is basically manufactured by Toyota. After proper investigation, it was reveled that the problem was due to defective accelerator pedal of the vehicle and the issue was highlighted to a great extend. They confessed the problem in to the design and announced to get the vehicles back. It was a product safety issue which had to be faced by world top class car manufacturer. The negative propaganda was started and then it was then investigated by internal as well as external experts. After the examination of the various samples, it was no more a doubt that the design was faulty in real. It was a mega decision to call it back (Product Safety Civil Penalties Improvement Act, 2007). It brought billion dollars loss for the owners. A total of 10 million vehicles across the globe faced the same problem and this was strictly called into action. The company had to pay $50 million for the record fines and is facing several law suits and the huge question mark on the credibility of the company. In the class-action law suits there were claims of over $100 million dollars and the marked value went down by $30 billion. However that was not a time to blame anything. The reputation of Toyota motors was rapidly gone down in a few weeks. After the announcement of taking the vehicles back, the experts analyzed the scenario according to their own judgment and available information. Some of the critiques even revealed that it was a deliberate publicity stunt. Whatever it was, but Toyota motors evident the history with a unique case which was never before. The causes of this great deadly blunder are revealed at several dimensions. The efforts made by Toyota motors management were incredible in order to fulfill the product safety concerns. The problem in the car designs were described as in foot break that the break was not working well in any of the designs which were launched. Excessive numbers of complaints were coming in to the room and it was the real moment of fright for the management (Product Safety Civil Penalties Improvement Act, 2007). After the issue was induced that the problem really exists, the law enforcement authority filed a lawsuit against the prevailing designs described as breach of good will and reputation, high level overlooking upon product safety concerns and product liability as well as corporate social responsibilities. The law suits again Toyota basically were categorized into two different types. Personal Injury law suits which were mostly claimed by people who suffered injuries due to defective parts of the motor vehicle and the class action law suits which was basically claimed by manufactures and even stock holders to compensate for the economic loss suffered from deflected parts of the car (Washington, D.C.: U.S. G.P.O. 2007) For personal injury law suits, the plaintiff must prove three aspects to the court of law; the plaintiff must have suffered loss, the manufacturing part was deflective and the injury was basically due to the defective part of vehicle. The second part was proven from the Lexus incidence was actually became a fact so the whole law suits are basically based on other two points. According to product liability law, the Toyota motors were left with one of the two options to claim in this case. They can either prove that the accident was due to some other cause and not because of the deflected part of the car. The other claim that can be made is that the injury was prior to the accident and was caused by some other factors rather than car accident. This seems to be the latest strategy in the defense of company. For example, in the start of this year during one of the law suits, they showed the U.S. District Court proof from the black box of the car. It showed that the car crash was caused by the whole action of the driver since the breaks were never used. Hence on the third claim and point of the product liability law, the plaintiff is not liable to get compensation for their loss since the defective part of the vehicle didn’t seem to be the case. Even going more into this case, as it happened in the Lexus case that started the whole issue, an individual’s death can be claimed under personal injury lawsuit for wrongful death. In this claim, any members of the decedent’s family would act as plaintiff and claim that the dealt was caused by faulty and defective part of the car. (BAGLEY, C. E. 2012) Over 200 class action law suits have been filled against Toyota since the first incidence was highlighted. The owners have suffered huge loss due to this and as per product liability law; there can be three types of law suit claims in this category. It can be because of loss of car value which was different when purchased initially before the incidence, time and money that is being spend in trying to get the vehicle fixed due to the error made by the company and it also due to economic loss that plaintiff suffered while he was unable to drive the vehicle for a certain period of time. These law suits were claimed under multiple violations of different laws some of which include warranty laws, state consumer protections law and several other common laws of the state. However, Toyota is greatly threatened by a large law suit which is being litigated in a federal district court in California. It is called Multi-District law suit and is actually the combination of various law suits that have been combined in form of a single law suit. This is greatly highlighted by media and is given national wide coverage. Reputation of Toyota is greatly threatened in country by this lawsuit and owners have their fingers crossed as this law suit progresses on. Even last month, the company had to settle a law suit by paying $25.5 million to settle U.S shareholder class action lawsuit. He had accused the company of now issuing proper disclosure of safety and quality issue relating to the unintended vehicle acceleration issue. However the discussion is so extensive which is being propagated till yet. The case was even discussed in the U.S congress under House Oversight and Government Reform Committee and the House Energy and Commerce Committee. It is also said that the damage caused to the company is far than what they actually deserved and there has been a political shift against Toyota at government level. This is because of most of the Democratic congressmen who are involved in the investigation board have General Motors, Toyota’s main rival in US, as their leading campaign supporters. These however always remain to be conspiracy theories where no one can be actually aware of the true facts. Toyota also claims to be victim of media criticism and aggression. To avoid future lawsuits, the company should redesign the quality assurance. The operational management and designing engineering team must be guided about the certain standards of quality (Rowe, 2011). The premium endurable quality must be ensured before the final launching. It is still a question in the eyes of critiques because the mistake was not at a minute level. In my personal opinion, this is a good example of product liability law involving a billion dollar company. It not only involves personal law suits but also deals with the law suits of stake holders, manufactures and other concerned parties. Personal law suits and class action law suits in various forms are even now under trail in various parts of the country. This not only explains the law by also the other aspect that might also influence such law suits. That include the role of media and politicians and the way things can be manipulated in such law suits. The essay also explain the basis of law suits a plaintiff or a company has to prove to make their law suit worth the claim and the various aspects that Toyota can use to defend themselves as they have done in few of the cases. In future, they need to make sure to double check the design of any car before putting it into the market and just as they claim, Safety should be their first priority. The claims would be settled or decided by court, one way or the other this issue would be solved in near future but the question mark on their reputation is something that would make them worried for years to come and it would be difficult to regain customers trust after such huge media coverage that these law suits have received. References Product Safety Civil Penalties Improvement Act: report (to accompany H.R. 2474). (2007). Washington, D.C.: U.S. G.P.O. BAGLEY, C. E. (2012). Managers and the legal environment: Strategies for the 21st century. S.L.: Cengage learning custom p. Rowe, E. A. (2011). Striking a Balance: When Should Trade Secret Laws Shield Disclosures to the Government? Iowa Law Review, 96, 793-835. Read More