Indonesian plane crash victims vs Boeing

[WarmNuts]

RELATIVES of two passengers killed in last week's Indonesian plane crash have expressed interest in joining a class action against the manufacturers of the doomed plane and its parts.. :ugh:

http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,21387560-2,00.html

what an absolute farce

[W.R.A.I.T.H]

Funny, been watching the thread on the topic for a few days, once someone dared to bring this posibility up and was immediately jumped on as prejudiced, ill-wisher and racist, how dare he accuse the lovely people of Indonesia with their guvment up front, of attempts of forgery of investigations and blame throwing. Now we're kind of getting there, and that would be the third such case from that country towards Seattle, wouldn't it?

I wonder if affairs in aviation over there are ripe enough for ICAO to step up and say something? Of course, no one will pressure Indonesia, but had it been another case, just out of curiosity, is there anything ICAO could do?

[DozyWannabe]

Because that poster's site was expressing borderline racist views against the Indonesians.

Getting grieving relatives to pursue class action suits against companies who may or may not have contributed to the accident is just SOP for lawyers of the bloodsucking variety.

Nothing to see here, move along people...

[Sallyann1234]

"Our investigation shows that there was a possibility of product defects in the Mandala accident, one involving the engine and another affecting the takeoff warning system, which was not working properly," he said.
If there were defects in components of such an elderly aircraft, I'd be looking at sueing the operator, not the manufacturer. But is course Boeing has more cash so they are the preferred target. As stated, SOP for lawyers.

[Ancient Observer]

Lawyers, huh!
However, after the Silk Air "suicide" accident, why did Boeing and the manufacturer cough up for an allegedly faulty rudder actuator?
The lawyers pursued the case, perhaps (I don't know) rightly so?

[theamrad]

As for the comments about the 'other site' - the reasons listed above are only a part - the more short version - because, I think, that individual is full of **** and their only purpose in coming to PPrune is at best scurilous. Surely most here don't appreciate that they contribute opinions etc, here in good faith - while some take that information (given in the course of reasoned debate/discussion etc), quote elements competely out of context and generally use it to fuel the most extreme of speculation(to be REALLY diplomatic) based on an agenda. After all - there is a warning:


As these are anonymous forums the origins of the contributions may be opposite to what may be apparent. In fact the press may use it, or the unscrupulous, to elicit certain reactions.


-------------------------------



There's something massively wrong here - even bearing in mind the manner in which SOME litigators think - with nothing concrete known about last weeks accident - either the lawyer concerned is seriously demented - or that element of the story is a complete invention.

DozyWannabe

just SOP for lawyers of the bloodsucking variety.........................
Nothing to see here, move along people...

i think you've hit the nail on the head with both statements!