I have a relatively long commute to work that involves some highway driving. I was behind a dump truck whose contents extended beyond the pit in the back (although not by much). On the back of his truck he had a sign that read “Driver is not responsible for damage caused by contents in rear”. My question is: How is that legally binding?
I never agreed to them putting too much in the back, and I never signed anything that stated I am OK with this policy. I just happened to be behind the truck when it happened to have something fall off the back. So could I have a good argument in court if something DID fall off and cause damage?
Yes, you do, since unsecured cargo is a citable offense in most states. Here’s Michigan’s:
Load, improper 3710
Load, no cover on 3710
Load, no flag on projecting 3400
Load, spilling on highway 3710
Load, unsafe on truck 3710
Too many truck drivers/companies seem to think a bumper sticker means they can just dump shit all over the road.
I remember years ago, driving down our street there was a huge trail of (still wet) tar all over the road. as we approached the end of the street, the police had a truck pulled over and were sitting there while the people driving the truck cleaned up the mess.
I do not have a cite nor am I a lawyer but I feel reasonably safe in saying you cannot avoid liability for something just because you posted a sign saying you are not liable. Perhaps they give you some legal cover if it is a warning (e.g. “No lifeguard on duty, swim at your own risk” or “Beware of dog”) but that still is not blanket protection from liability.
This is correct. You cannot unilaterally impose an obligation or liability on someone, and just because you post some kind of disclaimer does not automatically release you from liability for negligence.
As others have observed, these statements are mostly to discourage people from suing. It is up to the courts to decide whether a warning was reasonable or sufficent, when weighed against evidence of negligence.
We’ve done this before, so sorry I’m not eager to do the research again. But it is as enforceable as the signs you occasionally see on golf courses saying golfer is responsible for damage from wayward shots. In other words - not. Of course, proving the elements of negligence is a whole different kettle of fish.
I think I posted before in a similar thread - I could put a sign on my front lawn saying, “All passersby must pay me $5.” If anyone is stupid enough to do so, good for me.
Inasmuch as the driver doesn’t load the truck, possibly.
Mostly, those are a warning to stay back-- give the truck extra room at lights, and so forth. I mean, if the bumper sticker said, “Please give driver extra distance at lights in case of falling debris,” no one would do it, and there’d even be jerks who’d think it was the prefect opportunity to score a new windshield by pulling their car with an already-cracked windshield up too close, and then when a pebble fell on their car, claim it caused the crack. The “not responsible” bumper sticker puts those ideas out of people’s heads.
Yeah. It’s total bullshit. My brother was a driver for a sand and gravel company and they used to duct tape the inside of the tailgate to keep material from leaking out.
The other issue is when loading, spills may land on the exterior of the truck. Those should be brushed off.
Now, if they have proper mud flaps and their tire kicks up something already on the road, that’s not their fault.
I’ll add that they are responsible for crap that falls off their truck, but not for stuff kicked up off the road by their tires. At least that’s what my insurance guy tells me.
At least in some cases they might count on the fact that if some of their load drops on your car you’ll be too upset to catch up and get the information off the truck.
Can I presume, then, that the signs in the grocery store parking lot that say, “Not responsible for damage from shopping carts” are equally ineffective?
It’s for the court to decide if they are negligent or not. If it’s parking lot with carts traveling across it like tumbleweeds that’s the stores problem when they allow it to happen unchecked. If the lot is always kept free of carts and your car is damaged because Freddy the asshole decides to ram it with a cart the store might not be responsible, you’ll have to take it up with Freddy.
This is what I’ve heard as well. The sign is intentionally blurring the distinction between kicking up stuff that’s already on the roadway and dropping part of the load on the roadway.
If your car is damaged because of falling load from a truck, be sure to get pictures which show how the material was falling of the truck.
I had a conversation with an emergency room doctor who didn’t know what a Bobcat was, and when a patient was brought in because a Bobcat had fallen off a truck onto his car and injured him, she asked if the Bobcat was all right. She got some very strange looks.
I think no matter what bumper stickers the rig hauling the Bobcat had, the company was going to be paying a lot of money to the guy who got hit.
I would take that sign different than everyone else.
I take it to mean if you hit the load on the back of the truck. then the driver is denying responsibility. There are many people out there who after rear ending a truck they will try and put the responsibility on the truck because the load was hanging over the end of the truck.