Are you insane ? On your way to the dealer you stumble
across a 3 car pileup around a blind corner and your doing
55, maybe faster ? Now what do you do with no brakes ? So
lets say you make it to the dealer and are slowly moving across the lot to the service stalls and a customer crosses
the lot and you'er 3 feet away with no brakes. What do you
do now ? Don't be stupid. Have it towed. Just my input.
Do what you think is best. You thought about getting it
towed but you needed and extra push in that direction ?
I've been in the business 30 years and I don't do that.

I have had this happen before.
May not have been the same exact problem,
but it was just as dangerous.
While sitting and holding the brake, it would slowly leak down.
In the floor under the brake pedal I found brake fluid.
The seals in the master cylinder were leaking.
Any time I mashed the brake pedal and added pressure to the system,
brake fluid would be forced back thru the seals.
This is a VERY DANGEROUS condition.
In a panic stop the seals would likely fail and you would have no brakes.

You probably won't find brake fluid in the floor under the pedal
because you probably have power brakes and the master cylinder
is seperated from the firewall by a booster cylinder.
My old truck didn't have power brakes so the fluid just leaked
directly thru the firewall and into the cab.

If you have a problem with the pedal slowly leaking down while stopped,
you are going to have a big problem if you have to make a panic stop.

And if it is found out that you had prior knowledge of a brake
problem, then the consequences could be severe.
Not only will your insurance company not back you up on this,
but they would probably drop you like a hot ball of plutonium.

It's not worth risking your life over. Get it towed.

Pooh Bear

I would go to the repair shop, same as home, at no faster than 30 mph ( the scenic or back way), but you must know what you are doing !
If this condition is recent, you still have brakes, right ?

This condition does not happen all of a sudden, it may well take well over 100K, even 200K miles for the master cylinder seals to leak enough to cause the pedal to go to the floor under light pressure.
Under normal pressure the brake will work fine for a time..

I have driven a vehicle for about ten miles with the hand brake only, this can be done, requires total concentration, speeds of no more than 25-30 MPH..I know this bothers the safety nazis...too bad....

Thanks everyone for responding. Yes earthworm I still have brakes & this incident is very recent. My car will stop fine and as I said the pedal only goes to the floor after sitting at a long light and I admit I do use a heavy foot on the brake. I noticed today that the left front inside wheel is covered with what I assume is brake fluid but still am only adding a little bit of fluid to get it up to max. Anyway I could take some back roads and drive 25-30 miles an hour with flashers on which would only have me on the interstate for a short time. AAA wants 150.00 to tow from my house even though I'm a member and other companies want a minimum of 250.00. Are they NUTS!!! Oh well I guess I could start driving it and then stop and call AAA and have them tow.

EarthWorm. You are telling her it is fine to drive on the
interstate at 25 - 30 M.P.H. ? Your a bigger nut case than i thought. Your post is here for the whole world to see and if this poor person takes your insane advice and
drives a car with a brake problem and gets into trouble
guess what. You told her to do it. Hay. It's in writing
with your name on it. The insurance company does not like
writing cheques. If they can, and in this case, could charge you if there is an accident. That is the stupidest post you have ever typed. Nomally your not that brain dead. What happened ? Your I.P. address is as easy to get as the common cold. I can't believe you said that. Maybe it's just the heat or a bad day ?

You can rent a tow dolly from Uhaul for about $40 or a car trailer for $60.

This assumes you have another vehicle (or a friend) that can tow it.

As for internet advice, good luck prosecuting or even proving an individual actually wrote it. Plus, reality T.V. is far worse "advice" than telling someone with bad brakes to drive slow on a back road.

reminds me of a story a buddy told me... his brakes went out mostly out and he drove home.
When he got there suddenly he suddenly tried slamming his car in reverse while pumping on the brake, stomped on the throttle hoping reverse would spin em backwards,,, and still ran into a brick wall to stop once he got home. He was a fast thinker, there was just nowhere else to go.

Machiem. Well there is good luck prosecuting for internet
advice. Remember " electronics.net " ? Someone gave advice
on how to check a H.O.T. on a T.V. This person was a
child experimenting with T.V.s and almost got electricuted.
The father stepped in. Got the I.P. address of the server,
the internet address of the poster, and his server. Well
the rest is history. The site is now gone and the poster
was sued. Someone had a lot of money and a good bunch of
lawyers. If there is money to be made on a law suit someone will press it. Something to think about for everyone. Just one man's input. Believe what you want.

Sounds to me like a wheel cylinder is leaking fluid.
Or maybe a brake line at that cylinder.
Either way, it is an extremely dangerous problem.
DO NOT DRIVE THIS CAR UNTIL IT IS FIXED.
I cannot emphasize this enough.

Drive slow and careful on back roads?
You mean the same back roads where kids live and play?
Like the back road north of town here where a kid ran
out in the road and was hit by a car driving less than
the speed limit and with perfectly good brakes and an
experienced driver in broad daylight? The kid was killed instantly.

Take a look at some of my posts around the internet concerning
my efforts at redneck engineering and you will see that
I'm certainly no safety nazi. Far from it.
But telling someone to drive a car with bad brakes is irresponsible.
And it could make you party to a lawsuit.
You can't hide behind the internet. There is no anonymity there.
EarthWorm, the IP you posted from is 152.163.101.5
Machiem, the IP you posted from is 71.99.94.171
The date and timestamp is marked on your posts.
Your ISP will have records of who had that IP at that time and date.
And the MAC codes (unique ID) will be a match for your computer too.
There is no anynomity on the internet.
If they want you they will find you.

Pooh Bear

Here is a link that might be useful: MicroSoft's Really Hidden Files

kalining,

Could you please provide a link or source of information for the lawsuit? I searched but was unable to find any information regarding "electronics.net" and any lawsuit. I'd like to know the formal charges and the outcome of the lawsuit.

Kalining, I NEVER told anyone to drive 30 mph on any thru-way and if you have a lick of sense, you know that ! Also I do not appreciate your insults !
It seems as if everyone here is foolishly over-reacting rather than being rational and using ones brain rather than emotional based fear and ignorance......

And there is one thing far worse that bad brakes - that is people living in fear, being unwilling to think and reason, and then when things go wrong, to want to sue someone rather than acting like a man...

Kalining, I strongly suggest you read my post again, slowly, carefully ! And NOT with hatred and fear..

And I have little doubt that the original poster possess intelligence and will act accordingly..

Anytime a customer calls and tells me they have a low or fading brake pedal, my advice is to TOW THE CAR!

Do you want to hear about stupid lawsuits?

People have sued shops for the shops telling them they could drive their cars in for service, and have suffered greater damage to the car for; Brake problems, overheating engine issues, wiring troubles, low oil pressure indications, fluid leaks of any kind that result in component failure, fire etc.

Assuming someone "possess intelligence and will act accordingly" somehow means absolutely nothing if they suddenly are in a position to benefit from having someone else to try to blame.

You want to hear some really stupid lawsuits? Customer takes a car to a shop for a major brake repair. Customer does not like shops estimate, denies the work and takes the car. (Customers right to do that, agree?) Customer has an accident on their way to where-ever because of the bad brakes. Customer sues shop because the shop should have known to not let customer drive the car (Shop possesses greater knowledge). In some states, the only way the shop can protect themselves is to take on the expense of towing the car to where ever the customer wants it to go.

Driving a car with bad brakes is stupid, and dangerous, both for the driver and anyone else out on the street. It is worse than driving drunk, or driving while playing with anything that is a distraction (cell phone ect.) JMHO.

Hi, folks,

I've been lurking around since Robin Hartl left Hometime and in the search for why, I came across this site. Very interesting, to say the least.

Now for the question at hand: I've driven cars with bad brakes and bald tires--in fact I drove a VW Beetle for a whole winter in St. Louis using only the handbrake (bad master cylinder)--but I was a lot younger, dumber and broker then.

You will probably get to the mechanic okay, that's a high probability, so let's do the math. Imagine a .38 caliber revolver, a five-shot to make the math simpler. Now load one cartridge, close and spin the cylinder. There's a high probability (80%) that if you were to put it to your head and pull the trigger, the hammer would fall on an empty chamber. That's four chances in five. If we were playing Texas Hold 'em, it would be worth going all in.

BUT--we ain't playing poker here, we're talking about that one chance in five that someone will end up maimed or killed. You can always earn another bankroll but only in video games can you or the kid you ran over earn another life. Tow the car, Ma'am.

ed

Depends on where it's leaking. If its at the slave cylinder (at the wheels) then you still have the front or back pair of brakes to stop with. The brakes go down about twice as far as normal before they bite.
But it sounds to me like the master cylinder - if that goes there is no braking whatsoever. If you're _really_ cheap you might baby it to the mechanic _provided_ you have a really good handbrake.
It's not safe to even push a car without brakes.

This is a question that has always perplexed me.
The introduction of hydraulic brakes was wonderfull.
Except when a seal failed or a line broke and you had no brakes.
So they split the system into two circuits.
If one failed you still had the other one. Works wonderfully.
But, the front brakes do more work than the rear brakes.
So they added a proportional adjustment valve.
That is what I don't quite get.
Oh, it works great in theory. The rear brakes get more pressure.
And this forces them to do their share of the braking.
But now, if you lose one circuit and get zero pressure,
then the proportional valve also zeroes the other circuit.
That is the the way it seems to me. I don't quite understand it.

Back when I was young and stupid, I drove my (overloaded) F350 dump truck
off Signal Mountain (Chattanooga area) to a shop to get the brakes fixed.
They found the reason my brakes weren't working was
the right front brake line had burst.
I just put the truck in 2nd gear and let it roll down the mountain.
I still had a little bit of brakes on the back but only if I pumped the pedal.
If I had to do a panic stop then forget it.
And if I had hit something solid then all that firewood in the back
would have just kept going and crushed the cab with me in it.

We live and learn (just barely).

Pooh Bear
(they don't call me "ol' Fluff for Brains" for nuthin)

PoohBear: I ain't a mechanic but just for fun here's how I psyche it out.

From this site: http://www.familycar.com/brakes.htm

Proportioning valve or Equalizer Valve
These valves are mounted between the master cylinder and the rear wheels. They are designed to adjust the pressure between the front and rear brakes depending on how hard you are stopping. The shorter you stop, the more of the vehicle's weight is transferred to the front wheels, in some cases, causing the rear to lift and the front to dive. These valves are designed to direct more pressure to the front and less pressure to the rear the harder you stop. This minimizes the chance of premature lockup at the rear wheels.
==========================================================

From this site: http://auto.howstuffworks.com/master-brake2.htm
Pressure Differential Switch
The pressure differential valve is the device that alerts you if you have a leak in one of your brake circuits. The valve contains a specially shaped piston in the middle of a cylinder. Each side of the piston is exposed to the pressure in one of the two brake circuits. As long as the pressure in both circuits is the same, the piston will stay centered in its cylinder. But if one side develops a leak, the pressure will drop in that circuit, forcing the piston off-center. This closes a switch, which turns on a light in the instrument panel of the car. The wires for this switch are visible in the picture above.
======================================
Trucks with air brakes have a similar valve we used to call it a triple valve for when you disconnected from a trailer which is about the same as losing, for example, your rear brakes on a car. The piston, located in a T-fitting, would be forced to one side and it would shutoff the trailer air ie no leak. The dual auto brakes must work in approximately the same manner (in an analogous manner?).

Presumably then your entire foot pressure goes to which ever part of the dual system is still intact.

Brakes. So simple, yea right.

This disscussion right here could take us a month to get through, and we would miss key points that need to be known and understood, and really more than 1/2 of is going to go right over most peoples heads.

Before hydraulics we had mechanically operated systems. Push rods, cables, heck some "cars" only had a drum brakes right at the rear of the transmission directly operated by a lever.

When hydraulics first appeared we had a single system, and four drum brake assemblies. Brake balance was a known potential issue, and that was achieved by various uses of brake diameter, wheel cylinder diameter, friction materials, and even counter springs. This first change still allowed for a straight mechanical operation of the "emergency brake", which has been PC'ed to now be called the parking brake.

It wasn't too long before they realized a single master cylinder was a bad idea, and the dual master cylinders came about, allowing for a split brake system.

The first proportioning valves were basically a spring loaded accumulator, that allowed the pressure to the rear brakes to build up to a certain point, applying the brakes but at a restricted level, unless the pedal was pushed far enough to bottom out the accumulator, and then the pressure would rise to the maximum the system could develope.

The greater the friction between the linings and the drums, the less pedal pressure is required to stop the car, or ultimately lock up the wheels. If the vehicle was too hard to stop, larger diameter wheel cylinders helped create mechanical advantage. All in all it was a balancing act figured out through years of trial and error.

The fist "combination" vales incorporated the proportioning valve, and the differential valve in a single assembly. These would allow for shutting down a failed portion of the brake system, either the front or the rear could be disabeled if a failure occured. One problem though is when a failure occurs in one side, the pressure increases greatly in the remaing side, which is just as old as the side that failed, and has been known to result in a double failure, and then you have no brakes but the emergency brake. Which always gets me when I inspect a car, and find the emergency brake is frozen because it never gets used, and the owner gets upset because he/she does not want to spend money on a "parking brake" that they never use.

Disc brakes had many advantages of drum systems, and eventually we started having disc on all four wheels, and even on heavy trucks today.

"X" systems began to show up in the early 80's combining one front wheel with the opposing rear wheel. This system has been one of the best at maintaining reasonable braking during a failure. The "X" systems still incorporate proportioning valves, often in the master cylinder itself.

There are also height sensing proportioning valves which do exactly what it sounds like, it varies the rear brake pressure depending on how the vehicle is loaded.

Now we come to antilock systems, an entire education in themselves. Some antilock systems are simply installed right overtop of a full regular brake system, while many newer cars the antilock are an integral part of the brake balance system. Quite often only the O.E., that is the dealer scan tool has full access to service these systems, which is one of the reasons a shop like mine is spending ten's of thousands of dollars to have as many of them as I can afford.

Notice we did not talk about power assist systems of which there are several. Air brakes, which operate by having the air pressure release the brakes, and no air pressure applies/locks them up. We also won't even get into regenerative braking now available with the hybrids. There is just so much to know in this one area of automobile service, and people think anyone can put on a set of brakes. This is one of the reasons we(I) feel it's high time auto technicians be licensed. Heck, you got to have a license to cut hair and paint fingernails, it makes no sense for just anyone to start playing around with something as important as safety.

That I all understand.
But that doesn't explain to me why
when I burst a brake line or a wheel cylinder fails,
that the brake pedal will just go to the floor (no brakes)
until the problem in that half circuit is fixed.

Not go to the floor and stay there, but go to the floor
each time I mash the brake pedal. No pressure in the system.
To me, it seems if tho the proportional valve finds zero
pressure on one side, so it sends 80% of that to the other side.
And 80% of zero is still zero.
80% is a guess, I don't know how much it actually proportions.
And I'm talking about all pre 1980 vehicles.
I haven't worked on a brake system in a vehicle newer that 1980.
Never could afford a car that new before now. Got a 97 model.

I owned a 3/4 ton truck with a single circuit master cylinder.
Also had a hydraulic clutch. Same type of master cylinder.
And it a big brake wheel on the back
of the transmission for a parking brake.
If the driveshaft came out then there was no emergency brake.

Friend of mine had an old truck like that and was working on it one afternoon.
He set the parking brake and crawled under it and removed the drive shaft.
The truck being parked on a hill promptly ran over him.
Banged him really bad but he lived. And learned to chock the wheels.

Pooh Bear

Well I took a stab at it --struck out. Oh Well.

The brake on the drive shaft is also worthless if you break a drive axle. I did just that with a 2 axle dump truck uphill in heavy traffic. No place to go but backward. Finally found a board in the cab and managed to lean way out, put it on the pavement just right then back to it...

I fixed a broken hydraulic brake line oncet by hammering it shut --left 3 brakes --got home. Actually that's an old trick from when trucks with air brakes had metal tubing.

WOW .. never thought my question would create such feedback but thanks everyone and I really appreciate the concern & information. My DH drove the car to the dealer through the back roads with no problems although it did turn out to be a split hose line which explained why I was losing the fluid. I also got brake pads and rotors. Now are you ready for this? The brakes were the original ones and I still have "at least" 2 years left on my back drum brakes so although I probably pay more for jobs at a dealership I am totally amazed that this car is still so great after 14 years and they are amazed that I still have the original tailpipe (whatever that means) as I didn't know tailpipes went bad. Oh well again...thanks everyone ... you guys are great.

Never thought about breaking an axle.
Lose a half shaft and the differential gears just spin.
The result is the same. No emergency brake.

I have fixed brake lines before (temporary fix) by crimping them shut.

Got out one afternoon way up in the woods in a VW rail buggy.
Caught a brake line in a small tree and broke it.
Lost all the brake fluid and had no brakes.
(front brakes weren't hooked up, only rear brakes).
I crimped the steel line shut and filled the system with
water from a creek. Drove it home like that.
Flushed the system out when I got home and replaced the line.

We no longer live on Signal Mountain. We moved to the valley.
Used to put new brake pads on the car every 3 months.
Driving down the mountain to work everyday is hard on them.
Since we moved over here I haven't needed any brake work in 3 years.
I pull the wheels and inspect the pads and the rear drums for the shoes
and inspect the brakes about every 6 months.
Need to do that again sometime soon.

My Dad used to tell me,
"Making a car stop is more important than making it go."
Made sense to me.

Pooh Bear

Well, I've unsuccessfully searched on and off for about a week for any lawsuit regarding "electronics.net" and/or anything about giving bad advice over the internet.

I'm assuming Kalining is unable to provide any references or links to the alledged lawsuit either because it's been over a week since I requested additional information.

Therefore, I declare lawsuits stemming from bad internet advice a hoax.

I'm not going to say it's a hoax.
But I'm also not going to say that it can't happen.
And if it happens, win or lose, it still costs you a bundle.

Are you familiar with the Stella awards.
If not google it and read about some of the goofy lawsuits.
And people either won or at least got huge settlements.

A lawyer doesn't have to win a case to make money.
And if he thinks there is money to be made then watch out.

99 percent of all lawyers give the rest a bad name.

Pooh Bear

Just remember, it's a "jury of your peers" that usually determine the outcome of those lawsuits. Also remember, verdicts are location dependent.

I'm now curious whether this alleged lawsuit was a state or federal case.

I tried using the excuse that someone gave me bad advice when I was much younger. My parents always said, "If they told you to jump off a bridge, would you do that too?"

It may be a jury of your peers
but it is still
12 people who were too stupid to get out of jury duty.
No offense meant to those that happily do their duty.

And most lawsuits go to out of court settlements
to avoid that expensive trial by a jury of your peers.

And jury trial or not. Even if you win, it still costs you a bundle.

Pooh Bear

"Therefore, I declare lawsuits stemming from bad internet advice a hoax."

OK, then what would you call insurance settlements stemming from bad advice, on the internet, phone call or through any medium, or from a personal conversation?

What would you call having to be sure that I am in fact insured just in case something unforseen happens simply because I throw out an opinion, and someone else takes it as advice and suffers an otherwise preventable loss?

While you may not have found specifics supportive of kalinings comment, his post is unfortunately based in facts that these kinds of lawsuits do indeed happen. Whether they are won or not is beside the fact.

i wanted a jury of my peers, but couldnt find 12 people as smart and good looking as me. hahahahahaha

john g,

Please provide a link or reference to an insurance settlement that is the result of giving advice over an internet forum like this one. I don't care about phone calls or personal conversations since neither of those were part of the original discussion. I've never heard of somone making random phone calls or starting conversations with strangers asking for advice like you would on an internet forum. The original allegations was a lawsuit stemming from advice given at an internet forum from a "perceived" stranger. If you own a forum (or business) and solicit questions (or work) as a perceived "expert", then perhaps you should be careful. Perhaps this is the context of your comments? However, this is not the case in this discussion.

I've also never heard of anyone needing insurance to give advice on a forum like this one either. If you're discussing insurance required for your job or business, that's a different topic since you are considered an "expert" in your field of work. If I asked my doctor for medical advice and he was wrong, that could be a valid case. If I asked a random person walking down the street for medical advice and they were wrong, I don't think I'd get anywhere trying to lay blame on anyone but myself.

Kalining's post suggests an entire website was shut down and there was some type of punishment given to the person that gave the advice. Since these types of lawsuits do actually happen, post a link or reference to one and I'll be satisfied. I'm not saying that they couldn't or haven't happened. I'm saying I wasn't able to find one and I searched for about an hour a day for 1 week.

It would be helpful if the lawsuit you provided was decided in favor of the plaintiff since that was the original allegation. You can sue anyone for almost any reason and get it on the record books.

Australian businessman Joeseph Gutnick sucessfully sued a US newspaper for defamation for an internet article which was published in USA and did not classify as defamation in USA.
Under Australian law, forums are classified as "Broadcasting" and are subject to defamation and slander laws and The Broadcasting Act.
I suspect in the USA they are protected by the Free Speech clauses of the Constitution.

I read up on that case. It was interesting, but not relevant to the topic here since we aren't discussing defamation from a published article.

However, people that "bash" other people or brands should look that case up. Especially posts like "never! never! buy gm/gmc". I wouldn't worry too much since GardenWeb is the "publisher" and a better source for a monetary settlement as well.

OK. You are asking for specific proof machiem? Why do I have to do that for you? If you really want it, start here.

http://www.cybertriallawyer.com/lawsuit

Bad enough we have to be insured against the possibility, here is a lawfirm specializing in just these kinds of cases.
If your going to find your proof you want so badly, firms just like that one should have it.

"Why do I have to do that for you?"

Because it's not my responsiblity to provide proof or data to back up YOUR claim. You say these types of lawsuits do exist, so prove it. The website you provided has nothing relating to the topic, so making another claim saying they specialize in these types of cases isn't quite true either. If you would like to ask them for a consultation about the topic, go ahead, I've tried enough to help you both prove your claim. If I said I could breath underwater, wouldn't you expect me to prove myself or should I expect you to do it for me?

You also said twice that you have (what I would call) "internet forum insurance". In that case, how much is it, what does it cover and where can the other members of GardenWeb get it? I personally feel I am covered under the "Terms of Service" agreement and the purchase of a policy covering my "advice" here is a waste of money. I also think you are confusing your business or job related insurance with "internet forum insurance". Just for reference, I've never actually heard of "internet forum insurance", but I'm willing to accept that somebody, somewhere, sells it. If you're gullible enough to buy it, so be it. But, it isn't a requirement or even recommended to have in order to post on this forum, or any other forum that I know of.

Again, it's not that I wan't proof so badly, all I'm asking is for either of you to provide something to back up your claims. If you do provide proof there are "forum advice lawsuits", and now "internet forum insurance policies", I'll openly admit you were correct.

This has truly turned into something it should not have and I hope you can provide your proof so I can admit I was wrong and we can move on.

Could it be you're libeling yourself by essentially labeling a specific person something akin to a liar in a public forum ? Perhaps it might make an interesting case to prove or disapprove one way or the other.

No machiem, we will move on without your precious proof. Not taking the time to get it for you can make me wrong in your eyes, ask me if I really care. I've learned how to deal with bullies, and that's what you are trying to do.

If YOU want it, you go find it. If you can't or don't want to get over it on your own.

If you truly don't believe it's necessary to protect yourself go ahead and post in such a way as to put someone at risk if they follow your advice, then let's see if your lucky or not.

Trying to split the internet away from other forms of communication as being different and not able to put the writer(speaker) at risk in order to attempt to prove your point is cute, but does not make your point. I don't have a single fee in my insurance coverage for information that I put out, it is simply spelled out in the contract and falls under umbrella coverage.

Goodbye.

I don't think sucessful prosecution is likely as the plaintiffs have to prove that "the poster on the forum is a person that a _reasonable_ person would consider informed."
This is _not_ the same as the advice a qualified mechanic would give, which does imply knowledge.

That is quite different to, for instance, a forum refusing to take action against a person "breaking the law".
For instance, in Australia a jewish forum was prosecuted after an action taken by the Arab League for "Incitement To Hatred" which is prohibited under the Broadcating Act. In USA, forums can be prosecuted for failing to take off links to child pornography, for instance.

john g,

I'm now a "bully"? I'm sorry you feel that asking you to "put your money where your mouth is" (so to speak) is intimidating.

It's o.k. to state your beliefs and opinions. However, stating those opinions as "fact" may require you to produce those "facts" if you'd like to be considered a credible source.

john999,

I agree with your statements. Again, I also think you're covered by the Terms of Service.

Machiem. Yep, bully. That's why you had to press this one more time. My bet is you won't let it end here either. Somehow this won't be quite enough "proof".

When my insurance agent sits across from me at my desk and tells me this is happening, and shows me in my policy where they provide coverage, why should I doubt him?

http://www.insuranc-e.com/faqa.htm

Besides, from the website link above, this spells it out pretty clearly. Sorry that I cannot publish the exact language in MY insurance contract. That would be inappropriate. Quite similar in fact to the actions if I uploaded and displayed a schematic from my service information. That is a copywrite infringement, and while the majority of the time nobody really cares, it could, and I quote "could" be just the kind of thing that could get you sued, and that's not even for incorrect advice.

Here is a quote from that website.

Q) We do not currently use our Internet site for anything other than provision of information on our company. It is not interactive. How does this affect our position?

A)The existence of a non-interactive web site in itself does not present the liability but the content may well do so. The broadcast or publishing risk nonetheless exists in some form and incorrect information or misuse of information from or on the site where third parties may be entitled to rely on the details, does present a potential legal exposure.

Let me break this out for you. See the words, (phrases) incorrect information, risk, third parties, and potential legal exposure?
That's enough for me to base my OPINION, you can take the text as FAQ, which does sound awfully close to "fact" if you try to pronounce it......

Here is another web site.

http://austin.bizjournals.com/austin/stories/2001/03/12/smallb4.html

and from the text this quote:

"Essentially, if there's any conceivable way a client could contend the performance of your Web site, products or services affected his or her business and sue you for it, you need to think about Internet insurance. A few types of coverage generally are offered."

Now if you want to pick nit's and say "this isn't MY web site" then go ahead and put your head back in the sand.

As far as the terms of service issue go. If you really believe they protect you and you feel safe, good for you. IMO logic dictates anyone with any pockets at all is fair game if someone thinks they have been harmed and are trying to recover. I'd rather have my insurance company deal with paying someone to argue that point, than me ponying up for someone to do so. Unless of course you would be willing to do it for free, and be the one to pay if you lose in court.