I agree, ok but talking about idiot this guy is a first respoding idiot to make a statement that tow truck drivers are first responders too are you fucking kidding me FIRST RESPONDERS are first response to save lives like firefigters,cops, ambulance paramedics .Atow truck driver just saved my life he changed my tire .So if I help someone change their tire on the side of a road makes me a first responder , a tow truck drivers is a glorified REPO MAN
Yea I was so confused when she said that... like what did she just say?! She told on herself by making it obvious she knows absolutely nothing about cars. 🤣
@@kyoto32001 with a spare tire you are not to drive over 40 mph. if you have attended a driving class everybody knows the left lane is for passing or speeding over 60mph, she put her life at risk and cause major damage to her tire
Oh come on. This mom needs to encourage her daughter to grow up and take accountability. I had this same experience when I was 18- I drove to the closest place humanly possible. I know literally nothing about cars. But the roadside assistance TELLS YOU to go right to a shop. She's a whiner 5 years later.
My question is after hearing the noise why did she not stop and call them back and tell them what was going on so that they could return and fix the problem. She continued to drive the vehicle with the noise. That has nothing to do with age as one of the excuses her mom was giving, it's just common sense.
Similar thing happen to me but it was normal tires. I came off the motorway heard noise, car was shaking. I PULLED OVER and called the RAC I did not continue to drive that had never had that happen to me before, they told me 3 of my tires were missing bolts (they must have came off on the motorway) and I was lucky to be alive. I couldnt believe it. The people who did the tire..I went in like a 🌪 on them.
I suspect this young lady had to pass a few tire shops on the way home. There's no reason to deal exclusively with your dealership to get new tires. Above and beyond that she was going to Volvo due to noise that she didn't associate with that tire. Which makes me think she is perfectly happy to continue driving on that tire because she was prioritizing other noise over going to a tired shop asap
she also said she was driving in the left lane, which means she was likely going fasted rather than cautiously and slowly getting the car to the dealer.
She admitted to driving in the left lane on a donut . Hmmm I am pretty positive you aren't supposed to drive at high speeds while use a donut/temporary spare. I believe the suggested speed is around 50 mph. As Judge Milian said why did you not go to a tire store??? Let's just constantly complain about a weird noise and keep on driving it without getting the vehicle checked 😅 smh flipping sad/pathetic 😢😢
@@mrshappilymarried1 a full size spare yes but not a donut, a donut depending on manufacturer specifications are limited to speed 35-50mph (60-80kmh) and distance of more than 50-70miles. Look it up it's called space saver wheels
@@arinpoonpinrode1467 you can drive over 35 mph is my point and you proved it. I've seen with my own eyes people drove for days upon days on a Donut. Dumb luck I guess but I've seen it my whole life and I'm well over 40 yrs old😂
@@mrshappilymarried1 I say that some donut are limited to 35 some to 50 depending on the make and model of the wheels, mine are limited to 60kmh which is 37mph which I imagine would be brand as 35 in the US for simplicity. Oh by the way according to the plaintiff testimony she was driving to the dealer on a left lane on the highway doing the speed limit. Her testimony already indicate she exceed the limit of most if not all donut wheel. And with the cluelessness I bet the plaintiff just drive like normal when donut wheel require careful driving. It just exceed what the wheel can handle.
I am 50yrs old and been driving legally since I was 17yrs old! I know my cars inside out and always try and check your tyre air pressure, fluids and have a safety kit on your boot/trunk.
Anytime you have a tire change of any kind or reason, you should always double check your tire after a few miles to make sure all lugs are tight, errors can happen.
the issue is that, even if it’s on the company, she was negligent in multiple ways (ie: admitting she was in the left lane, driving a car after it made a weird noise & not even bothering to just check the donut). even if she wasn’t negligent, it would be hard to prove but she and her mom admitted that she didn’t know what to do in the situation. while you should know this before being allowed to drive, you can call someone or google it on a phone to know what to do. unfortunately she learned an expensive lesson & hopefully the company learned as well if they didn’t tighten it properly.
Well, she takes after mommy so judging by mommy's enraged reaction to the verdict, they'll probably keep being "victims" of their own negligent choices🤦
@@kyoto32001 it might be legal but it not safe driving on a donut on left land highway speed. Donut have recommended speed and distance limit. It wasn't design to handle normal car usage.
volvo may have had a defective doughnut tire that they provided for that car , but they want to blame the tow truck driver . and i totally believe that this plaintiff wanted to keep driving her car like she had a new tire on it but it came loose instead .
I think they didn’t tighten up the bolts right, but since she didn’t call them back, and then 3 days later the accident happened, so everyone’s questioning, what did she do in those 3 days…..so she lost. Btw, why in the heck wait 5yrs to sue?!
A donut is still a tire and the only way it came off was because they didn’t tighten it properly. The defendant tried to slick give an explanation of why it wasn’t tightened and the plaintiff had a letter from the shop saying exactly the reason why.
The tire still shouldn't come off even if it's a donut. I understand it's bursting but coming off that this means the lug nuts not tight enough in my opinion
She didn’t say she was driving it around. She said she drove it 5 miles home then 3 days later to the dealership. The donut shouldn’t come off just from doing that.
@@onetiredgirl2 not at high speeds! She admits she was in the high speed lane going speed limit (which means she was going faster). This was her fault. Not how you drive on a donut. She slept through that class.
@@maryelaine-blinstrubchambe6083 you must have read that in this post. It comes down to what you believe. No you can’t drive a donut for days but you should expect to go at at least the speed limit which is 65 in my state and fully in range for a temporary tire. If i pay a professional tow to change my tire he better put it on right. Difference is I don’t believe she was driving it for days or going excessively fast and you do. That was a crack pot decision.
WTF I’m a mechanic and this was definitely the defendants fault. The donut is temporary Yes but it wasn’t torqued right. If this was normal for donuts to do this DOT wouldn’t allow ppl to use them. The judge was wrong in this case I have customers that ride on donuts for weeks the only thing that should’ve been a issue is the donut has less thread so it will wear a lot faster if you drive for a while but shouldn’t come off.
The wheel bolts were obviously not tightened properly or it wouldn't' have fallen off, unless we're to believe that she loosened them and then drove it so that she could sue them.
Agreed... They are saying it is a temporary fix, that has nothing to do with the tightening of the lug nuts... The rim of the spare tire would still be attached to the car... Maybe the tire could have shredded but the lug nuts would still not be loose...
There are many reason lug nuts can get loosened on a tire, especially a donut. Like the judge said there are rules for operating a vehicle with donut, such as not exceeding a 50 mph and avoiding any possible hazards on the road. The plaintiff admitted to driving in the left lane, that along with any number of things could have loosened the lugs. That is why donuts are a temporary solution.
@VimaktheFEARLESS it appears you are not familiar with cars... When lug nuts are snugged to the recommended pound feet of torque, the lugs will not loosen... Even going 200 mph...
@@coreydbryant Nope I’d say I’m relatively familiar 😁. I’ve worked in roadside assistance for a while and had diligent family teach me not to drive in the fast lane on a donut.
volvo may have had a defective doughnut tire that they provided for that car , but they want to blame the tow truck driver . and i totally believe that this plaintiff wanted to keep driving her car like she had a new tire on it but it came loose instead .
Even if the donut was driven for the 3 days she claimed it was parked, the bolts should not have come off. At most she should have gotten was a flat. For a wheel to pop off, that comes from the bolts being loose.
@@dsmith4480 I've driven on donuts, many many times and for many many miles at normal highway speeds. Never once has any of them ever come off. Many mechanics I've been friends with and family that works on cars, never heard of this happening for anything other than loose bolts.
By her own admission, she drove in the left lane on a freeway "going the speed limit", which is faster than recommended on a donut. Given how seemingly clueless she is re car maintenance, that thing could have been flat or partially flat for a number of miles, at high speed. That will put unusual strain on the tire that could loosen the bolts. While the judge didn't go over on air, I suspect that the distances involved here were well over the ~50 miles that is recommended on a spare (and that would be at
@@dsmith4480 No you're delusional I don't should not do that I have driven on a donut for weeks I've also driven it on the highway there is nothing wrong with doing that to a donut they give you the recommendation because they don't want to be liable but they last wait longer than that and there's no way it should be going flat or falling off that's lugs and lugs only
I think defendant's company was responsible for the donut falling off and the damage to the car. Plaintiff lost because she waited too long to get it fixed. There's no reason you have to go to Volvo for a tire; any tire store can get you one same day. On another note, JM is constantly telling litigants that they should have gotten something in writing from a professional, and here this plaintiff has something in writing from a professional and JM says he was "guessing" and totally disregards it. The numbering of times JM contradicts herself in these cases is really surprising.
I love how she keeps blowing off the questions the judge asks her. She is very ignorant. She should have gotten a new tire right away. Like JM said, it's a temporary fix.The donut could be malfunctioning. Oh mom is a mechanic now. Ignorant people. Glad they lost.
Wouldn't go as far as calling folks ignorant, the donut not being properly tightened cause that car to fall to the ground ,it was not drivable after that. period !!!!
She got this wrong. I'm a mechanic and sometimes I think I need to pivot to accident attorney. The limits everyone is talking about with temporary spare tires is mostly based on the tread performance limitations. It's not designed for use above certain speeds because of heat build up and stopping/maneuvering performance. It's a safety hazard in itself but not from falling off the car. The rim itself is bolted to the hub like a normal wheel. IT SHOULD NEVER EVER FALL OFF or fail in any way shape or form. It was 100% improper installation (lug nuts not tightened) by the tow truck company. The oval or egg shaped holes are exactly what happens when the lug nuts are loose. If the tread separated from the rim, I'd say tough luck. Think about it folks. When you have a blowout, you don't lose the entire wheel. The tow company hand tightened the nuts but forgot to torque them down. The problem simply got worse over time. Tow company is disgusting. They know it was their fault. Literally no different than getting a tire replaced at a shop and it completely falling off a few days later.
The person who changed the tire didn't tighten the bolts enough. Same thing done to me, when I had a business do a seasonal tire change for me. Horrible sound on my way home (two minutes) - before I got home I stopped and called the shop, they said come back, I did. When I parked in their lot I went to the right rear tire and I could tighten every single bolt on the tire with my hand. All three of the other summer tires were fine. The guy who changed my tires looked like he'd just had a new one ripped for him by the manager as he apologized to me. She was a fool to keep driving though. She should have figured out - using her brain - that the brand new sound had something to do with the tire just changed. I think they are 50/50 responsible for the damage - except for the three day lapse and her driving it again. Was there no one around in her life who would have had the sense to go to the car and check the 'donut' and see if it was causing the sound? She's kind of clueless. But the guy citing cars speeding by is no excuse not to properly tighten the lug nuts.
"and then i have my life put at risk but its not his fault." -Not everything bad that happens to you in life is someone else's fault. 21 y.o. with this kind of thinking? Need to grow up and start taking responsibility.
We didn't have money to buy a tire new or used. Drove to work and back home for 4 days on a doughnut. So hey I say wasn't put on properly . I don't think JM made a right decision. But she's the judge
I disagree with the verdict. That tire could’ve killed that lady and then I’m positive the case would then be criminal. So Oftentimes proof is asked of the plaintiff in order for it it go in their favor ..she had it, directly from the Volvo dealership yet she still lost??? How? I’m glad she’s ok.
First, who drives on a donut for 3 days (I don’t believe for one second it was parked for 3 days), especially after it was making a “funny sound”?! Not only that, she then drives it on the freeway/parkway?! The audacity of the plaintiffs. Lastly, age and ignorance is not a defense. Yes, it may be unfortunate, but all that means is an expensive lesson & no one else is required to pay that but her.
I think it’s the tow company’s fault. Period. He admitted to them doing botched jobs just to hurry off the turnpike for their safety but didn’t think about the customer’s safety. SMH he clearly admitted on national tv. A donut should not just pop off period. Unless u are being really negligent. I don’t care if u drive it 50 miles.
Plantiff lost because she never contacted the company to check the noise coming from the tire. She admits in court that she doesn't know the rules of driving with a donut. She continued to drive it after admitting she knew something was wrong. She admitted to driving it in the high speed lane. Her car is a hoopdie, she could have gotten the tired replaced anywhere else but waited and drove there. That's why she lost. So I dont understand why everyone is up in arms over her losing?
What was presented wasn't expert testimony. The statement said "Spare was loose" AFTER the wheel fell off. No one is denying the wheel was loose, the issue is what caused it to be loose. If the woman didn't trust the repair after the noise, then wouldn't the logical thing be to check the spare that was just replaced? If she had done that as soon as she got home, called up the guy to complain, that'd be proof, not three days later from someone that doesn't know about tires, something even her mom admits to.
She didn't ignore it, but analysed it and found it to be not sufficient proof. Just having an expert testimony doesn't mean u must win the case. All testimonies need to be scrutinised.
So that experts isnt an expert but the people who put the loose tire on in dark in the fast lane are right. Thats crazy. She knows good and well she would not react that way if it was one of her young daughters. The judge is FOS some rulings.
This is most certainly a result of not tightening the nuts correctly. Even a spare tire needs to have the correct torque on the wheel nuts. There is nothing wrong with keeping a donut tire on for 3 days. As long as you follow the specifications of the donut tire. This is 100% the defendants fault
One of the few times that the plaintiff actually has a letter from the dealer stating that the tire was improperly installed and the judge still ruled against her. Go figure.
Right! She was totally on the side of the defendant for some reason. She had a letter from the damn dealership and it still wasn't enough...unbelievable Judge
The year it happened is crazy she’s taking them to court now. But seriously I’ve driven on a donut for I think a month. Lol This is why I think the judge was a bit off on this one.
@@dontlietomegivemethetruth2175 This may be true but it was perfectly fine until I was able to take it in for a new tire. Those were the days. Teenage living lol
@@JollyGoodJewWitch They definitely last longer than the recommendation cause I've also kept going on for a week or 2 at a time and I've driven on the highway with it and nothing went wrong I know they don't recommend it but there's no way it will fall off within the amount of time she said she drove unless it was installed wrong Or you've already done this multiple times on the same donut
Even if she could prove it was their fault, she absolutely would not have gotten the over $3k she was suing for... you can only collect damages up to the value of your cars worth and there is NO WAY her car is worth that!
@@DonziGT230 You're right they didn't because they didn't have to even get into that.. and I made an educated guess based off of the pictures of the car, it was clearly a fairly old vehicle, not in the greatest shape. Then I used my knowledge of cars and their value on the open market, plus watching this show (and others) with countless cases involving damages on cars and people suing for what it takes to fix the car, which ends up being more than the value of the car, not understanding how the law works by being capped at the value..
The nuts weren't tightened properly and therefore slowly loosened further until the wheel come off. Saying that why didn't she ring AAA while the car was parked at her home or even ask a family member or neighbour, or as the Judge said check the wheel herself, it isn't rocket science to check if a nut is loose. Roadside assist could even come out, she tells them the noise started after the wheel was changed, the first thing they would do is check how the wheel was put on.
the tow driver did his job which was to get her car home but after that its no longer their responsibility because they were not hired to REPAIR her tire , they were hired to get her car off the road but it was her responsibility to get the vehicle repaired and or towed to get repaired the next day or two .
Embarrassing that the mother somehow thinks that because the daughter is young and didn't know that could somehow translate into a lawsuit ... If you leave meat on the counter instead of refrigerating it and then cook it, the meat could be rotten. Will she sue the grocery store?
It’s obvious the guy didn’t put the donut on correctly. The lawsuit was warranted. They should have just did it sooner. A donut is designed to be driven on. If you can’t drive on a donut then why would the car manufacturer supply them.
@@gtsound12 The daughter had a duty to stop the car when she heard a weird noise, period. She chose to keep driving on a tire that was recently changed despite having *clear evidence* something was wrong. Sure - anyone can sue at anyone at any time, but the fact that she lost is evidence enough for me.
Ya I think this was wrong. It was lose when she was going home per the testimony. And yes if you have ever seen a wheel that was not tightened correctly you know it. The wheel does not loosen on its own if properly tightened.
The judge is always asking for evidence from an expert, and when a Volvo expert WRITES his down notes from his inspection, the judge minimizes it saying "a little note from Volvo", like it was something written on a 1x1 sticky note?!
I've driven with a donut for three months a couple of times. If a mechanic surmises what happened--his professional opinion should be respected. That was definitely shoddy workmanship This judge always leans toward the owner.
I believe she drove that car. He's not a good witness..he's focusing on the wrong issue..they always tell you to get to a tire shop immediately..he never said that..he kept talking about the danger to him..she would have lost with any judge..her mother didn't help help her case..they both acted clueless.
Sometimes the Judge makes bad decisions on cases. She wants experts to write a statement but when she gets the statement she dismisses it. I believe it wasn't tightened up enough. She should have been compensated. But she shouldn't have driven on it.
You don't need a law degree to figure out some of the cases. She's not perfect.im sure she makes bad decisions. I remember a couple of times when her husband didn't agree with her decision and voice his concerns to her. I'm sure she probably goes home at night and wonders kif she made the best decision. Most of the time she makes a good decision but there are times I believe she doesn't. You don't need to be a lawyer to decide some of the cases, you just need to be human..
21 years old and can’t change a tire ?? Doesn’t know what a donut is ?? Disregarding loud noise coming from vehicle and continuing to drive ?? Wow is all I can say
I think the judge was wrong. The wheel nuts are to be torqued. Even on a donut tire. The fact that the lug holes on the wheel had elongated indicates they were lose. A donut may explode, but the lug holes don't come off. Another case where Judge Milan should defer to an expert's diagnosis. She tends to think she's an expert at everything. Just the facts Ma'am
They feel as though she was driving it within those three days it was suppose to be parked. But they dont realize that if she did drive a donut for 3 days it still should not have popped off the bolts. The most it should have gotten was a flat
So here it is. I'm a certified automotive and heavy duty mechanic as well as marine engineer. 25 years certified. The tow truck driver should have first checked the air pressure in donut spare. They are typically rated at 60psi and NO ONE CHECKS THEM REGULARLY. next when he installed the lug nuts, he should have torqued the nuts with a calibrated torque wrench to factory spec. Last he should have walked around the whole car checking the other pressures as well. Not rocket science . I've never had a tire come off my whole career. Cheers friends.
plaintiff also stated she was driving in the left lane on her way to Volvo. No one drives at 40 MPH on the left one. This is the rated speed for donuts so she must have been driving way too fast.
The judge was wrong on this one. Bolts don't loosen on a tire that quick. Spare tires are temporary but you can drive on them longer than 3 days. The fact that the tire fell off the vehicle & the repair shop said it came off due to how it was put on makes the defendant guilty. Also the judges did not defend this verdict afterwards because they both know she was wrong on this one.
A donut definitely can last longer than 3 days, but you can’t drive on a donut like a regular tire. There are rules, don’t exceed 50mph and avoid road hazards. The plaintiff admitted to being ignorant of the rules for a donut, and ignorance doesn’t make someone else liable.
Mom saying she’s only 21…. At 21, I was married, with a child, living in a foreign country. You can’t figure out that if your car is making noise after a tire change you shouldn’t keep driving it? I get choked when people say age because you shouldn’t drive, then. If you’re not responsible or have enough life experience when things go wrong, then get off the road.
Ok, but it’s still the company’s fault if the tire was making noise, they didn’t put the doughnut on right. But, she still should have told them immediately when the car started making noise. I’m thinking she waited 3 days because that was all the appointments they had. I don’t agree with the judgement!
She definitely waited too long to file but that aside, a donut when installed properly doesn't just fall off or any of the assumptions the judge made . I cringe with every auto related case she rules on...
She should have immediately stopped and called again or at the very least counted her blessings for getting home as called someone from there. She put her own life at risk based on her mother's stupid advice. It's seems more likely than not she drove around on that dodgy wheel during the three days ignoring it's obvious defect or poor fitment. I have had 2 cars in my life with loose wheel nuts and neither just dropped off however they were clearly unsafe to drive. The donut isn't a proper wheel and I won't use one as I live too far from help
Emergency spare tire rules are simple: 50&50. That's no more than 50 miles and no more than 50 mph. But that's not because the tire will fall off if you exceed that; it's because it's hard on other components of your car, especially the transmission, and also because the car won't handle the same. If the lug nuts are tightened properly, the tire won't fall off, EVER. Also, the car won't sound the same with the emergency spare on. That tire will have a different hum, so it's perfectly normal to notice that it's making a different sound. And one more thing: the emergency crew should be telling that young lady the 50&50 rule. THEY put the tire on and they should confirm she knows how to use it, but once again, not because the tire is going to fall off if she goes too fast or too far. The info is so she drives at a safe speed and doesn't damage other components. Damaging other components would be all on her. It would be all her fault. But it absolutely is not her fault that the wheel fell off. That is 100% due to the negligence of the emergency crew.
Not true... You can do at least 60mph... Tire manufacturers would never limit someone to travel less than the accepted speed of being on the highway... Look at your spare tire for the information...
when using the "donut tire" there's a warning on the tire itself not to go over 50 miles per hour so it's more likely than not she was going too fast for the tire to handle.
@Sue Morpeth - Yerega why aren't you? They would not put that on the tires if that was not the case... Besides it has nothing to do with lug nuts falling off...
She killed me when she actually read "porperly" instead of just correcting it 🤣
"I think it's so ridiculous.." --- The ridiculous part is that the plaintiff waited FIVE YEARS to come to court!😐
That is the biggest issue...
I bet she suddenly needed the money
They go by the statute of limitations.
In Ohio, 4 years for an oral contract; 6 years for written.
Exactly who waits 5 years!? I wonder why she was so hard up for cash 5 years later??? Hmmm... Her mom is just as immature smh...
@@colleenknapp8626 that or hard up for cash all of a sudden. 😅
The plaintiff even admitted she was in the left lane that means she was in the passing Lane and most likely driving far too fast for a donut
I'm just going to say that age and ignorance is NOT a defense.
Right? She could ended up hurting herself or somebody else. Her mom seems more immature than she is.
I agree, ok but talking about idiot this guy is a first respoding idiot to make a statement that tow truck drivers are first responders too are you fucking kidding me FIRST RESPONDERS are first response to save lives like firefigters,cops, ambulance paramedics .Atow truck driver just saved my life he changed my tire .So if I help someone change their tire on the side of a road makes me a first responder , a tow truck drivers is a glorified REPO MAN
Thank goodness, another voice of reason 👍
No self-reflection on the part of the plaintiff. I guess it wasn’t too important when she waited five years. C’mon man.
Pressure from mom
Plaintiff SAID she was on the left lane... Clearly she was negligent with the spare tire 🤦
Yea I was so confused when she said that... like what did she just say?! She told on herself by making it obvious she knows absolutely nothing about cars. 🤣
@@Yeakeepgoing ??? everyone drives in left lane. what are you talking about?
driving legally in left lane. so what.
@@kyoto32001 with a spare tire you are not to drive over 40 mph. if you have attended a driving class everybody knows the left lane is for passing or speeding over 60mph, she put her life at risk and cause major damage to her tire
@@DiorpradaGucci I drive in LEFT LANE! Don't care about how YOU drive.
Oh come on. This mom needs to encourage her daughter to grow up and take accountability. I had this same experience when I was 18- I drove to the closest place humanly possible. I know literally nothing about cars. But the roadside assistance TELLS YOU to go right to a shop. She's a whiner 5 years later.
My question is after hearing the noise why did she not stop and call them back and tell them what was going on so that they could return and fix the problem. She continued to drive the vehicle with the noise. That has nothing to do with age as one of the excuses her mom was giving, it's just common sense.
Similar thing happen to me but it was normal tires. I came off the motorway heard noise, car was shaking. I PULLED OVER and called the RAC I did not continue to drive that had never had that happen to me before, they told me 3 of my tires were missing bolts (they must have came off on the motorway) and I was lucky to be alive. I couldnt believe it. The people who did the tire..I went in like a 🌪 on them.
It’s the defendants fault regardless the donut is designed to last until it gets a flat not come off
@@chuck9380 Irregardless, she's partly the blame. I am not going to continue to drive if I hear a noise.
I suspect this young lady had to pass a few tire shops on the way home. There's no reason to deal exclusively with your dealership to get new tires. Above and beyond that she was going to Volvo due to noise that she didn't associate with that tire. Which makes me think she is perfectly happy to continue driving on that tire because she was prioritizing other noise over going to a tired shop asap
she also said she was driving in the left lane, which means she was likely going fasted rather than cautiously and slowly getting the car to the dealer.
She admitted to driving in the left lane on a donut . Hmmm I am pretty positive you aren't supposed to drive at high speeds while use a donut/temporary spare. I believe the suggested speed is around 50 mph. As Judge Milian said why did you not go to a tire store??? Let's just constantly complain about a weird noise and keep on driving it without getting the vehicle checked 😅 smh flipping sad/pathetic 😢😢
Her ignorance is amazing. You can’t go over 35 on a spare.
Since when? Not in Texas 🤣People travel on major highways every day on a spare...every single day and they don't fall off and roll down the highway.
@@mrshappilymarried1 a full size spare yes but not a donut, a donut depending on manufacturer specifications are limited to speed 35-50mph (60-80kmh) and distance of more than 50-70miles. Look it up it's called space saver wheels
@@arinpoonpinrode1467 you can drive over 35 mph is my point and you proved it. I've seen with my own eyes people drove for days upon days on a Donut. Dumb luck I guess but I've seen it my whole life and I'm well over 40 yrs old😂
@@mrshappilymarried1 lol!
@@mrshappilymarried1 I say that some donut are limited to 35 some to 50 depending on the make and model of the wheels, mine are limited to 60kmh which is 37mph which I imagine would be brand as 35 in the US for simplicity.
Oh by the way according to the plaintiff testimony she was driving to the dealer on a left lane on the highway doing the speed limit. Her testimony already indicate she exceed the limit of most if not all donut wheel. And with the cluelessness I bet the plaintiff just drive like normal when donut wheel require careful driving. It just exceed what the wheel can handle.
I've seen people drive on a donut for weeks 😂
Factz ... that's me😂
And it's stupid and dangerous!
Really and you think thats ok
@@HotRod66796 nobody said it was. I was making a statement
And that's ok until it all goes wrong
"she was just a young person making poor decisions"... Mom:"I didn't think anything was wrong*... Acorn and tree
👍👍👍👍🤣🤣👍👍👍👍
Stop it 😮
Apple and tree. Lol.
I hate parents that make excuses for their children..."oh she was 21 ....." the judge "Your not 21"....... The judge got to the point
I am 50yrs old and been driving legally since I was 17yrs old! I know my cars inside out and always try and check your tyre air pressure, fluids and have a safety kit on your boot/trunk.
*You're
Anytime you have a tire change of any kind or reason, you should always double check your tire after a few miles to make sure all lugs are tight, errors can happen.
the issue is that, even if it’s on the company, she was negligent in multiple ways (ie: admitting she was in the left lane, driving a car after it made a weird noise & not even bothering to just check the donut). even if she wasn’t negligent, it would be hard to prove but she and her mom admitted that she didn’t know what to do in the situation. while you should know this before being allowed to drive, you can call someone or google it on a phone to know what to do. unfortunately she learned an expensive lesson & hopefully the company learned as well if they didn’t tighten it properly.
Well, she takes after mommy so judging by mommy's enraged reaction to the verdict, they'll probably keep being "victims" of their own negligent choices🤦
perfectly legal to drive in left lane. i do it all the time.
@@kyoto32001 it might be legal but it not safe driving on a donut on left land highway speed. Donut have recommended speed and distance limit. It wasn't design to handle normal car usage.
volvo may have had a defective doughnut tire that they provided for that car , but they want to blame the tow truck driver . and i totally believe that this plaintiff wanted to keep driving her car like she had a new tire on it but it came loose instead .
I think they didn’t tighten up the bolts right, but since she didn’t call them back, and then 3 days later the accident happened, so everyone’s questioning, what did she do in those 3 days…..so she lost. Btw, why in the heck wait 5yrs to sue?!
Should have been a split judgment. The donut should never fall off.
The owner of the tow seems to know nothing about towing.
A donut is still a tire and the only way it came off was because they didn’t tighten it properly. The defendant tried to slick give an explanation of why it wasn’t tightened and the plaintiff had a letter from the shop saying exactly the reason why.
The tire still shouldn't come off even if it's a donut. I understand it's bursting but coming off that this means the lug nuts not tight enough in my opinion
Any INTELLIGENT driver knows you don't drive around on the replacement donut!
Yes but that girl and her Mum are not intelligent .
A donut should last the ride home. Thats crazy
She didn’t say she was driving it around. She said she drove it 5 miles home then 3 days later to the dealership. The donut shouldn’t come off just from doing that.
@@onetiredgirl2 not at high speeds! She admits she was in the high speed lane going speed limit (which means she was going faster). This was her fault. Not how you drive on a donut. She slept through that class.
@@maryelaine-blinstrubchambe6083 you must have read that in this post. It comes down to what you believe. No you can’t drive a donut for days but you should expect to go at at least the speed limit which is 65 in my state and fully in range for a temporary tire. If i pay a professional tow to change my tire he better put it on right. Difference is I don’t believe she was driving it for days or going excessively fast and you do. That was a crack pot decision.
WTF I’m a mechanic and this was definitely the defendants fault. The donut is temporary Yes but it wasn’t torqued right. If this was normal for donuts to do this DOT wouldn’t allow ppl to use them. The judge was wrong in this case I have customers that ride on donuts for weeks the only thing that should’ve been a issue is the donut has less thread so it will wear a lot faster if you drive for a while but shouldn’t come off.
Driving on a donut DOES NOT make it fall off. I drove on a donut for a week. They have to put it on properly,
The wheel bolts were obviously not tightened properly or it wouldn't' have fallen off, unless we're to believe that she loosened them and then drove it so that she could sue them.
Agreed... They are saying it is a temporary fix, that has nothing to do with the tightening of the lug nuts... The rim of the spare tire would still be attached to the car... Maybe the tire could have shredded but the lug nuts would still not be loose...
There are many reason lug nuts can get loosened on a tire, especially a donut. Like the judge said there are rules for operating a vehicle with donut, such as not exceeding a 50 mph and avoiding any possible hazards on the road. The plaintiff admitted to driving in the left lane, that along with any number of things could have loosened the lugs. That is why donuts are a temporary solution.
@VimaktheFEARLESS it appears you are not familiar with cars... When lug nuts are snugged to the recommended pound feet of torque, the lugs will not loosen... Even going 200 mph...
@@coreydbryant Nope I’d say I’m relatively familiar 😁. I’ve worked in roadside assistance for a while and had diligent family teach me not to drive in the fast lane on a donut.
@@ggrowwarrior that is fine, but that will never cause a lug nut to fall off...
Defendant is so clear, calm, and persuasive.
volvo may have had a defective doughnut tire that they provided for that car , but they want to blame the tow truck driver . and i totally believe that this plaintiff wanted to keep driving her car like she had a new tire on it but it came loose instead .
He’s also full of it
Even if the donut was driven for the 3 days she claimed it was parked, the bolts should not have come off. At most she should have gotten was a flat. For a wheel to pop off, that comes from the bolts being loose.
Not if you go over the miles and even just sitting there causes stress on the joints.
@@dsmith4480 I've driven on donuts, many many times and for many many miles at normal highway speeds. Never once has any of them ever come off. Many mechanics I've been friends with and family that works on cars, never heard of this happening for anything other than loose bolts.
By her own admission, she drove in the left lane on a freeway "going the speed limit", which is faster than recommended on a donut. Given how seemingly clueless she is re car maintenance, that thing could have been flat or partially flat for a number of miles, at high speed. That will put unusual strain on the tire that could loosen the bolts. While the judge didn't go over on air, I suspect that the distances involved here were well over the ~50 miles that is recommended on a spare (and that would be at
@@dsmith4480 No you're delusional I don't should not do that I have driven on a donut for weeks I've also driven it on the highway there is nothing wrong with doing that to a donut they give you the recommendation because they don't want to be liable but they last wait longer than that and there's no way it should be going flat or falling off that's lugs and lugs only
@@newsflash7609 You can drive well over the recommendation that is not going to cause your tire to fall off
I think defendant's company was responsible for the donut falling off and the damage to the car. Plaintiff lost because she waited too long to get it fixed. There's no reason you have to go to Volvo for a tire; any tire store can get you one same day. On another note, JM is constantly telling litigants that they should have gotten something in writing from a professional, and here this plaintiff has something in writing from a professional and JM says he was "guessing" and totally disregards it. The numbering of times JM contradicts herself in these cases is really surprising.
The way the judge purposely read “porperly” in that report knowing it should have been properly lol
I love how she keeps blowing off the questions the judge asks her. She is very ignorant. She should have gotten a new tire right away. Like JM said, it's a temporary fix.The donut could be malfunctioning. Oh mom is a mechanic now. Ignorant people. Glad they lost.
Yeah the mom was the major dummy. Ticked me off how she kept shaking her head like the Judge was wrong😡!!
Donuts are temporary but they only come off if the person that put them on didn’t tighten it properly
Wouldn't go as far as calling folks ignorant, the donut not being properly tightened cause that car to fall to the ground ,it was not drivable after that. period !!!!
@@nhughes1162 You’re right, she just didn’t know.
She got this wrong. I'm a mechanic and sometimes I think I need to pivot to accident attorney.
The limits everyone is talking about with temporary spare tires is mostly based on the tread performance limitations. It's not designed for use above certain speeds because of heat build up and stopping/maneuvering performance. It's a safety hazard in itself but not from falling off the car.
The rim itself is bolted to the hub like a normal wheel. IT SHOULD NEVER EVER FALL OFF or fail in any way shape or form. It was 100% improper installation (lug nuts not tightened) by the tow truck company.
The oval or egg shaped holes are exactly what happens when the lug nuts are loose.
If the tread separated from the rim, I'd say tough luck.
Think about it folks. When you have a blowout, you don't lose the entire wheel.
The tow company hand tightened the nuts but forgot to torque them down. The problem simply got worse over time.
Tow company is disgusting. They know it was their fault.
Literally no different than getting a tire replaced at a shop and it completely falling off a few days later.
The person who changed the tire didn't tighten the bolts enough. Same thing done to me, when I had a business do a seasonal tire change for me. Horrible sound on my way home (two minutes) - before I got home I stopped and called the shop, they said come back, I did. When I parked in their lot I went to the right rear tire and I could tighten every single bolt on the tire with my hand. All three of the other summer tires were fine. The guy who changed my tires looked like he'd just had a new one ripped for him by the manager as he apologized to me. She was a fool to keep driving though. She should have figured out - using her brain - that the brand new sound had something to do with the tire just changed. I think they are 50/50 responsible for the damage - except for the three day lapse and her driving it again. Was there no one around in her life who would have had the sense to go to the car and check the 'donut' and see if it was causing the sound? She's kind of clueless. But the guy citing cars speeding by is no excuse not to properly tighten the lug nuts.
"and then i have my life put at risk but its not his fault." -Not everything bad that happens to you in life is someone else's fault. 21 y.o. with this kind of thinking? Need to grow up and start taking responsibility.
You're supposed to drive about 45 miles an hour with the doughnut on for a very short period of time
If...
That's max speed.
No more than 35 mph on a donut
i have driven 65 on the freeway with no problem with a doughnut . the key is to make sure the doughnut is the correct one for your vehicle .
We didn't have money to buy a tire new or used. Drove to work and back home for 4 days on a doughnut. So hey I say wasn't put on properly . I don't think JM made a right decision. But she's the judge
The way she reads the typos😂😂 "porperly"
That’s my kind of petty 😂❤️
I disagree with the verdict. That tire could’ve killed that lady and then I’m positive the case would then be criminal. So Oftentimes proof is asked of the plaintiff in order for it it go in their favor ..she had it, directly from the Volvo dealership yet she still lost??? How? I’m glad she’s ok.
First, who drives on a donut for 3 days (I don’t believe for one second it was parked for 3 days), especially after it was making a “funny sound”?! Not only that, she then drives it on the freeway/parkway?! The audacity of the plaintiffs. Lastly, age and ignorance is not a defense. Yes, it may be unfortunate, but all that means is an expensive lesson & no one else is required to pay that but her.
I think it’s the tow company’s fault. Period. He admitted to them doing botched jobs just to hurry off the turnpike for their safety but didn’t think about the customer’s safety. SMH he clearly admitted on national tv. A donut should not just pop off period. Unless u are being really negligent. I don’t care if u drive it 50 miles.
Plantiff lost because she never contacted the company to check the noise coming from the tire. She admits in court that she doesn't know the rules of driving with a donut. She continued to drive it after admitting she knew something was wrong. She admitted to driving it in the high speed lane. Her car is a hoopdie, she could have gotten the tired replaced anywhere else but waited and drove there. That's why she lost. So I dont understand why everyone is up in arms over her losing?
The judge always asks for expert testimony, now she got it and ignored it. Weird.
What was presented wasn't expert testimony. The statement said "Spare was loose" AFTER the wheel fell off. No one is denying the wheel was loose, the issue is what caused it to be loose. If the woman didn't trust the repair after the noise, then wouldn't the logical thing be to check the spare that was just replaced? If she had done that as soon as she got home, called up the guy to complain, that'd be proof, not three days later from someone that doesn't know about tires, something even her mom admits to.
Lol that was not expert testimony.
Janita I was thinking the same thing.
YeH that was annoying
She didn't ignore it, but analysed it and found it to be not sufficient proof. Just having an expert testimony doesn't mean u must win the case. All testimonies need to be scrutinised.
So that experts isnt an expert but the people who put the loose tire on in dark in the fast lane are right. Thats crazy. She knows good and well she would not react that way if it was one of her young daughters. The judge is FOS some rulings.
Exactly!
Yes!!!!
This is most certainly a result of not tightening the nuts correctly. Even a spare tire needs to have the correct torque on the wheel nuts. There is nothing wrong with keeping a donut tire on for 3 days. As long as you follow the specifications of the donut tire. This is 100% the defendants fault
One of the few times that the plaintiff actually has a letter from the dealer stating that the tire was improperly installed and the judge still ruled against her. Go figure.
Exactly
Right! She was totally on the side of the defendant for some reason. She had a letter from the damn dealership and it still wasn't enough...unbelievable Judge
The year it happened is crazy she’s taking them to court now. But seriously I’ve driven on a donut for I think a month. Lol This is why I think the judge was a bit off on this one.
Realistically you shouldn’t drive more than 50 miles on a donut tire.
You're not suppose to. You were taking a risk everyday you drove on it.
The plaintiffs are idiots.
@@dontlietomegivemethetruth2175 This may be true but it was perfectly fine until I was able to take it in for a new tire. Those were the days. Teenage living lol
@@JollyGoodJewWitch They definitely last longer than the recommendation cause I've also kept going on for a week or 2 at a time and I've driven on the highway with it and nothing went wrong I know they don't recommend it but there's no way it will fall off within the amount of time she said she drove unless it was installed wrong Or you've already done this multiple times on the same donut
Even if she could prove it was their fault, she absolutely would not have gotten the over $3k she was suing for... you can only collect damages up to the value of your cars worth and there is NO WAY her car is worth that!
I didn't notice them stating the year or model of the car; how did you determine that it's not worth $3k?
@@DonziGT230 You're right they didn't because they didn't have to even get into that.. and I made an educated guess based off of the pictures of the car, it was clearly a fairly old vehicle, not in the greatest shape. Then I used my knowledge of cars and their value on the open market, plus watching this show (and others) with countless cases involving damages on cars and people suing for what it takes to fix the car, which ends up being more than the value of the car, not understanding how the law works by being capped at the value..
The nuts weren't tightened properly and therefore slowly loosened further until the wheel come off. Saying that why didn't she ring AAA while the car was parked at her home or even ask a family member or neighbour, or as the Judge said check the wheel herself, it isn't rocket science to check if a nut is loose. Roadside assist could even come out, she tells them the noise started after the wheel was changed, the first thing they would do is check how the wheel was put on.
the tow driver did his job which was to get her car home but after that its no longer their responsibility because they were not hired to REPAIR her tire , they were hired to get her car off the road but it was her responsibility to get the vehicle repaired and or towed to get repaired the next day or two .
who cares how old she is. if you're going to drive, you should know what potential problems there could be and common sense goes a long way.
She isn’t any smarter for waiting 5 years to sue than when she’s 21 with the donut.🤣😂🤣😂
I put mine on myself and drove on it for weeks until I was able to repair it 🤷🏾♀️
Embarrassing that the mother somehow thinks that because the daughter is young and didn't know that could somehow translate into a lawsuit ... If you leave meat on the counter instead of refrigerating it and then cook it, the meat could be rotten. Will she sue the grocery store?
It’s obvious the guy didn’t put the donut on correctly. The lawsuit was warranted. They should have just did it sooner. A donut is designed to be driven on. If you can’t drive on a donut then why would the car manufacturer supply them.
@@gtsound12 The daughter had a duty to stop the car when she heard a weird noise, period. She chose to keep driving on a tire that was recently changed despite having *clear evidence* something was wrong. Sure - anyone can sue at anyone at any time, but the fact that she lost is evidence enough for me.
Ya I think this was wrong. It was lose when she was going home per the testimony. And yes if you have ever seen a wheel that was not tightened correctly you know it. The wheel does not loosen on its own if properly tightened.
No I think she did something bcuz what logical person doesn't go straight to the closest repair shop once they made her mobile
I agree.
Yet she kept driving on it which is her fault
The judge is always asking for evidence from an expert, and when a Volvo expert WRITES his down notes from his inspection, the judge minimizes it saying "a little note from Volvo", like it was something written on a 1x1 sticky note?!
Trust me this judge treats people differently depending on how they look
No way in hell is a spare going to just fall off a car, unless it wasnt tightened.
You can tell by the look on her face when the defendant mentioned driving during the three day time period that it's true.
I've driven with a donut for three months a couple of times.
If a mechanic surmises what happened--his professional opinion should be respected. That was definitely shoddy workmanship
This judge always leans toward the owner.
Girl you were driving in the left, fast, lane. This is solely on you.
I believe she drove that car. He's not a good witness..he's focusing on the wrong issue..they always tell you to get to a tire shop immediately..he never said that..he kept talking about the danger to him..she would have lost with any judge..her mother didn't help help her case..they both acted clueless.
She's suing all these years later? Money hungry much?
Sometimes the Judge makes bad decisions on cases. She wants experts to write a statement but when she gets the statement she dismisses it. I believe it wasn't tightened up enough. She should have been compensated. But she shouldn't have driven on it.
Really? Where did you get your law degree?
You don't need a law degree to figure out some of the cases. She's not perfect.im sure she makes bad decisions. I remember a couple of times when her husband didn't agree with her decision and voice his concerns to her. I'm sure she probably goes home at night and wonders kif she made the best decision. Most of the time she makes a good decision but there are times I believe she doesn't. You don't need to be a lawyer to decide some of the cases, you just need to be human..
21 years old and can’t change a tire ?? Doesn’t know what a donut is ?? Disregarding loud noise coming from vehicle and continuing to drive ?? Wow is all I can say
At 21 she should’ve just googled it smh. The defendant had the smoothest and shortest defense. Good job!
I have always been under the impression that when there are Doughnuts, the Cops will get involved!!🍩🍩🍩🍩🍩😎
😂😂😂😂😂 that was cute what u did there
I think the judge was wrong.
The wheel nuts are to be torqued. Even on a donut tire.
The fact that the lug holes on the wheel had elongated indicates they were lose.
A donut may explode, but the lug holes don't come off.
Another case where Judge Milan should defer to an expert's diagnosis.
She tends to think she's an expert at everything.
Just the facts Ma'am
She said she was driving the speed limit. It clearly says on warning labels that the tire will fail If driven over 45 mph
Twenty six years old and still needs mommy to help her fight her stupid case. What a big baby she is.
Plantiff needs money for the casino, groceries, clothes, partying 🤣🤣🤣And after FIVE YEARS here's where she's at 🙄
I have drove on a donut for weeks while delivering newspaper they did not put the tire on right or check the pressure
The defendant has one of the best backgrounds for this show!
This is crazy so what's the point of the donut if I can't drive it 5 miles to a shop
They feel as though she was driving it within those three days it was suppose to be parked. But they dont realize that if she did drive a donut for 3 days it still should not have popped off the bolts. The most it should have gotten was a flat
I seen one pretty much buckle on a small Buick SUV when they did a quick turn and knicked the curb😱
@@TimeisUp22 it didn't pop off the bolts she ran it for three days causing it to pop .. She is just a bold face lie!!
The donut is to be driven no faster than 50 miles an hour for a max distance of 50 miles.
@@lutherwhitley lmao yes it did pop off the bolts. Did you not listen to the case and see the picture??
So here it is. I'm a certified automotive and heavy duty mechanic as well as marine engineer. 25 years certified. The tow truck driver should have first checked the air pressure in donut spare. They are typically rated at 60psi and NO ONE CHECKS THEM REGULARLY. next when he installed the lug nuts, he should have torqued the nuts with a calibrated torque wrench to factory spec. Last he should have walked around the whole car checking the other pressures as well. Not rocket science . I've never had a tire come off my whole career. Cheers friends.
This was a BS ruling. Makes me more even want to watch.
these cases annoy me because people don't know what they don't know....
plaintiff also stated she was driving in the left lane on her way to Volvo. No one drives at 40 MPH on the left one. This is the rated speed for donuts so she must have been driving way too fast.
The Plaintiff is giving a lot of useless information.
Definitely. So many things to say before getting to the point.
Annoying.
she went to the donut place, dunkin donuts to fix her tire 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
New Jersey is weird about towing on the Turnpike.
The judge was wrong on this one. Bolts don't loosen on a tire that quick. Spare tires are temporary but you can drive on them longer than 3 days. The fact that the tire fell off the vehicle & the repair shop said it came off due to how it was put on makes the defendant guilty. Also the judges did not defend this verdict afterwards because they both know she was wrong on this one.
A donut definitely can last longer than 3 days, but you can’t drive on a donut like a regular tire. There are rules, don’t exceed 50mph and avoid road hazards. The plaintiff admitted to being ignorant of the rules for a donut, and ignorance doesn’t make someone else liable.
Mom saying she’s only 21…. At 21, I was married, with a child, living in a foreign country. You can’t figure out that if your car is making noise after a tire change you shouldn’t keep driving it?
I get choked when people say age because you shouldn’t drive, then. If you’re not responsible or have enough life experience when things go wrong, then get off the road.
Oh please… I’ve driven with a donut tire on for months lmao
Defendant was not even there when all occurred. He just knows what the employee said. So wrong.
Those donut tires are made for emergency use only, not to go down the road at 60 mph, is this woman crazy.
Harvey is right. She could’ve mitigated her damages even if it was their fault.
She admitted driving “the speed limit” if she was going 55 she obviously doesn’t know that donuts are not meant to go that fast.
Irrelevant. A spare is never going to just fall off a car unless it wasn't put on correctly to begin with
Ok, but it’s still the company’s fault if the tire was making noise, they didn’t put the doughnut on right. But, she still should have told them immediately when the car started making noise. I’m thinking she waited 3 days because that was all the appointments they had. I don’t agree with the judgement!
Defendant knows his thing. She is just money hungry
She definitely waited too long to file but that aside, a donut when installed properly doesn't just fall off or any of the assumptions the judge made . I cringe with every auto related case she rules on...
It sounds like it is you that is making assumptions.
@@kennethbaker5223 wrong answer... try again...
She should have immediately stopped and called again or at the very least counted her blessings for getting home as called someone from there.
She put her own life at risk based on her mother's stupid advice. It's seems more likely than not she drove around on that dodgy wheel during the three days ignoring it's obvious defect or poor fitment.
I have had 2 cars in my life with loose wheel nuts and neither just dropped off however they were clearly unsafe to drive. The donut isn't a proper wheel and I won't use one as I live too far from help
My daughter at 17 was taught to change a tyre.
How fast was she driving? a donut is only good to drive at 50 mph. going over that is dangerous.
No impact on lug nuts...
Emergency spare tire rules are simple: 50&50. That's no more than 50 miles and no more than 50 mph. But that's not because the tire will fall off if you exceed that; it's because it's hard on other components of your car, especially the transmission, and also because the car won't handle the same. If the lug nuts are tightened properly, the tire won't fall off, EVER. Also, the car won't sound the same with the emergency spare on. That tire will have a different hum, so it's perfectly normal to notice that it's making a different sound. And one more thing: the emergency crew should be telling that young lady the 50&50 rule. THEY put the tire on and they should confirm she knows how to use it, but once again, not because the tire is going to fall off if she goes too fast or too far. The info is so she drives at a safe speed and doesn't damage other components. Damaging other components would be all on her. It would be all her fault. But it absolutely is not her fault that the wheel fell off. That is 100% due to the negligence of the emergency crew.
The plaintiff admitted that she hurried home so she was probably going over the speed limit of the spare
MM is completely wrong here! A wheel that is tight does not just loosen up and fall off.
thats bull shit !!!, she call that same day ,she could not drive the car after that. After that happened it was not drivable.
Like What the Heck!! 😆 You can only do 35 mph on a spare tire. FYI
Not true... You can do at least 60mph... Tire manufacturers would never limit someone to travel less than the accepted speed of being on the highway... Look at your spare tire for the information...
@@coreydbryant Hey Corey, yes that is true that its labels the max on the tire but I’ve never seen 60mph as a max.
@@Bellaxcharlie-p4r check it out...
@@coreydbryant I have and it says 35mph but who’s care. Have a great Christmas Corey. Thanks for the great debate.
@Ebony ain't no way a spare tire says 35mph... No response needed... Be blessed...
The defendant would have had a stronger case if she didn’t say the car was making noise from the onset
when using the "donut tire" there's a warning on the tire itself not to go over 50 miles per hour so it's more likely than not she was going too fast for the tire to handle.
Smh this kid not taking responsibility at all
I agree with the judgement. If she is so “young” not to know what to do with the sound, did she know you aren’t suppose to go over 25 mph.
Ummmmm, you can do 60mph on a donut....
@@coreydbryant you can. But you aren’t supposed to
@Sue Morpeth - Yerega why aren't you? They would not put that on the tires if that was not the case... Besides it has nothing to do with lug nuts falling off...
We get rid of donut tires, and replace them with a regular tire in our vehicle.
Should have gone to service station or tire shop immediately!