Can a car manufacturer be held liable for an accident caused by a defective part in California?
Yes, you may be able to file a product liability claim against a manufacturer if a defective vehicle component caused or contributed to the accident. California law allows injured parties to pursue compensation without proving negligence, as long as the defect and resulting harm can be established.
Yes, you may sue a car manufacturer for a defective parts accident in California. The state’s strict product liability laws allow injured people to hold manufacturers, distributors, and retailers responsible for defective car parts that cause crashes or make crash injuries worse.
Unlike a standard negligence claim against another driver, a product liability claim does not require proof that the manufacturer was careless. The injured person must show that the part was defective, that the defect existed when it left the manufacturer’s control, and that the defect caused the injury. If you were injured in a crash, a San Jose car accident lawyer can help determine whether a defective part may have played a role.
Key Takeaways for Defective Car Parts Accidents in California
- California’s strict liability doctrine means an injured person does not need to prove the manufacturer was negligent, only that the product was defective and the defect caused the injury
- Three types of defects may support a product liability claim: manufacturing defects, design defects, and failure-to-warn defects
- Over 30 million vehicles in the U.S. were recalled in 2025 due to nearly 1,000 separate safety issues, according to NHTSA data
- Multiple parties throughout the distribution chain, including the vehicle manufacturer, the parts manufacturer, the distributor, and the dealership, may be held liable for a defective car part
- The statute of limitations for a product liability claim in California is generally two years from the date of injury under CCP Section 335.1
California Product Liability Law and Defective Car Parts
California has been at the forefront of product liability law since the California Supreme Court’s 1963 decision in Greenman v. Yuba Power Products, Inc. (59 Cal.2d 57). That ruling established that a manufacturer is strictly liable when a defective product causes injury to someone using it in a reasonably foreseeable way.
California law recognizes three categories of product defects. Each one applies differently to car parts, and a single defective component may involve more than one category.
Manufacturing Defects
A manufacturing defect occurs when a car part is made incorrectly or deviates from its intended design during production. The part’s blueprint may be perfectly safe, but something went wrong on the assembly line.
A batch of brake pads with improperly bonded friction material or an airbag inflator assembled with contaminated propellant would fall into this category.
Manufacturing defects typically affect a limited number of units rather than every product in a line. The key question is whether the specific part that caused the injury differed from the manufacturer’s own specifications.
Design Defects
A design defect means the car part is dangerous by design. Every unit produced carries the same flaw because the problem is baked into the blueprint itself.
A fuel tank positioned in a location that makes it likely to rupture in a low-speed rear-end collision is a design defect. So is a roof structure that collapses too easily in a rollover.
To prove a design defect in California, the injured person may need to show that the product failed ordinary safety expectations or that its risks outweighed its benefits.
Failure to Warn
A failure-to-warn defect exists when a car part carries risks that the manufacturer knew about or had reason to know about but failed to communicate to consumers.
If a tire manufacturer knew that a particular tire model was prone to tread separation at sustained highway speeds but did not include a warning or adjust its speed rating, that may qualify as a failure to warn.
This category also covers inadequate instructions. A replacement part that requires specific installation procedures to function safely must include clear directions. Missing or misleading instructions may create liability if improper installation leads to a crash.
Who May Be Held Liable for a Defective Car Part in California?
California’s strict liability framework extends beyond the company that manufactured the defective part. Multiple parties in the distribution chain may share responsibility for putting a dangerous product into a consumer’s hands.
Parties that may face liability in a defective car parts case include:
- The vehicle manufacturer that designed and assembled the car, even if a third-party supplier made the specific defective component
- The parts manufacturer that produced the defective component, such as a brake system supplier, tire maker, or airbag manufacturer
- Distributors and wholesalers that moved the product from the factory to the retailer
- The dealership or auto parts retailer that sold the vehicle or the replacement part to the consumer
- Repair shops that installed a defective aftermarket part or failed to follow proper installation procedures
The ability to hold multiple parties liable matters in practice. A parts manufacturer may carry limited insurance. The vehicle manufacturer that chose to use that part in its cars may carry far more. Identifying every potentially liable party early in a case gives the injured person the best chance of recovering fair compensation.
How Is a Defective Car Parts Claim Different from a Regular Car Accident Claim?
A standard car accident claim in California is based on negligence. The injured person must prove that another driver failed to exercise reasonable care and that failure caused the crash. A defective car parts claim operates under a different legal framework.
Strict Liability Changes the Burden of Proof
Under strict liability, the injured person does not need to show that the manufacturer was careless. The focus shifts from the manufacturer’s conduct to the product itself. If the car part was defective and that defect caused the injury, the manufacturer may be liable regardless of how much care it took during production.
This distinction matters because manufacturers often have enormous resources to defend themselves. Proving exactly what went wrong inside a factory or design lab is difficult. Strict liability removes that barrier and focuses the case on whether the product was safe.
Manufacturers May Fight Harder
While strict liability makes the legal standard more favorable for the injured person, defective car parts cases tend to be more aggressively defended than standard crash claims.
Manufacturers may retain teams of engineers, product designers, and accident reconstruction professionals to argue that the part performed as intended or that the driver’s own conduct caused the injury.
These cases also require substantial evidence. Preserving the defective part, documenting the crash scene, and retaining qualified professionals to analyze the component are critical steps. A product liability claim built on speculation rather than physical evidence is unlikely to succeed.
Ask Alexander Law Group
Q: My car was recalled, but I never got the repair done. Can I still sue?
A: Yes, you may still have a product liability claim even if you did not complete a recall repair. The defect existed in the product before the recall was issued, and the manufacturer placed a defective part into the market. However, the manufacturer may argue that your decision not to complete the recall contributed to the injury.
Q: What if a mechanic installed a defective aftermarket part on my car?
A: Both the aftermarket parts manufacturer and the repair shop that installed the part may be liable. The parts manufacturer may face strict liability for selling a defective product. The repair shop may face a negligence claim if it failed to follow proper installation procedures or used a part it knew or had reason to know was unsafe.
Q: How do I know if a defective part caused my accident?
A: Determining whether a defective car part caused a crash typically requires a professional inspection of the vehicle and the specific component. Accident reconstruction professionals and mechanical engineers may analyze the wreckage, the part’s failure pattern, and the crash dynamics to determine whether a defect played a role.
What Role Do Recalls Play in a Defective Car Parts Case?
A recall issued by the manufacturer or ordered by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) may be strong evidence that a defect exists.
In 2025 alone, over 30 million vehicles in the U.S. were recalled due to nearly 1,000 separate safety issues. Not every recall involves a part that causes crashes, but many address components that directly affect vehicle safety.
A recall is not required to bring a product liability claim. Many defective parts cause injuries long before a recall is issued, or no recall is ever issued at all. The absence of a recall does not mean the part was safe.
What a Recall Does and Does Not Prove
A recall does not automatically prove that the defect caused a specific person’s injuries. The injured person must still connect the defective part to their particular crash. What a recall does provide is documented evidence that the manufacturer identified a safety problem. That evidence may support the argument that the defect existed when the product left the factory.
Checking NHTSA’s recall database and complaint database after any car accident is a practical step. A pattern of complaints about the same part on the same vehicle model may reveal a defect the driver was never aware of.
What Is the Deadline to File a Defective Car Parts Lawsuit in California?
The statute of limitations for a product liability claim in California is generally two years from the date of injury under Code of Civil Procedure Section 335.1. This is the same deadline that applies to most personal injury claims in the state.
When the Discovery Rule Applies
Some defects do not cause obvious injuries right away. A slow steering failure or a gradually degrading brake component may cause a crash months or years after the defect first appeared. California’s delayed discovery rule may extend the filing deadline in these situations.
Under the discovery rule, the two-year clock begins when the injured person discovered or reasonably should have discovered the injury and its connection to the defective product.
Preserving Evidence Early Matters
Product liability cases depend heavily on physical evidence. The defective part itself is often the most important piece of the case. If a vehicle is scrapped, sold, or repaired before the part is preserved, critical evidence may be lost permanently.
Notifying all potentially responsible parties in writing to preserve the vehicle and its components is an important early step.
California Car Accident and Defective Parts Questions Answered by Our San Jose Attorneys
Yes, California law allows an injured person to pursue both a negligence claim against the at-fault driver and a product liability claim against the manufacturer in the same case. These are separate legal theories that may apply to the same crash.
For example, another driver may have rear-ended your vehicle, but a defective seatback that collapsed on impact may have made your injuries significantly worse.
Compensation in a California product liability case may include medical expenses, lost wages, reduced earning capacity, pain and suffering, and property damage. In limited cases where the manufacturer knew about the defect and failed to act, punitive damages may also be available. These damages are intended to punish reckless conduct and discourage similar behavior.
No. California’s strict product liability protections apply regardless of whether the injured person bought the vehicle new or used. The defect must have existed when the product left the manufacturer’s control. A used car buyer, a passenger, or even a pedestrian injured by a vehicle with a defective part may bring a product liability claim against the manufacturer.
Product liability cases against vehicle or parts manufacturers generally take longer than standard car accident claims. These cases involve extensive discovery, professional analysis of the defective component, and hard-fought negotiations with well-funded corporate legal teams. Some cases resolve through settlement after the evidence is developed. Others proceed to trial.
When a Car Accident Involves More Than Bad Driving
Not every car accident is caused by a negligent driver. When brakes fail, tires separate, airbags malfunction, or steering systems lock, the problem may trace back to the company that designed or built the part. California law gives injured people a path to hold those companies accountable without having to prove they were careless. Knowing what to do after a car accident can help protect that path.
If you or a family member was injured in a San Jose car accident and you suspect a defective vehicle or part played a role, the product liability attorneys at Alexander Law Group, LLP, offer free consultations to evaluate your case.
Call (408) 289-1776 to discuss what happened and whether a defective product claim may apply to your situation.
