i was wondering if anybody knows of any lawsuits that have been settled one way or another about incorrect windshield installs? for instance,poor adhesion or using butyl tape? i know of the big one in denver years ago where the guy got thown through the windshield of his truck had just had put in and they didn't use urethane on a dw848, or even rust? how about an automaker that had that problem from the factory like some of the 1341's that the urethane peels off with the paint.

I have been looking too. Have not found any to date

The list of vehicles with urethane failing extends to more than the just GM I have seen it on Jeep,Ford,Mopar,Audi,Dodge,and Mercedes-Benz! The one I see the most has to be Jeep from the Wrangler to the Grand Cherokee! Not all have been failure at the body some have been failure to also stick to the glass! These have been factory installs!

Conspiracy theory

I was told one time that there have been 11 cases that have been settled in the history of auto glass. I couldn’t find out the amounts because the insurance companies hushed it as part of the settlement. Though eleven is too much, I have often wonder why it's has become such a hot topic? Considering there are eleven million windshields being replaced each year.

Can someone tell me how many lawsuits have been filed against the networks, insurance companies and NAGS for price collusion? I believe they are the biggest reason for faulty installations. By not paying installers reasonable prices for service rendered, they create a dangerous environment for people to cut corners. In order to squeeze that extra dollar people are forced to weight quality with price on everything.

Inflation has jump in the last two years but companies like The Hartford, Allstate, Progressive and Nags have either increased there discounts or lowered the list price of a glass. Unfortunately, the actuaries the glass towers have probably figured out that it’s better to nickel and dime our industry and occasionally pay out some hush money for these catastrophic failures, then pay a fair wage for quality.

Why else would they be so secretive about the real numbers of failures and their costs? And why would they be so hush on the formula to calculate list prices, or what they call “fair and reasonable” prices?

In NY we had some high priced talent trying to put together a class action lawsuit regarding unsafe installations. These people were not able to come up with a solid case of someone getting hurt due to a poor installation. I think the problem is over looked. When the accident is evaluated, the windshield could be lying on the hood and no one would give it a second thought. No one is looking into the possibility the occupants may not have been hurt had the windshield stayed in. We need to educate the local ambulance chasers. Then you will see changes made.

Actually, there have been several. A list was published some years back...have to find that copy.

In the meantime, relying on just memory...

Tracy Rhyne, Maya Donnett, Jeanie Fransway, Ford Motor, a lady in a Dodge full size van, the Denver case of PPG, Solaglass, and the Chev dealer over the 848 mentioned above...

It would take some time to dig up the info on more.

Most probably don't make it to court.

If they do not make it to court they can't be used in class action lawsuits.

Most never make it to the lawsuit stage because the cars are often totalled. Then, insurance company often settles the total loss by paying the claim and retains the vehicle (evidence). Then the vehicle is disposed of in various ways (salvage the most common).

The result is no evidence = no lawsuit.

in the case of serious accidents, the jaws of life are used in alot of cases too, in order to extract the victim, which usually will destroy any evidence of a failed windshield. Plus accident investigators are not trained to look for a secondary cause of injury, they are basically looking for the cause of the accident.

another thing im wondering, if car manufacturers haven't been held accountable for faulty installations how can aftermarket replacements?

also in rollovers where the vehicle rolls more than once doesn't the point become mute? after that first roll the glass itself has become compromised,and i don't see how at that point the windshield will hold up no matter how the installation was done.
basically the point i am getting to is that isn't ridiculus to rely on glass to protect the occupants?
i just have the feeling that the more public awareness about windshield installations may come back to bite us all in the a**. because then every accident with a death or injury will be the windshields fault, according to injury lawyers.

I do remember reading an article several years ago about a suit in Florida (?) where a windshield was replaced for an auto rental company. The auto glass company did not follow SDAT, released the car back to the rental company and in turn rented the vehicle, still before the SDAT. Then the accident which I believe left the lady parapalegic.
This is the best I remember it but maybe someone from AGRR can help out because I am almost positive that is where I read it.

Found it on Glasslinks.

http://www.glasslinks.com/newsinfo/detsafe.htm

http://www.glasslinks.com/newsinfo/fordsuit.htm


http://www.glassbytes.com/newssafelite20050304.htm

check this out http://www.injuryboard.com/view.cfm/Topic=434

The windshield is just part of the structure it only helps hold the roof up in a roll over. The sad part is the government won't do anything to protect the consumer until some senator or their relative gets hurt due to a bad installation