Penthouse Secondary Latching - SMB Service Bulletin

[BroncoHauler-SMB]

Happended to come across this service bulleting on SMB's website. Don't recall seeing it mentioned here.

http://www.sportsmobile.com/6_bulletins.html


Herb
=================================================

Penthouse Secondary Latching — Bulletin 7-7-10
To: Owners of Sportsmobile Converted Ford, Dodge, Chevy/GMC Vans with Penthouse Top
Sportsmobile Texas Inc. and Sportsmobile West Inc. were recently involved in a lawsuit. This lawsuit was the result of a very high speed triple roll-over accident with two fatalities. Four other occupants that were buckled-up suffered minor injuries, if any. These were the first fatalities in 50 years of converting thousands of vans with expandable tops. The vehicle involved in the accident was a "Ford Extended Body" van with a "4-Wheel Drive."

During the lawsuit allegations were made that one or more of the roof latches failed during the roll-over, resulting in the Penthouse Expandable Top separating from the van.

Out of abundance of caution and as a result of this most recent allegation, Sportsmobile has developed a secondary restraint for the roof. Sportsmobile will sell this secondary restraint to owners of Sportsmobile vehicles at its cost.

This secondary latching kit is available for Ford, Dodge and Chevy/GMC vans converted by Sportsmobile with a Penthouse Top. Sportsmobile will supply the parts at its cost of $80, including shipping. About one or two hours will be required for installation. Essentially the installation requires removing the three existing latches, adding shortened seat belts and reinstalling the latches with the seat belts. When driving, both the the old latches and modified seat belts will help secure the top to the van's roof. You can install at your own expense, or Sportsmobile will install at no charge for labor at any of its three locations by appointment. Your only cost will be $80 for parts
[thumb:cnbt14b7]10585[/thumb:cnbt14b7]
To order the Sportsmobile Penthouse Top Secondary Latching Kit, print out or use this order form PDF.

Warning: Do not drive at excessive speeds, make abrupt maneuvers or drive under the influence of illegal substances. Always stay buckled up.

 

[billwilson-THOR]

Good to know

LOL charging $80 !

 

[BroncoHauler-SMB]

I feel sorry for the occupants of the van, but if rolling over multiple times, I'm not sure what you expect the fiberglass PH roof to do for you.

I'm guessing too many lawyers looking for too much money was the reason behind this "fix."


Herb

 

[WVvan-SMB]

Four other occupants that were buckled-up suffered minor injuries, if any.

I'm trying to read between the lines here but does this mean that the two fatalities weren't buckled up at all?

 

[Ford_6L_E350]

To me it read like the two fatalities weren't buckled in. Maybe the key part was 'VERY HIGH SPEED'. For me, in a 10,000# lifted van, anything over 70 is high speed, very high speed would be 85+. And then the penthouse top gets blamed for the deaths?

I'm sorry some had to die. Sometimes Darwinism wins out.

Mike

 

[LenS]

Lets see:

High speed.....50% at fault
Not buckled up....49% at fault
Modified vehicle MUST some how be at fault.... 1%

So they ask for $100 million and although they probably were 99% at fault Sportsmobile would be liable for 1% of the $100 million or $1 million. Sportsmobile probably was also required to show "good faith" and put out a field fix for a high speed, no seat belt, multiple roll over accident.

Ah, the American legal system.

 

[Silver350]

Hey WV Van, I'm guessing a couple of people riding in the back were unbelted and ejected once the top came off. I wonder what percentage of the SMB price tag is insurance.

 

[daveb-SMB]

I'll bet our vans stack up a hell of a lot better than a pickup camper would in a similar situation. Sorry to hear about the injuries and deaths but I can’t believe how people put the blame on something that may have been caused by other factors. I wonder if this is a frivolous lawsuit or actually has some merit. Sounds like BS to me hearing the limited info on it. I could see if the latches failed letting the top lift off causing the vehicle to loose control and crash. How do other companies who build similar pop top RV’s latch down their tops?

My van is at SMB now but I’m not sure I want those installed.

 

[Scalf77]

I'll bet our vans stack up a hell of a lot better than a pickup camper would in a similar situation. Sorry to hear about the injuries and deaths but I can’t believe how people put the blame on something that may have been caused by other factors. I wonder if this is a frivolous lawsuit or actually has some merit. Sounds like BS to me hearing the limited info on it. I could see if the latches failed letting the top lift off causing the vehicle to loose control and crash. How do other companies who build similar pop top RV’s latch down their tops?

My van is at SMB now but I’m not sure I want those installed.

I'm with you, I don't think I could talk myself into having these installed. First it would be a pain to do both sets of latches, and even then they are using the same bolt mounts so a single point of failure still exist. But wait, with the seat belt latches maybe we can get it wired into seat belt circuit to tell us when we have forgotten to latch the roof down. Not that I've ever done that :b1:

 

[patrick51]

Certainly contrived in a legal office. Another example of why our US small business is going "south".

 

[BroncoHauler-SMB]

Don't forget to ask SMB to connect to the seat belt chime to let you know when you're unlatched.

 

[Jeffrey-SMB]

Lawyers make me puke. I'm sure that those bastards sued every single part manufacturer and component supplier to that van. Let's see now, a vehicle is speeding fast, a situation comes up fast that may or may not be their fault, the vehicle rolls THREE times,and people are killed. Sounds pretty common. I seriously doubt that the roof latches killed those poor folks.

"People need to be responsible for their own actions". Sadly, only in a real world.

 

[Ford_6L_E350]

Lawyers make me puke. I'm sure that those bastards sued every single part manufacturer and component supplier to that van. Let's see now, a vehicle is speeding fast, a situation comes up fast that may or may not be their fault, the vehicle rolls THREE times,and people are killed. Sounds pretty common. I seriously doubt that the roof latches killed those poor folks.

"People need to be responsible for their own actions". Sadly, only in a real world.

Last time I was on a jury they wanted to give the plaintiff money without understanding the issue of 'FAULT'. I talked them out of it, but it was scary. One guy said he would always give the little guy money from the big company - didn't matter the circumstances. That is what attorneys live for - jurors who don't know or understand but think the big company can afford it. Get 10-12 of those on a jury and you can get a big cash award.

Don't shirk your civic duty, we need people with smarts on juries or we will all pay for it.

Mike

 

[WVvan-SMB]

When I got home from work today there was a letter from Sportsmobile. It references the service bulletin. I'm assuming everyone will get one of these. Two things I notice.

This lawsuit was the result of a very high speed triple roll-over accident.

The bolded text is in the original.

WARNING: DO NOT DRIVE AT EXCESSIVE SPEEDS, MAKE ABRUPT MANUVERS OR DRIVE UNDER THE INFLUENCE OF ILLEGAL SUBSTANCES. ALWAYS STAY BUCKLED UP.

Again the bolding and uppercase are in the original.

So the people in the accident may have been speeding, making sudden lane changes while high and unbuckled? Not trying to be funny. I'm wondering if that's the read-between-the-lines message here because Sportsmobile's lawyers wouldn't let them come right out and say it. Notice how if this was a general safety message it should have also included something about not being "under the influence of alcohol" but it doesn't.

Of course I might be reading too much into it. Then again ..... 6:

PS. When I went to type this in my spellchecker indicates they misspelled MANUVERS (maneuvers).

 

[SMBDAD]

There was a guy on this site that had mentioned the fatality law suit last year. I thought they were bringing the GVW into the equation. I would like to know how that all turn out.

 

[daveb-SMB]

I not too sure, but anything that’s not OME could point toward a cause or partial cause of a wreck. So even the heavier duty tires and rims could be considered as something illegal in the judicial world. With that in mind, all the added equipment and the suspension upgrades that SMB makes to handle that weight are also non-OME. I wonder what other RV companies do about the GVWR. I would think that SMB had some type of testing done to gain some kind of variance in regards to extra weight. My van “empty” came in close to GVWR. Guess it might depend how frivolous our wonderful system lets it get.

 

[Ford_6L_E350]

When S-K did my 4x4 conversion they uprated the FAWR, RAWR and GVWR. Now I'm barely legal.

Mike

 

[jage]

Seems like I've said this before in a discussion of roll cages for these vans, but I'm pretty sure every fatality I've read about re: Sportsmobiles is directly related to wearing a seatbelt. Not that I like nanny stickers, but adding a sticker like Jeep has (even on a hardtop):

WARNING
THE TOP AND DOORS ON THIS VEHICLE ARE DESIGNED FOR PROTECTION AGAINST THE ELEMENTS. DO NOT RELY ON THE TOP AND DOORS TO CONTAIN OCCUPANTS WITHIN THE VEHICLE OR TO PROTECT AGAINST INJURY DURING AN ACCIDENT.
WEAR SEATBELTS AT ALL TIMES

Seems like a better idea then these seatbelts which are tied to nothing but the latch bolts, which are going to fail at some point, which brings us back to a full cage and tying the roof to it somehow so the fiberglass roof won't then fail...

Besides, we already know the people who need this won't bother to buckle a seatbelt... :b8:

 

[Bigfoot-THOR]

I know this is an old thread, but I happened to come across this article a few days ago:

(not sure if same crash...)
http://www.tirereview.com/Article/85680 ... dable.aspx

In addition to the jury verdict, the Barber estate received another $8.3 million settlement with other defendants.

Wonder if the other defendants were SMB?

If you Google a bit you can find pictures of the crashed van, not pretty.

 

[jage]

Is this the same SMB rollover from Mexico? It doesn't sound like the same accident, and I'd assumed that the Mexico rollover where one of the beltless passengers was thrown from the vehicle was the origin of the latching lawsuit.