Liability insurance--Woods porting

[Boleclimber]

All chainsaw manufactures carry liability insurance for instances where they are sued by chainsaw users. Manufacturers perform extensive testing for kickback and chain brake operation.

When a saw has its cylinder modified, the resulting torque curve and horsepower rating is increased. This increase alters the saw performance and can cause greater kick back risk. Because the saw is modified, the manufacturer has less liability for damages. I highly beleive if a person is seriously injured by a modified saw, a chainsaw manufacturer will blame the modifications.

Do any chainsaw porters, who modify for monetary gain, have concern about creating liability, to themselves, with these modifications?

 

[spacemule]

Do any chainsaw porters, who modify for monetary gain, have concern about creating liability, to themselves, with these modifications?

Think of the type of mentality that modifies chainsaws for money and your question will be answered. :hmm3grin2orange:

 

[Roanoker494]

I would almost 100% guarantee that modifying a saw would release the manufacturer from damage liability, they can not be held responsible for the quality of someone else work. I don't believe any saw builder would admit there is a chance of injury because of creating liability, plus I would not figure that a properly built saw is any more dangerous than a factory built saw. Now if you build a real "hotrod" saw and slap a cheap Golf piston in it..........

 

[redoakneck]

Blame the high octane gas, the file that sharpened the chain, the tree owner....

Give me a friggin break, you buy or pay to have a chainsaw modified then you use it at your own risk, plain and simple. You can not blame the maker or modifier of a chainsaw for an injury, same as owning a gun. Inherent risks in everything so quit playin the blame game and costing me more and makin me peel all the stupid warning stickers off of stuff. It is people like that that called for the warning on the 5 gallon bucket so your kids don't drown in it!!!!


How darn dumb you gotta be to blame the saw for an accident???? 8 up with the D A is costing this country its greatness,


well gotta go call my attorney, tripped over that flat, level spot, gotta be someones fault

 

[Boleclimber]

It is clear the warranty is out on any modified saws. I am talking about human bodily injury from kickback or other rapidly moving/projectile saw parts.

I would disagree about a modified saw being less dangerous. My ported saws kick back harder and respond to throttle very differently than a unaltered saw. When applying throttle I can feel the saw body torque the bar tip in an upwards fashion significantly more with a un-modified unit.

 

[sunfish]

Are you a lawyer?

 

[HILLBILLYREDNEC]

Bole you bring up good point. What if the guy that had the saw modded dies and the saw is sold to some unknowing person. Modified equipment can be tricky to resell. The issue of liability is well worth talking about. If you mod a preform a saw mod for profit your a business in most states. The modification of a saw for profit should come with a bill of sale with caveat that the saw is modified and has no warranty once it leaves the possession of the person doing said work.

 

[Boleclimber]

No, I am not a lawyer. I have witnessed enough unreasonable lawsuits through the years to know when liability becomes an issue with performed work.

 

[redoakneck]

It is clear the warranty is out on any modified saws. I am talking about human bodily injury from kickback or other rapidly moving/projectile saw parts.

I would disagree about a modified saw being less dangerous. My ported saws kick back harder and respond to throttle very differently than a unaltered saw. When applying throttle I can feel the saw body torque the bar tip in an upwards fashion significantly more with a un-modified unit.

Nobody ever said chainsaws are safe. Back in the day, saws never had brakes, but I guess the front porches were bigger and if you couldn't hang with the big boys and bad toys, you went to the porch.

Be accountable for you actions involving machines and tools, understand how they work, know how to service and check them so they operate properly-if you are careless with this stuff it will hurt you and it will be your fault.

 

[Boleclimber]

Hillbilly, I do believe that would help solve some liability issues. There is till situations of individuals arguing increased performance overpowered factory safety measures. Safety measures that the saw owner possibly believed would keep them safe.

There may still be some wiggle room in there for lawyers to harp on.

 

[Boleclimber]

Nobody ever said chainsaws are safe. Back in the day, saws never had brakes, but I guess the front porches were bigger and if you couldn't hang with the big boys and bad toys, you went to the porch.

Be accountable for you actions involving machines and tools, understand how they work, know how to service and check them so they operate properly-if you are careless with this stuff it will hurt you and it will be your fault.

I agree with this, however, chain brakes are a result of lawsuits and government regulations. Users were getting hurt because they believed they could run with the big boys when they belonged on the porch.

 

[Boleclimber]

I forgot to add safety chains. There is a reason safety chains have been developed.

 

[GASoline71]

Yep... to lull Harry Homeowner into a false sense of security.

Gary

 

[redoakneck]

I believe there is a place for safety devices on saws, but how do you blame an injury on the equipment. Barring an engine exploding or some freak accident do to crappy metal I just can't see a saw causing injury if used properly. It is not like the space shuttle.

How many people have been hurt by a chainsaw and think it was NOT there own negligence.

 

[Roanoker494]

My first post was regarding weather a modified saw was more likely to blow apart and cause injury. Kickback is caused by putting the bar and chain into particular situations and can very well happen even if you were turning the chain with a hand crank. Could the kickback on a "hotsaw" be faster and more powerful? Yes it very well could. Is a "hotsaw" more likely to kickback? I don't see how it could be.

 

[john inglis]

Liability

CAN YOU SUE A LAWYER FOR CAUSING STRESS WHEN THEY SUE YOU . SURELY THEY ARE LIABLE FOR THE EFFECT ON YOUR HEALTH . ESPECIALLY AS THEY WOULD BE WELL AWARE OF THE EFFECT STRESS CAN HAVE FROM OTHER CASES WHERE THEY HAVE SUED OVER THE EFFECT OF STRESS.

 

[WoodChuck'r]

That's where time has to take it's place and if the saw holds up over a long amount of time, then the saw is good. But how much is enough time...? A month, a year, two years...?? There's no official answer....

 

[Guido Salvage]

CAN YOU SUE A LAWYER FOR CAUSING STRESS WHEN THEY SUE YOU . SURELY THEY ARE LIABLE FOR THE EFFECT ON YOUR HEALTH . ESPECIALLY AS THEY WOULD BE WELL AWARE OF THE EFFECT STRESS CAN HAVE FROM OTHER CASES WHERE THEY HAVE SUED OVER THE EFFECT OF STRESS.

There is a theory of law (termed malicious prosecution) that allows an individual to bring a cause of action against someone who previously took legal action against them and loss. In this case, the plaintiff would be the former defendant in the case and the person or lawyer who originally brought the case would be the defendant.

In order to prevail in a case such as this, the plaintiff must demonstrate the following:

A) They were the defendant in the original case and won,
B) The party in the current case (defendant) played an active role in the first case,
C) There was no basis for the original suit, and,
D) The case was brought or continued for an improper purpose.

It would be a tort action in civil court where the plaintiff would seek monetary damages and is based on abuse of the legal process in the original case. There are nuances to this type of scenario and with having to prove all four elements there is a high bar to overcome to win.

 

[one.man.band]

being an old school thinker like me: there is a term called 'inherent risk.' which simply means that purchasing or acquiring something by choice.....automatically makes you a party to assume liability. just how much of that liability is decided by a judge.

unknowingly purchasing something without seller disclosure is also a liability. also decided by a judge.

if in doubt...just modding it yourself could solve that question.

with seller disclosure, and choosing to acquire by buyer, i would tend to think that the liability would be nil to the seller. but yet again a judge decides these matters.

rpms

 

[spacemule]