I always find it interesting how many people are quick to jump up and say that any number of things (i.e. being over ratings) will or will not have any bearing in a lawsuit....and although obviously we all represent any number of things on the internet, I'd have to estimate that people making these pronouncements haven't spent much time on either side of the bar litigating an insurance claim.
Why don't we hear about lawsuits for over GVWR or "the Fridge was on!" or....?
To set context, for every late night ambulance chasing advertiser ("Turn this wreck into a CHECK!") there are at least three attorneys who practice insurance defense....but they aren't out on TV advertising how they've turned a CHECK into a check. Furthermore, civil negligence suits typically don't rise to the level of publicity because: a) it is in the interest of both sides to settle rather than expose their client's case to the vagaries of the jury system, so there's nothing to report; b) even if the case is not settled, many (not all, but many) trial court decisions go unreported; and c) even those that go to trial and/or get reported may very well have a protective order that limits publication of the salient issues.
There's one theory of how to try a plaintiff's case in civil negligence that can be summed up as "Throw all the s*** against the wall and see what sticks". Were I representing a plaintiff in a negligence action and there was any indication of an overweight (yes, over any rating put forth by the manufacturer), it would be pretty poor representation not to allege that as a contributing factor.
