I purchased a travel trailer and the axles failed. They were replaced under warranty with the same axles. They failed again. I replaced them with bigger axles thinking the company over-rated them (I did not overload them). They failed as well. They are still under warranty. The company refuses to honor the warranty. I have found proof that these axles should never have been used in a tri-axle application (as they are on this trailer). I need to get back the money I spent replacing axles, bearings, wheels and tires as well as getting a set of axles that will not fail. I am having trouble finding the correct lawyer and not sure of jurisdiction. Trailer made in Indiana (as a good many are), but I live in Ohio.
-
FreeAdvice has a new Terms of Service and Privacy Policy, effective May 25, 2018.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our Terms of Service and use of cookies.
Failure to honor warranty
- Thread starter run4bear
- Start date
Accident - Bankruptcy - Criminal Law / DUI - Business - Consumer - Employment - Family - Immigration - Real Estate - Tax - Traffic - Wills Please click a topic or scroll down for more.
So the company replaced the axles under the warranty. This good. But then they failed again;
Did the company who hold the warranty of the travel trailer- perform the work installing the bigger axles? If not, you probably voided the warranty.
By performing work independently without contacting the warranty company, you probably voided the warranty.
See 'you probably voided the warranty' above.
They were contacted and the axles were replaced per warranty. The warranty is NOT voided. All my ducks are in a row. I have proof on everything, it has cost be $20,000 in actual expenses and I still have axles that will continue to fail. Competing companies ALL state (in their manuals) these axles will ALWAYS fail in a tri-axle application. The Trailer company SHOULD have known, but the Axle company also "failed to warn". I am having a horrible time finding a lawyer who will take this case. I has an expert lined up and all documentation. Some lawyers said I have to sue in the axle company's state, others say in that state where I lived at the time of purchase, yet still others say the jurisdiction is the state of purchase. (1st trailer bought online and I picked it up, 2nd trailer delivered to me outside my state of residence.
I even contacted the DOT because I have had repeated wheel separation which could injure or kill someone else. They have nothing of value to say.
I am going batty over this and well as broke!
davidmcbeth3
Senior Member
Well if your use of the item does create a death, you will certainly be charged with at least manslaughter ... as you know this may occur. Because you just told DOT this may happen.
What a WONDERFUL piece of advice! Do you not think I already KNOW that? The FACT is that I make my living driving this rig and have been wrung dry. No money to repair or replace anything further. I DO exercise due diligence and inspect daily, limit my load, etc. ALL of which costs me time and money.
Bottom line, if you don't have money you are screwed. How about some information that would help me get BEYOND this.
So far every lawyer I contact says I need to sue in different jurisdiction. Are they just blowing me off?
What IS the proper jurisdiction? Ohio (where I resided) Indiana (where the trailer was made) or Georgia (where I bought the first trailer) or Florida (where I bought the second trailer.)
justalayman
Senior Member
\You are planning on suing Dexter Axle?
Why? They have done nothing wrong here. Your target is the trailer manufacturer and them alone.
So, who is denying warranty coverage? You speak as if it is Dexter. If so, then they are not incorrect in denying coverage. The trailer manufacture is who designed the trailer so they are who is responsible for any defective engineering.
Why? They have done nothing wrong here. Your target is the trailer manufacturer and them alone.
What do you mean Dexter failed to warn. Have you seen their website? The trailer manufacturer is the entity that designed the trailer using 3 Dexter Torflex axles. If Dexter says not to do it and the trailer manufacturer went ahead and did it, it's on the trailer manufacturer.
Really? If so, I suspect Dexter has viable suit against every one of them. ALWAYS is a big word and if in properly engineered system, they will not fail. The problem I see is that manufactures do not properly engineer the system. There are many cases of triple axle set-ups with no load sharing, both torsion axles as well as air and leaf spring set-ups, that have untold miles of use on them without failure. Leaf spring mounted axles themselves do not in themselves load share any more than a torsion tube axle unless the suspension is designed to allow for such load sharing. There is much more to load sharing suspension systems than whether it is a dual or triple axle and whether it is a torsion tube or leaf spring or air spring suspension.
So, who is denying warranty coverage? You speak as if it is Dexter. If so, then they are not incorrect in denying coverage. The trailer manufacture is who designed the trailer so they are who is responsible for any defective engineering.
Last edited:
No, it is NOT Dexter I am after. It is a competing company. It is the competing company that has no such warning in their manual or warranty. It is Dexter that informed me potential problems and it is one of the Dexter engineers that will testify to the problem.
Perhaps the trailer company is also liable as they SHOULD have known since they use many different axles, including Dexter.
So, I am still not knowing WHERE I should sue: The place of manufacture?, The place of sale? (2 trailers, same problem with the axles on BOTH trailers, I had an Ohio address when I purchased each trailer.) But the first trailer I found online at a GA dealership. It was taken to the GA facility of the trailer manufacturer for additions where I picked it up. The second trailer was purchased from a Florida dealer because he had the ONLY one is the USA available at the time and had it shipped (at my expense) to me from the Indiana factory.
justalayman
Senior Member
Oh, so Dexter says to not use THEIR axles in a triple set-up. That doesn't mean anything in regards to any other manufacturer.
as to where to sue:
given the fact I do not believe you are even considering the proper defendant, I don't think it will matter since the entity you sue would likely get this dismissed after initial review. If you want to sue the entity that might be liable (and what you have provided does not prove there is any inherent problem. In fact, I can show you many designs that do not have any load sharing characteristics among a double or triple axle design with no unexpected failure rate), I would still suggest suing the manufacturer in their home state. If you don't, you have to deal with more than one state due to the various states involved in the purchases and following actions. That could mean multiple suits which would be alleviated if suing the manufacturer in their home state.
you purchased nothing from the axle manufacturer so you have no claim against the axle manufacturer. Your claim, if there is a valid one, is against the trailer manufacturer since that is who built the trailer with the questionable triple axle torsion bar suspension. The axle manufacturer has no duty to inform you that there is (if there actually is) a problem with using them in a triple axle design, at least unless they designed the system for the trailer manufacturer. The trailer manufacturer is liable for the trailers they designed and built.
as to where to sue:
given the fact I do not believe you are even considering the proper defendant, I don't think it will matter since the entity you sue would likely get this dismissed after initial review. If you want to sue the entity that might be liable (and what you have provided does not prove there is any inherent problem. In fact, I can show you many designs that do not have any load sharing characteristics among a double or triple axle design with no unexpected failure rate), I would still suggest suing the manufacturer in their home state. If you don't, you have to deal with more than one state due to the various states involved in the purchases and following actions. That could mean multiple suits which would be alleviated if suing the manufacturer in their home state.
Well, the trailer manufacturer's warranty defers warranty of component parts (like refrigerator, etc., including the axle company) to the warranty supplied by that manufacturer of that component part. I DO have a manual from the axle company stating their warranty (which excludes "incidental and consequential" damages.)
I also think the trailer manufacturer should also be held responsible since they use Dexter axles and Dexter does give the warning in their applications manual. Both the axle company and the trailer company are in Indiana. Both exclude "incidental and consequential damages" in their warranty. I am told (I do not know for sure) that Indiana does not allow for "incidental & consequential" damages and Ohio does. The fact that I had NO reason to expect these axles to fail (I have towed trailers for 30+ years with NO similar mishaps - all of them dual axle), can prove they were not misused, abused or overloaded and the repeated failures (which might NOT have occurred if I was told these axles would continue to fail instead of just being denied the warranty claim) and was allowed to replace the failed axles with the same type of axle which caused more damages (blown tires, bearing & seal failures, lost wheels, damaged spindles) costing me in excess of $20,000, I have a great deal of "incidental and consequential" damages. Plus I will need to have another set of axles that will not fail, or a complete replacement of the trailer with one that can accommodate axles that will not fail.
So, the real question now is: where do Indiana & Ohio stand on claims for "incidental and consequential" damages?
I also forgot to mention that ALL of the other companies that make torsion axles that I have contacted say that these axles should never be used in a tri-axle application. So it is NOT just Dexter, they ended up being the most helpful when doing my research. And, as we all know, are very respected in the industry.
Last edited:
justalayman
Senior Member
are you claiming the axles are defective or the application is improper? If claiming the axles are defective, you might go after the axle manufacturer. If you are claiming the design is defective, you go after whomever designed this which is most likely the trailer manufacturer.
but anyway, why is the axle manufacturer refusing to honor the warranty?
but that is concerning Dexter axles only. If yours did not have Dexter axles, it is irrelevant.
but, at best, you lived in Ohio. From what you have posted, you did not have any actual dealings in Ohio. Not sure how you intend to argue Ohio jurisdiction only due to your address.
The big question I have is: why did you pay to have axles installed? Was it at the advice of the dealer, trailer manufacturer, or axle manufacturer?
you have actual damages, not consequential damages. The damages you claim are costs to repair damage caused by the failure. Consequential damages are damages incurred as a result of the failure such as when you could not use the trailer which cause you a loss of income or if somebody was injured due to a wheel flying off.
from the UCC:
The axle manufacturer REPLACED the first set of axles telling me upon inspection that the arms were bend and therefore there was a defect. On the next set they said the arms were bend and that I had to have overloaded them and would not replace them under warranty. They would have replaced them AT MY COST, however I refused and bought heavier rated axles (before I found out about the mis-application) hence I continue to have the same problems, thinking that perhaps the axle company over-rated their axles. I know better now.
I have not overloaded them (except by mis-application) and the statement from the Dexter Applications manual explains WHY they were overloaded - BUY THE USE OF THESE AXLES IN A TRI-AXLE APPLICATION. On a certified Cat Scale they were NOT overloaded.
So I suppose the trailer manufacturer is more liable. They SHOULD have known because they also use Dexter axles, however, the axle company that made the axles I have, to the best of my knowledge, has NO such warning about the use of these axles in a tri-axle application. So, they also should have known and "failed to warn" as well as "fail to honor the warranty?"
Thank you for explaining "incidental and consequential" damages. Now I know I can ask for reimbursement for at least what I had to pay for staying on the road. Now I wonder about punitive damages, since the axle company AND the trailer company SHOULD have known, failed to warn me, and continually allowed me to use the same axles THREE TIMES. I have lost wheels (some never found) and they could very easily have caused harm to someone else as well as to me if more than one wheel at a time was lost. I must have been just lucky. This entire rig on the Cat Scales is over 40,000 pounds. I lost time on the road, had the annoyance or waiting for parts and repairs. I was lucky enough to be "between" events I attend, so the loss of income was minimal, but the stress has been very high.
Since I discovered the cause, I have taken EXTRA PRECAUTION in my inspection before any trip and immediately corrected anything that I saw starting to fail (such as uneven tire wear - I have had the tires flipped on the rims several times - they all would wear to the inside - or leaking seals - I had bearings repacked, seals replaced, and - at my expense - bought all the necessary replacement parts to keep on hand since NONE of the parts were available anywhere except from the axle company - contrary to their claim that their dealers carried the parts. And that was only after I had a failure and had to sit at a shop for 5 days waiting for parts to arrive.
So, it sounds like an Indiana attorney is the way to go? Now, I have contacted DOZENS of law offices and the only one I got to do anything wrote 10 day demand letters and failed to follow up. So I stopped paying him and filed a complaint with the bar association (he also violated our agreement - I had insisted on seeing every demand letter before it was sent - letters were sent (probably written by paralegals who did not know enough) that had incorrect facts and figures - to which the axle company responded with very slim offers of compensation and no other resolution as money alone will NOT solve the problem.) I fired him many months ago and simply cannot afford to spend thousands of dollars AGAIN to have some lawyer not listen or say they need to do research when I probably already have all the ammunition they need. What KIND of lawyer should I be searching for? I mostly get "not interested" or "we don't handle that kind of case."
I have not overloaded them (except by mis-application) and the statement from the Dexter Applications manual explains WHY they were overloaded - BUY THE USE OF THESE AXLES IN A TRI-AXLE APPLICATION. On a certified Cat Scale they were NOT overloaded.
So I suppose the trailer manufacturer is more liable. They SHOULD have known because they also use Dexter axles, however, the axle company that made the axles I have, to the best of my knowledge, has NO such warning about the use of these axles in a tri-axle application. So, they also should have known and "failed to warn" as well as "fail to honor the warranty?"
Thank you for explaining "incidental and consequential" damages. Now I know I can ask for reimbursement for at least what I had to pay for staying on the road. Now I wonder about punitive damages, since the axle company AND the trailer company SHOULD have known, failed to warn me, and continually allowed me to use the same axles THREE TIMES. I have lost wheels (some never found) and they could very easily have caused harm to someone else as well as to me if more than one wheel at a time was lost. I must have been just lucky. This entire rig on the Cat Scales is over 40,000 pounds. I lost time on the road, had the annoyance or waiting for parts and repairs. I was lucky enough to be "between" events I attend, so the loss of income was minimal, but the stress has been very high.
Since I discovered the cause, I have taken EXTRA PRECAUTION in my inspection before any trip and immediately corrected anything that I saw starting to fail (such as uneven tire wear - I have had the tires flipped on the rims several times - they all would wear to the inside - or leaking seals - I had bearings repacked, seals replaced, and - at my expense - bought all the necessary replacement parts to keep on hand since NONE of the parts were available anywhere except from the axle company - contrary to their claim that their dealers carried the parts. And that was only after I had a failure and had to sit at a shop for 5 days waiting for parts to arrive.
So, it sounds like an Indiana attorney is the way to go? Now, I have contacted DOZENS of law offices and the only one I got to do anything wrote 10 day demand letters and failed to follow up. So I stopped paying him and filed a complaint with the bar association (he also violated our agreement - I had insisted on seeing every demand letter before it was sent - letters were sent (probably written by paralegals who did not know enough) that had incorrect facts and figures - to which the axle company responded with very slim offers of compensation and no other resolution as money alone will NOT solve the problem.) I fired him many months ago and simply cannot afford to spend thousands of dollars AGAIN to have some lawyer not listen or say they need to do research when I probably already have all the ammunition they need. What KIND of lawyer should I be searching for? I mostly get "not interested" or "we don't handle that kind of case."
justalayman
Senior Member
no punitive damages. This is not the type of case it would be available.
now that you are aware there is a problem, any damages from the point of knowing what you know are on you. That is called "mitigating your damages" which simple means; you have to act to prevent any additional damages if you are aware your actions could result in additional damages.
like I said before, I do not believe your claim is against the axle manufacturer since this is not actually a warranty issue but a trailer suspension design defect. That means whomever designed the unit and spec'd the axles is who would be liable.
outside of the legal issues and to the design issues:
In this publication, you can see that this manufacturer or torsion bar type axles does not have a problem using them in a triple set up if engineered properly:
www.tiedown.com/pdf/b986.pdf
Personally, I see no difference between a tandem and triple axle set up if there are no equalizers other than in a triple, an engineer would likely tend to undersize the capacity of the axles due to the distribution over 3 axles instead of two. With no equalizers on a tandem, you can end up with the same loading problems as with a triple yet a tandem does not appear to be a big problem. Maybe because they do not undersize the axle capacity so much?
so, what the problem is, in my mind, is that there is no load sharing equalizer designed into the system and a likelihood of too small of a capacity rating of the axle. The engineer would have to consider the extreme loads applied in a condition where a single axle may be required to carry the entire load.
so, want a million dollar idea?
design a triple axle suspension where torsion bar axles are used and there are equalizers incorporated to prevent the problem you are experiencing.
can't sue for what ifs.
those would be the incidental or consequential damages they are denying.
now that you are aware there is a problem, any damages from the point of knowing what you know are on you. That is called "mitigating your damages" which simple means; you have to act to prevent any additional damages if you are aware your actions could result in additional damages.
like I said before, I do not believe your claim is against the axle manufacturer since this is not actually a warranty issue but a trailer suspension design defect. That means whomever designed the unit and spec'd the axles is who would be liable.
outside of the legal issues and to the design issues:
In this publication, you can see that this manufacturer or torsion bar type axles does not have a problem using them in a triple set up if engineered properly:
www.tiedown.com/pdf/b986.pdf
they do make a special note concerning the trailer being level or it will cause undue wear on the axle and wheels.
Personally, I see no difference between a tandem and triple axle set up if there are no equalizers other than in a triple, an engineer would likely tend to undersize the capacity of the axles due to the distribution over 3 axles instead of two. With no equalizers on a tandem, you can end up with the same loading problems as with a triple yet a tandem does not appear to be a big problem. Maybe because they do not undersize the axle capacity so much?
so, what the problem is, in my mind, is that there is no load sharing equalizer designed into the system and a likelihood of too small of a capacity rating of the axle. The engineer would have to consider the extreme loads applied in a condition where a single axle may be required to carry the entire load.
so, want a million dollar idea?
design a triple axle suspension where torsion bar axles are used and there are equalizers incorporated to prevent the problem you are experiencing.
If I could attach a document here, I would. I have a PDF from Tiedown engineering where they specifically state that the "do not recommend triple torsion axles". I had three 7000# torsion axles, but it is evident now that any application of tri-axle torsion axles will result in the problems I am having. 8000# axles are doing no better.
The is one company that does install and warranty triple torsion axles, it is called Morryde and they are also in Elkhart. It would cost me about $13,000 to get these axles installed and my trailer would be elevated as much as 12" higher off the ground. (may be a problem.) There is also the option of regular spring axles which would cause a rougher ride and potential damage to the trailer itself. Dexter also has a new type of Axle called a Flex-Ride that is similar to what is used on semi-trailers. I have done a lot of research. Again, a big expense.
Since the vast majority of my damages occurred BEFORE I found out about the problems caused by the tri-axle use of torsion axles, and I have taken due diligence in preventing any major problems or breakdowns. So most of my financial losses are prior yo my gaining this knowledge.
I have towed torsion axles trailers almost since their inception, but in a dual axle application and NEVER had a problem. You are looking at hundreds of thousands of miles. There is no doubt in my mind and I think I have enough evidence to directly relate my problems to the tri-axle application.
I agree with your assessment that the rated load-rating for the triple application should have been downgraded. I have asked the trailer manufacturer how they determine the trailer load rating. They simply said 3 7000# axles mean a 21,000 load rating. I have always been under that and based my purchase on that rating knowing my load.
I am now agreeing with you even more. They evidently should have known and were sloppy in their research (and assumptions.)
Since I have yet to find anyone else who has had this problem, my guess is that since this trailer was made under the assumption that the "average buyer" was only going to use it occasionally and they had no problems in the past, most people did not use their trailer full-time as I do and hence did not have the problem - or at least not to the degree that I have.
I drive 20,000 miles a year on these. I did the same with dual torsion axles on smaller trailers for at least ten years as well with NO such problems.
So in addressing the trailer manufacturer the options for resolution are:
1) reimbursement for damages and replacement with axles that will work (if even possible)
2) a different trailer (which I am not sure they make one that will address my needs)
3) they buy back my trailer (I also added about $20,000 in accessories: solar panels, charging system, satellite dish, generator for which I would no longer have any use.)
Then, frankly I am "off the road" for good with enough money to buy a house. I never intended to stay on the road full-time this long, but the financial drain has not allowed me to stop driving. I have a buyer for my business who would want to continue what I am doing (on a smaller scale) but I cannot legally or with a clear conscience sell them this trailer with the business without disclosing the problems. My reputation (and that of my business (32 years now) would be at stake as well as the liability for damages they would incur.)
The is one company that does install and warranty triple torsion axles, it is called Morryde and they are also in Elkhart. It would cost me about $13,000 to get these axles installed and my trailer would be elevated as much as 12" higher off the ground. (may be a problem.) There is also the option of regular spring axles which would cause a rougher ride and potential damage to the trailer itself. Dexter also has a new type of Axle called a Flex-Ride that is similar to what is used on semi-trailers. I have done a lot of research. Again, a big expense.
Since the vast majority of my damages occurred BEFORE I found out about the problems caused by the tri-axle use of torsion axles, and I have taken due diligence in preventing any major problems or breakdowns. So most of my financial losses are prior yo my gaining this knowledge.
I have towed torsion axles trailers almost since their inception, but in a dual axle application and NEVER had a problem. You are looking at hundreds of thousands of miles. There is no doubt in my mind and I think I have enough evidence to directly relate my problems to the tri-axle application.
I agree with your assessment that the rated load-rating for the triple application should have been downgraded. I have asked the trailer manufacturer how they determine the trailer load rating. They simply said 3 7000# axles mean a 21,000 load rating. I have always been under that and based my purchase on that rating knowing my load.
I am now agreeing with you even more. They evidently should have known and were sloppy in their research (and assumptions.)
Since I have yet to find anyone else who has had this problem, my guess is that since this trailer was made under the assumption that the "average buyer" was only going to use it occasionally and they had no problems in the past, most people did not use their trailer full-time as I do and hence did not have the problem - or at least not to the degree that I have.
I drive 20,000 miles a year on these. I did the same with dual torsion axles on smaller trailers for at least ten years as well with NO such problems.
So in addressing the trailer manufacturer the options for resolution are:
1) reimbursement for damages and replacement with axles that will work (if even possible)
2) a different trailer (which I am not sure they make one that will address my needs)
3) they buy back my trailer (I also added about $20,000 in accessories: solar panels, charging system, satellite dish, generator for which I would no longer have any use.)
Then, frankly I am "off the road" for good with enough money to buy a house. I never intended to stay on the road full-time this long, but the financial drain has not allowed me to stop driving. I have a buyer for my business who would want to continue what I am doing (on a smaller scale) but I cannot legally or with a clear conscience sell them this trailer with the business without disclosing the problems. My reputation (and that of my business (32 years now) would be at stake as well as the liability for damages they would incur.)
Find the Right Lawyer for Your Legal Issue!
Fast, Free, and Confidential
data-ad-format="auto">