I wondered when this would happpen

[Thorne]

Attorney for trucker who careened off Bay Bridge says he will sue state

OAKLAND — An attorney for the trucker who plunged off the Bay Bridge, 200 feet to his death after his big rig went over the northern side of the S-curve, said today that he plans to sue the state for wrongful death.

Tahir Sheikh Fakhar, 56, of Hayward, was killed Nov. 9 while driving a load of pears over the bridge from Oakland to South San Francisco. He was working as a subcontractor for JM&R Trucking in Oakland, where the owner called him a "safe driver," according to published reports.

His brother, Naveed Anjum, also of Hayward, blames the poor design of the curve and the lack of warning signs and signals for his brother's death. At least 43 accidents had occurred at the curve from the time it opened Sept. 8 until the day Fakhar was killed, his brother said.

"They did open that bridge in a hurry," he said in the office of Oakland attorney Lew Van Blois. "They should have taken a few more weeks to make sure it was safe for the public."

The California Highway Patrol has said Fakhar was driving 10 mph over the 40 mph limit. His brother refutes that claim.

www.mercurynews.com/breaking-news/ci_14977945?nclick_check=1

While I haven't been in this particular area, I've been in areas that are extremely dangerous because of road construction. Uneven lanes caused by paving one side first (with a drop of almost 6 inches in some cases), badly "finished" paved areas, unmarked curves that are badly graded or too sharp for posted speeds. I've said several times that the state should/would be sued if I were in an accident caused by these conditions, mainly because they are practically impossible to see at night in some areas and while there might be construction signs up, the posted speed is too fast for the condition that the road has been left in. Should be an interesting outcome.

[BlackFox]

May 3, 2010 9:48:23 GMT -5 Thorne said:

While I haven't been in this particular area, I've been in areas that are extremely dangerous because of road construction. Uneven lanes caused by paving one side first (with a drop of almost 6 inches in some cases), badly "finished" paved areas, unmarked curves that are badly graded or too sharp for posted speeds. I've said several times that the state should/would be sued if I were in an accident caused by these conditions, mainly because they are practically impossible to see at night in some areas and while there might be construction signs up, the posted speed is too fast for the condition that the road has been left in. Should be an interesting outcome.

My wife spun a rental car out in Virginia in the rain, at night, with uneven pavement from repaving. Single car, no injuries. Uneven pavement was posted, but no reduction in speed limit. She said she was doing less than the posted speed when she lost it from the front right dipping down off the uneven pavement. The trooper wrote her a reckless driving ticket, and we had to drive all the way back up there to Christiansburg a month later for the court date. He reduced it to something that wasn't a damn misdemeaner after the trooper, in court told the judge that considering the conditions, it wasn't really "reckless".

[Conservator]

Not to stray off topic, but I've always said if I or anyone in my family were tp get injured in an accident at the 24/75 split, I'd have an attorney pull all the injuries & deaths caused by the dangerous conditions that the state has not made an effort to fix or make more safe. And I'm not generally a "sue" happy type person.

[Thorne]

Not off topic at all. I just find it ridiculous that these companies are allowed to leave the roads in such bad condition and allow traffic to travel on them. Or just as bad, those states that have allowed the roads to get in such bad condition that they're practically impassable. Actually, I kinda find that last a bit ironic, considering that one of the worst states that I've driven through in regards to deteriorating roads is IL. There are stretches there where the foundation of the road has started to give way, all;owing deep grooves to form in the road. And these grooves can be extremely dangerous, especially in a truck, as the truck's wheels tend to follow the grooves. And IL has a fairly high fuel tax rate, which is supposed to be used solely for the purpose of road repair. Things that make you go "Hmmmmmm......"

[saldo1981]

May 4, 2010 3:48:20 GMT -5 Thorne said:

Not off topic at all. I just find it ridiculous that these companies are allowed to leave the roads in such bad condition and allow traffic to travel on them. Or just as bad, those states that have allowed the roads to get in such bad condition that they're practically impassable. Actually, I kinda find that last a bit ironic, considering that one of the worst states that I've driven through in regards to deteriorating roads is IL. There are stretches there where the foundation of the road has started to give way, all;owing deep grooves to form in the road. And these grooves can be extremely dangerous, especially in a truck, as the truck's wheels tend to follow the grooves. And IL has a fairly high fuel tax rate, which is supposed to be used solely for the purpose of road repair. Things that make you go "Hmmmmmm......"

IL does have some of the worst roads. I grew up there and I've seen pot holes big enough to swallow a compact car whole. I've been on parts of road where it was just common practice to have 1/2 or more of the car in the shoulder for 1/2 mile or so at a time because of the number of potholes.

Speaking of dangerous roads I drove South Crest the other day and all the bumps and uneven pavement made it difficult to maintain the speed limit at times, the car was thrown a bit by the larger bumps and this is in a Miata, I'd hate to drive that road in a bigger car and realize why people go 10-15 mph the whole way.