Handbrake failure compensation

[czechplastik]

I think it would be difficult to prove the handbrake was at fault. Of the few that have failed there was never any evidence of fault when they were examined. Unless someone can produce some damning independent evidence no court case will float.

[Dalboy]

Originally Posted by czechplastik

I think it would be difficult to prove the handbrake was at fault. Of the few that have failed there was never any evidence of fault when they were examined. Unless someone can produce some damning independent evidence no court case will float.

If there is no evidence of faults what are they going to improve with recall??

[Brodick]

Originally Posted by czechplastik

I think it would be difficult to prove the handbrake was at fault. Of the few that have failed there was never any evidence of fault when they were examined. Unless someone can produce some damning independent evidence no court case will float.

I agree

[Brodick]

Originally Posted by minisweeper

I for one am not particularly keen on this idea. Then again I also dont park in gear. I know they're both well intended but old habits die hard. I really would expect the handbrake to hold my 20k car wherever I leave it.

Show me a car manufacturer that states their cars handbrakes will hold on a hill without any back up ( i.e car also left in gear)

It is not an Idea it is the highway Code!!!

If you park on a hill and do not leave your car in gear (as well as applying the handbrake) and your car rolls ( be it a civic or a BMW 5 series)
I would of thought that the police would be wanting a word ( o.k the handbrake should not fail but if it does the gears should still hold the car)
same with an insurance company if someone's hanndbrake fails and the car rolls and causes damage to the car - do you think the insurance company is going to pay out if you have broken the highway code by not having the car in gear aswell ?

CZ would I be right in that assumption ???

[Dimplyred]

Originally Posted by Topcat

In reality how many cars do you see parked on a road with a slope, with their wheels turned into kerbs? I looked today whilst out and I actually didnt see any!!

I know people are divided about leaving the car in gear but again how many people actually do this? I dont know anyone that does it (this forum excluded) and in 24 years of owning a car I have never done it until now as it has never been an issue.

I actually do leave my car in gear, when parked and yes it is good practice. I can't think of anyone I know who turns their wheels into the kerb, and personally I wouldn't dream of doing it and damaging my wheels, but that's just me, I CAN see the logic in it.

The point is we shouldn't have to do this, we are being told to do it because of a fault with an essential part of the car. The fact that a certain persons hasn't faulted doesn't mean it won't. Honda have obviously identified a design or manufacturing fault and feel it is important to address it, if not immediately rectify it. I'm sure it's not a decision they have taken lightly. It is potentially a very serious fault. I am not lecturing you because I know you have the same opinion as me, but I have tried telling this to Mr Honda this afternoon and it's like banging my head against a brick wall. You know who I mean!!!

[Brodick]

Originally Posted by Topcat

I would say to anyone who has a civic and it has rolled away causing damage they should definately follow this up. Start by calling Trading Standards they will give you the number to call to lodge a complaint against Honda and then take it from there.

In turn admitting that they have not adheard to the Highway code ??
I think the authorities will take a dim view of the handbrake failure
but they will also look into why the highway code was not adheard to

There is no defence to that

[czechplastik]

Very few parts of the HW code are legal requirements. Those marked as must are legislated for. The rest are guidelines.

If someone claimed the handbrake had failed and caused an RTC the vehicle would be examined independently either through the Police or by the insurance company.

[Brodick]

Originally Posted by Dimplyred

I actually do leave my car in gear, when parked and yes it is good practice. I can't think of anyone I know who turns their wheels into the kerb, and personally I wouldn't dream of doing it and damaging my wheels, but that's just me, I CAN see the logic in it.

The point is we shouldn't have to do this,

Sorry DR but it is the Highway code which must me adheard to

[Dimplyred]

Originally Posted by Brodick

Sorry DR but it is the Highway code which must me adheard to

Isn't it an essential part of the handbrakes function that it must be capable of holding the car stationary???

[Brodick]

Originally Posted by czechplastik

Very few parts of the HW code are legal requirements. Those marked as must are legislated for. The rest are guidelines.

If someone claimed the handbrake had failed and caused an RTC the vehicle would be examined independently either through the Police or by the insurance company.

so what are you saying CZ? If someone does not put their car in gear aswell - they are not commiting some sort of an offence ?

Surely the insurance companies would take a dim view of this though ?

[Dimplyred]

Originally Posted by Brodick

Sorry DR but it is the Highway code which must me adheard to

Would a car fail an mot if it's handbrake could not do this???

[Dalboy]

Originally Posted by Brodick

so what are you saying CZ? If someone does not put their car in gear aswell - they are not commiting some sort of an offence ?

Surely the insurance companies would take a dim view of this though ?

I don't think either of the recommendation's are compulsory in law just recommendations.

[czechplastik]

Originally Posted by Brodick

so what are you saying CZ? If someone does not put their car in gear aswell - they are not commiting some sort of an offence ?

It's not an offence no...

Not in the same way you could be prosecuted for having headlights out brake lights etc out.

The insurance company may well not like it, but I'm not entirely sure they could use it to avoid a claim.

[czechplastik]

Further to what I said earlier here is the introduction to the code, lifted from the book itself...

Many of the rules of the highway code are legal requirements, and if you disobey these rules you are committing a criminal offence. You may be fined, given penalty points on your licence or disqualified from driving. In the most serious cases you may be sent to prison. Such rules are identified by the use of the words MUST/MUST NOT.

Although failire to comply with the other rules of the code will not, in itself, cause a person to be prosecuted, the Highway code may be used in evidence in any court proceedings under the Traffic Legislastion to establish liability.

Rule 226. Parking on hills.

If you park on a hill you should (not must)...

- Park close to the kerb and apply the handbrake firmly

- Select a forward hear and turn your steering wheel away from the kerb when facing uphill

- Select reverse gear and turn your steering wheel away from the kerb when facing downhill

- Use 'park' if your car has an automatic gearbox



So while suggested, it is not a must and so not an offence you can be prosecuted for. Although as Broders suggested it may be something that can be used to establish liability.

[Dimplyred]

Originally Posted by czechplastik

Further to what I said earlier here is the introduction to the code, lifted from the book itself...

Many of the rules of the highway code are legal requirements, and if you disobey these rules you are committing a criminal offence. You may be fined, given penalty points on your licence or disqualified from driving. In the most serious cases you may be sent to prison. Such rules are identified by the use of the words MUST/MUST NOT.

Although failire to comply with the other rules of the code will not, in itself, cause a person to be prosecuted, the Highway code may be used in evidence in any court proceedings under the Traffic Legislastion to establish liability.

Rule 226. Parking on hills.

If you park on a hill you should (not must)...

- Park close to the kerb and apply the handbrake firmly

- Select a forward hear and turn your steering wheel away from the kerb when facing uphill

- Select reverse gear and turn your steering wheel away from the kerb when facing downhill

- Use 'park' if your car has an automatic gearbox



So while suggested, it is not a must and so not an offence you can be prosecuted for. Although as Broders suggested it may be something that can be used to establish liability.

It's just common sense really. But who would be most liable in the event of a claim, Honda who have admitted there is a problem with the handbrake or an individual who admits they have no common sense.

[gray52]

so you spend 2k on a nice set of rages, only to kerb them everytime you park on a slope???

[Dimplyred]

Originally Posted by gray52

so you spend 2k on a nice set of rages, only to kerb them everytime you park on a slope???

Exactly, it's not practical in real life and anyone with decent wheels or who gives a damn about them won't do it

[Pottsy]

When we use the car, we are obliged to operate it in accordance with the manual. So lets have a quick look at it...

How to put the brake on:

Pull the lever up fully. To release it, pull up slightly, push the button, and lower the lever.

If the person seeking compensation admitted to pressing the button when raising the lever, then this may harm their case. Though it would probably be argued that if pressing the button on brake application should harm the operation, then this should be mentioned in the manual.

Parking:

• If the vehicle is facing uphill, turn the front wheels away from the curb, and put the transmission in first gear.
• If the vehicle is facing downhill, turn the front wheels toward the curb, and put the transmission in reverse gear.

Now, if I were defending Honda in a court, it would be very easy to simply point to these paragraphs in the instruction book, and state that the car was not operated as instructed. And if I were the litigant, I wouldn't know what to say.

The parking brake is as likely to hold the car on the hill as the engine is to power you down the road. It should do and it probably will do, but it might not. So it's best to think of what may happen when there is a single point of failure. Especially when it's a single string powered notoriously unreliable device such as this.

Very sadly, I suspect that this may lead to a new placard fitted to the dash on all cars from all manufacturers (the parking brake is essentially the same in all cars) stating something like "When parked, leave in gear".

[Pottsy]

Originally Posted by Dimplyred

Exactly, it's not practical in real life and anyone with decent wheels or who gives a damn about them won't do it

The idea is that you point the wheels toward the kerb, but don't actually touch it. I habitually do this, and have scuff free wheels!

[Dimplyred]

Originally Posted by Pottsy

The idea is that you point the wheels toward the kerb, but don't actually touch it. I habitually do this, and have scuff free wheels!

I don't suppose you have Rage's fitted though. There is no margin for error with these wheels as the rim is level with the tyre sidewall and the sidewall itself is only three inches high. It would be very easy to over do it and hit the kerb. Whilst I am not denying it is good practice, it is something I choose not to do.