ATV & UTV Product Defect Claims
When an all-terrain vehicle or side-by-side malfunctions due to a manufacturing defect, design flaw, or inadequate safety warning, the consequences can be catastrophic. The CPSC has issued hundreds of ATV and UTV recalls over the past decade, covering defects ranging from fire hazards and steering failures to throttle malfunctions and brake system problems. Despite these recalls, defective ATVs and UTVs continue to injure and kill riders across Georgia and South Carolina.
At Roden Law, our product liability attorneys handle ATV and UTV defect cases against manufacturers including Polaris, Honda, Yamaha, Can-Am (BRP), Kawasaki, Arctic Cat, and CFMOTO. We retain engineering experts to analyze failed components and determine whether a defect caused or contributed to your crash.
Common ATV & UTV Product Defects
ATV and UTV product defect cases typically fall into three legal categories — manufacturing defects, design defects, and failure to warn:
- Throttle and acceleration defects: Stuck throttles, unintended acceleration, and electronic throttle control failures that cause loss of control
- Steering system failures: Power steering malfunctions, tie rod failures, and steering column defects that prevent the rider from controlling direction
- Brake system defects: Brake fade, premature brake wear, hydraulic line failures, and parking brake malfunctions that fail to prevent the vehicle from moving
- Fire hazards: Fuel system leaks, overheating exhaust components, and electrical shorts that cause engine compartment fires — a particular problem in Polaris RZR models
- Suspension and frame failures: A-arm failures, shock absorber defects, and frame cracks that cause loss of control or structural collapse
- Roll cage and restraint deficiencies: Inadequate roll cage strength in side-by-side vehicles, seatbelt failures, and door latch defects that allow occupant ejection during rollovers
Product Liability Law in Georgia & South Carolina
Georgia’s product liability framework under O.C.G.A. § 51-1-11 allows injured plaintiffs to pursue claims against manufacturers, distributors, and retailers in the product’s chain of commerce. Claims may be based on strict liability (the product was defective and unreasonably dangerous), negligence (the manufacturer failed to exercise reasonable care), or breach of warranty (the product failed to perform as warranted).
South Carolina’s Products Liability Act (S.C. Code § 15-73-10 et seq.) similarly imposes strict liability on manufacturers for defective products. Both states recognize the “consumer expectations” test and the “risk-utility” test for determining whether a product design is unreasonably dangerous. Georgia also has a 10-year statute of repose for product liability claims (O.C.G.A. § 51-1-11(b)), meaning claims must generally be filed within 10 years of the product’s first sale.
CPSC Recalls and Their Impact on Your Claim
A CPSC recall of the ATV or UTV model involved in your accident is powerful evidence in a product liability case. The recall demonstrates that the manufacturer itself — or the federal government — determined that the product posed an unreasonable safety risk. Our attorneys obtain complete recall files, including internal manufacturer communications, engineering analysis, consumer complaint databases, and injury reports, to build the strongest possible case against the manufacturer.
Preserving Evidence in ATV Defect Cases
If you suspect a product defect caused your ATV or UTV accident, preserving the vehicle is essential. Do not repair, dispose of, or allow anyone to modify the vehicle. Photograph it thoroughly, and inform your attorney immediately so we can issue a spoliation preservation letter to all parties. We arrange for independent engineering inspections of the failed component to document the defect before evidence is lost.
Why Choose Roden Law for ATV Product Defect Claims
Product liability cases against major ATV manufacturers require significant resources — expert engineering analysis, deposition of corporate witnesses, review of internal design documents, and often nationwide litigation coordination. Our firm has the experience and financial resources to take on these well-funded corporate defendants. We advance all case costs and work on a contingency fee basis — you pay nothing unless we recover compensation.