Man Drives Into Pole, Sues Walmart

A man who drove his pickup truck into a pole in the parking lot of a New Hampshire Walmart has sued the retail giant for damages, claiming the placement of the pole is conducive to car crashes.

The man says that, after dropping off a passenger at the front door of the Walmart, he then “drove into a free-standing pole,” causing $2,918 in damage to his 1997 Chevy S10.

From the Portsmouth Herald:

He alleges a store employee told him there were six accidents involving the same pole within five months and that Walmart “failed to reconfigure their parking area” after purchasing the property from a previous owner.

A second store employee told him the lot is “not a normal configured lot,” he also claims.

If what he says about the other accidents is true, does he have a point? Or is he just a bad driver looking for someone to foot the bill for his truck repairs?

Driver hits pole in parking lot, claims Walmart should pay []


Edit Your Comment

  1. Jeff-er-ee says:

    Can you really do $2,900 damage to a 1997 S-10? I can’t imagine anyone paying for than 3 figures for one of those PoSs.

    • dadelus says:

      It may cost $2,900 to fix even if the vehicle isn’t worth that much.

      I traded in a 98 S-10 for less then $2,500 in 2005. So I would imagine he’s looking at a repair bill that far exceeds the actual value of the vehicle.

      • ospreyguy says:

        Hence the reason to sue Big W and have them foot the bill…

      • Chief CL says:

        that’s called “totaling” a car…

        If he had insurance (he is breaking the law if he doesn’t), then his insuarance will declare the vehicle totaled, and issue him a check for the blue book value, where he can in turn buy the same piece of shit truck.

        • notserpmh says:

          That’s not right. It is against the law to not have liability insurance. It is not against the law to have comprehensive “full coverage” insurance. Typically if you have an auto loan, your lender will require it (to protect their collateral), but if your car is paid for, you only have to have insurance for what you might do to others and their cars.

          If I had a less than $3,000 car that was paid off, I can guarantee I would only have liability. For what you pay in a year for the difference in insurance costs, you could just buy another one.

        • yurei avalon says:

          No it isn’t in NH where this happened. You are not required in this state to have any automobile insurance, not even liability. In some cases a court might force you to if you go around getting into accidents a lot or have a lot of violations, etc.

          It’s not walmar’ts fault you can’t look where you’re going, even if they are a horrible company. Man up, sell that chevy POS for scrap and buy yourself a new junker for like $1,500.

        • JonBoy470 says:

          Actually, this incident occurred in New Hampshire, which does not require motorists to carry any automobile insurance. So long as the driver was a New Hampshire resident, he was in the clear on that front. See this link:

          Incidentally, as a former NH resident, I can tell you I love this lack of an insurance requirement. Yes, I had insurance, including uninsured motorist coverage, and for the record I think any driver who forgoes insurance is an idiot. However, unlike in neighboring states that have the insurance requirement, insurance companies don’t have NH residents over a barrel, as they have to compete with the alternative of not buying car insurance. Car insurance is thusly quite reasonably priced in NH.

    • Jeff-er-ee says:

      Argh! “for” = “more”

      More than…MORE THAN…bad poster, no biscuit!

    • sonnetfm says:

      exactly what I was thinking
      I’m glad this is the first comment

    • swarrior216 says:

      I drive one of those POS S10’s. And it is a POS! It’s a 02 with the Xtreme package and it’s not even worth $3,000. Barely.

    • Overheal says:

      My jeep is in the body shop right now actually from an incident on black friday: ha;d the cost, if not more, could easily be labor, not parts. if my estimate is to be believed. My fender bender is costing the perp’s insurance ~$2,100, only $900 of which is actual parts.

    • mandy_Reeves says:

      It is the fault of Walmart. Only because they should have noticed a pattern before this accident. If you have a certain number of accidents all in one spot, you may just want to check out the cause and see what needs to be done.

  2. scoobydoo says:

    How the hell do you get $3000 in damages on a 1997 S10? Thing can’t be worth more than $750.

    • PriceIsWrong says:

      It’s not hard at all. If he dented a section across two sections, I could easily see it costing him that, hell, even if it was just his front end. Hourly rate for mechanics these days is almost $100 depending on where you go. I would think an older S10 wouldn’t cost nearly that much to fix, let alone replace out right.

      • There's room to move as a fry cook says:

        scoobydoo isn’t questioning the $3000 damage – but you can only claim up to the blue book value of the car – in this case $1000-$2000 depending on condition & the specific model & trim level.

        In my experience a minor fender bender starts at $1000 and goes up depending on invariant mass, velocity, and point of contact

    • lucky13 says:

      Depending on condition and mileage, it could be worth as much as $1500 – I sold a 92 S-10 for $800 last spring but it was a base model with 240K miles.

      That said, the cost to repair the damage could easily be twice the value of the truck, however, if it was insured I don’t see why the insurance company didn’t just total it and give him the value of the truck as compensation.

      • DarthCoven says:

        Who the hell has collision coverage on a 97 S-10?

        • lucky13 says:

          Good point – I didn’t have any collision coverage on mine either. Which is why he is suing WalMart for the cost of the repairs – doesn’t excuse him for causing the damage he’s suing for, though.

  3. Joeypants says:

    R.I.P Personal Responsibility

  4. UCLAri: Allergy Sufferer says:

    I’m trying to think of something witty, something pithy, or even something remotely humorous to say, but I can’t quite understand how to say anything other than, “What a maroon!”

    • TheRedSeven says:

      Well, the guy’s last name *is* Griswold… And if National Lampoon has taught us anything, it’s that Griswolds are prone to overreaction, to hilarious results.

    • humphrmi says:

      “Victim of Soicumstances, eh? Wise guy!”

    • Angus99 says:

      I yam disgustipated.

    • lostalaska says:

      Put a sign on the light pole that people keep hitting. The sign should read, “WARNING! This light pole has been proven to attract idiots, if you are an idiot please give a wide birth.”

  5. Joeypants says:

    R.I.P. Personal Responsibility

  6. mikeluisortega says:

    I’m sure Walmart would like to “check his receipt” on those damages ;)

  7. pecan 3.14159265 says:

    It’s hard to say – I have no context for how the parking lot actually looks. I see two poles, one light pole, and some parking spaces. I don’t know how far the store curb is from the light pole he hit, and Google Street View is not helpful in this case because I can’t find a Wal-Mart at the address provided in the article.

  8. Loias supports harsher punishments against corporations says:

    If the picture is of the pole in question, then….no.

    But if it’s truly in a hazardous location and difficult to see, then I am willing to hear him out.

    • bethshanin says:

      My thoughts exactly. Lets see a pic and diagram before we jump to conclusions. We had an office that had a pole in the weirdest place. Even covered in reflective tape and warning all visitors, it still claimed many employees and visitors cars. Blind spots and uncommon placement FTL

      • physics2010 says:

        Same. I agree. Depends on actual placement. Reflections at a certain time of day, thin profile, or other camouflaging effects could make certain placements dangerous. As stupid as this sounds, if there was a history of cars hitting this pole regardless of actual placement, a judge could find Wal-mart partially responsible. Even in that case I doubt anything more than an 80/20 agreement with Wal-mart taking 20% of the blame. Sadly Wal-mart is stuck at this point. If they make any modifications it could be seen as admitting fault. Their only hope is a completely non-related parking lot re-modification project where they re-stripe and just happen to remove or reposition the sign.

  9. Tomas says:

    Very simple: Bad driver.

  10. ThomFabian says:

    Its a light pole.
    It didn’t jump in front of him.
    He hit a non-moving object with his moving vehicle.

    Sorry charlie, this ones on the driver.

    • Applekid ┬──┬ ノ( ã‚œ-゜ノ) says:

      “Your honor, the earth is constantly rotating. Therefore, my truck was in the same position while the earth spun around under it. Clearly the pole was in the way of the truck’s natural position.”

      • Primarylupine says:

        If his truck was traveling around 800mph, I’d buy that defense. You’re lucky to get a ’97 S10 to 80mph.

  11. Nidoking says:

    I assume this pole is jumping out and catching people by surprise.

    • oldwiz65 says:

      Perhaps this is a new terrorist weapon – light poles programmed to move around parking lots attacking cars and people.

  12. iggy21 says:

    No hes had no point. He hit a stationary object with his moving car. His decision and actions led to the crash. I dont care if the light pole is in the middle of the driving lane, you are responsible for avoiding obstacles.

  13. Larraque eats babies says:

    Can walmart counter-sue for repair of damages to the pole? Also, I think the pole and the pole’s family have been suffering from this encounter, and they should get some compensation. I think $2,918 should cover it.

    • tbax929 says:

      Whoever owns the pole should certainly go after his insurance for property damage.

      I flipped my car three times on the PA Turnpike, taking out a guard rail in the process. My insurance repaired my car and also paid PennDOT for the damage I did to the guard rail.

      This accident was his fault, unless the pole was moving.

      • Ryan L says:

        It took me a few seconds to realize that you meant 3 consecutive flips, not that you flipped your car on 3 separate occasions, I was sitting here just thinking about how bad of a driver you must be.

        Oh, and I hope you were OK.

  14. Preppy6917 says:

    I never thought I’d be rooting for Wal-Mart, but there’s a first time for everything.

  15. macoan says:

    What makes it worse is Wal-Mart paints the bottom of the polls in this BRIGHT YELLOW paint which just makes it blend so well in with the rest of the dark paved parking lot – it’s hard to make out those polls.

    Every Wal-Mart i’ve been in have rows – with painted yellow arrows – unless he was trying to cut over to another row outside of the painted rows (to go other way in another row) — which is probable what he did – other people almost hit me all the time….. it’s like they don’t pay attention and for some reason don’t expect people to be driving the correct way down the row in a parking lot. Probable the same thing here – just ran right into the poll.

  16. devwar says:

    I am familiar with this parking lot, and yes, the parking lot leaves much room for improvement. But if you don’t like it, fine. Just don’t drive your car into it to make a point.

  17. There's room to move as a fry cook says:

    If he hit a person standing in the same spot it would be his fault. Surely Walmart can spare a mannequin to tie to the pole.

  18. Brunette Bookworm says:

    That’s the pole? No, he’s an idiot. It looks like there is a handicapped space by it. If a car had been there, would he have hit that and said it was in a bad spot? It’s a freaking parking lot. Lots of them have light poles in them. And I can’t even see the front door so where was he driving at to drop someone off that he hit that pole?

  19. Groanan says:

    “Six accidents involving the same pole within five months “
    He is a bad driver, but he has a point.
    Walmart knew they made a bad driver trap, that catches bad drivers and damages their vehicles.

    It would be the same thing as if they put bowling balls on the top shelf, just within reach of stupid people, with a sign saying “ask for assistance.”

    • Applekid ┬──┬ ノ( ã‚œ-゜ノ) says:

      I smell a great hidden camera bit.

    • Mom says:

      Some random minimum wage employee told him that there were six accidents in five months. Is this employee keeping records?

      • Applekid ┬──┬ ノ( ã‚œ-゜ノ) says:

        I know folks with college degrees working minimum wage jobs because of the job market. There are some sharp tacks hidden in the normally all-squishy bowl of Jello.

      • Hoot says:

        That’s what I was thinking. Why is he relying on what Walmart employees are saying? I’m sure those facts are admissible in court.

        • Loias supports harsher punishments against corporations says:

          Which is why you hire a lawyer and do that crazy, legal thing called “discovery.” In other words, you obtain public records to determine if a pattern of damage is occuring in regards to that pole. Then sue for negligence.

      • crazydave333 says:

        Methinks the employee was just trying to get some irate customer to calm down by showing some empathy. They did it the wrong way.

    • Hoss says:

      Agree. Next accident will involve grampa driving with granny in the passenger’s seat and lots of sad relatives

    • kcarlson says:

      “Attractive nuisance”?

  20. lucky13 says:

    Was the light on when he hit it? Regardless, it sounds like he ignored the first rule of driving – look where you’re going, not where you’ve been.

  21. salviati says:

    Only if the pole is significantly obscured, or darkly colored without adequate lighting in the area. And even then, such a case would be iffy at best. Should I assume by the bill that this buy didn’t have insurance?

  22. hoi-polloi says:

    I was prepared to read about icy conditions, poor lighting, and the like. Nope. Someone rammed a pole, then claimed the pole shouldn’t be there in the first place. I’ve been in some poorly conceived parking lots and gas stations. I’ve managed not to ram my car into anything. It sounds like an employee tried to make the guy feel better and talked him into a law suit.

  23. cmdr.sass says:

    As a driver, you are ultimately responsible for avoiding stationary objects, especially those painted yellow and illuminated..

  24. salviati says:

    Only if the pole is significantly obscured, or darkly colored without adequate lighting in the area. And even then, such a case would be iffy at best. Should I assume by the bill that this guy didn’t have insurance?

  25. Jacquilynne says:

    If the multiple accident thing is true and is way more often than most light poles get hit, then maybe he has a point. But I’m still doubtful.

    • tidomonkey says:

      It doesn’t matter if six people or a hundred hit it within five months, all the drivers are at fault.

      • Jacquilynne says:

        I’d agree that all the driver’s are significantly at fault. But if there’s something seriously wrong with the parking lot design or the placement of the light standard, then WalMart may also be partially at fault, and a lawsuit might be the only thing that gets their attention enough to change it.

  26. mcs328 says:

    I guess I need to see a layout of the parking lot. I know some parking garages try to fit in an extra parking space near an intersection that obstructs the view of cross traffic. So maybe just maybe this light pole was in a spot around a blind corner?

  27. teke367 says:

    I really can’t see how a pole isn’t easily avoidable. But if there were truly 6 accidents in five months, perhaps something is up. The photo nor the original article help with seeing how this is anybody’s fault but the driver’s though. And isn’t the speed limit like 10mph in parking lots? Is that fast enough to do so much damage to a car?

  28. Costner says:

    Say what you will, but I bet Walmart pays the guy off just to avoid having to fight it in court. This is how the legal system works in America. Sue the big guys for a little and they will pay you to go away. Sue the big guys for a lot and they will keep you tied up in court until you can no longer afford Ramen noodles for dinner.

  29. dolemite says:

    It’s his fault. I’m pretty tired of people that pull up to the front doors of stores to drop off people or sit there in the fire lane. If he were actually out parking in the lot, it wouldn’t have happened in the first place.

    • WiglyWorm must cease and decist says:

      My infant and my two year old (and previous to that my pregnant wife) say “bite me”. In adverse weather I will not hesitate to drop off my wife and kids directly in front of the doors.

      If i’m waiting on one, I DO at least pull off to the side, not just wait at the doors like some, though.

      • dolemite says:

        In the past, whole villages of people walked hundreds of miles.

        Women and children trekked miles per day to forage and gather. Even the pregnant ones!

      • George says:

        Dropping off someone in the fire lane is illegal in New Hampshire. You can get ticketed even if you are there for a few seconds.

  30. TheRedSeven says:

    Here’s the closest Google Street View I could find.,-70.816498&sspn=0.015886,0.037766&ie=UTF8&t=h&rq=1&ev=zi&split=1&radius=1.14&hq=wal-mart&hnear=&ll=43.099385,-70.806971&spn=0.007615,0.018883&z=16&layer=c&cbll=43.100114,-70.809248&panoid=poYcV-4GiSpWQpjJDhy2GQ&cbp=12,18.04,,0,8.07

    The article incorrectly reports the address as Newington, ME (which doesn’t exist so far as I can tell). The correct address is 2200 Woodbury Ave, Portsmouth, ME.

  31. There's room to move as a fry cook says:

    I see 3 poles. A light pole, a handicap sign pole, and a stop sign pole. None of which are in a right-of-way. Maybe Walmart should move the stop sign to a less busy intersection or move the handicap space to the far end of the parking lot.

  32. Press1forDialTone says:

    Did they check and see if he was wearing beer goggles at the time?

  33. kriswone says:

    So it’s totaled?

  34. CTConsumerist says:

    Didn’t Walmart spend millions depending itself in the Black Friday trampling case a few years ago. I think Walmart would rather spend tens of thousands defending this one rather than to cave in and write a check for $2918.

  35. AustinTXProgrammer says:

    6 accidents in 5 months? I hate to say it but that says it is more than this guy being a bad driver. So Walmart should offer to settle for 5% (it is certainly 95% the drivers fault), and then fix the parking lot.

    • tbax929 says:

      I diagree. Walmart shouldn’t offer him a dime and should, in fact, demand he pay for any damages he did to the light pole.

    • It's not my baby, baby! says:

      Just because 6 other idiots did something is not proof of negligence…
      The plaintiff would have to show that the placement of the pole fails the “reasonable person” test.

  36. MongoAngryMongoSmash says:

    But the Road Runner ran straight through it, no problem.

  37. El Matarife says:

    It’s a light pole. Avoid it.

  38. There's room to move as a fry cook says:
    • There's room to move as a fry cook says:

      I assume he hit the stop sign pole. It’s out there. It doesn’t show well in this photo but is just right of the white arrow where the yellow edge meets the blue edge

  39. jedifarfy says:

    If the pole lept in front of the car, or popped out from the ground, sure.

    Whether or not the parking lot is “configured” right doesn’t mean that 1) it’s not still a parking lot, and 2) THERE’S A LIGHT POLE. DON’T HIT IT.

  40. DragonThermo says:

    I can’t find that particular location on the Google Map satellite view, but I’ll give the OP a point that the parking lot is “not a normal configured lot” in that the parking rows are not perpendicular to the face of the building. That is, they are at an angle compared to the face of the building.

    Looking a the photo in the article, I’m not clear which pole he allegedly plowed into. Did he hit the one with the Stop sign? The one with the (likely) Handicapped Parking sign? The one with the “3” sign?

    However, that point is taken away considering all three poles sit upon large, wide cement bases painted bright yellow with yellow striped pavement between him and the pole. Unless he was cutting across the lot, instead of going down the isle, I don’t see how a reasonable person would hit either one of them from the POV of the camera.

    Looking on Edmunds for used Chevy S10s, $3500 gets you a 1999 model with 108K miles on it.

  41. sendbillmoney says:

    I can see it now.

    Plaintiff: Your Honor, here is evidence of six crashes into the same light pole even before my accident. WalMart is clearly at fault.

    WalMart: Your Honor, If a blind person walked through that parking lot and hurt himself bumping into the light pole, his suit would be dismissed. At least the blind person would have an excuse for not noticing a FIFTEEN FOOT TALL, STATIONARY OBJECT in his path, however.

    Your Honor, here is evidence of the (tens/hundreds of thousands) of transactions we make per year at that location, Except for the plaintiff and the six customers he mentioned, they all managed to avoid the FIFTEEN FOOT TALL, STATIONARY light pole.

    Your Honor, this thing is obvious enough that (tens/hundreds of thousands) of WALMART customers avoid it without incident. The plaintiff’s failure shouldn’t be laid at WalMart’s feet.

    We ask that his suit be dismissed, and counterclaim for the scratches he put on our light pole plus court costs.

  42. sp00nix says:

    Sounds like the typical crap a Walmart customer would pull, at least at the one by me.

  43. Schlake says:

    My mom successfully avoided a ticket for crashing her car into a telephone pole because the pole was in the middle of the sidewalk. She told the judge that sidewalks are for pedestrians, and the pole should not have been there. Thankfully they hadn’t pressed charges against her for driving down the sidewalk.

  44. Goldensummer says:

    I shop at that Walmart semi-often and that pole is in the handicap spaces, but its only about 3-4 feet away from the cross walk. The front of the store abuts directly to the cross walk you can see in the foreground. There’s no sidewalk in front of the store. The parking lot has too many entrances and the store itself doesn’t have a front entrance only a sort of side door. Its awkward but I can’t see hitting the pole without some really bad driving.

    • Brunette Bookworm says:

      Exactly. If the pole wasn’t there, he would have hit a car that was parked there. It’s in the middle of parking spaces! Spaces for parking, not driving through. And if you read the linked article, the damage was to the grill and hood so he hit it with the FRONT of his truck. How do you not see it if you are heading right for it?

      • Oddfool says:

        Used to work at a mall in downtown San Diego, and one particular afternoon, someone tried driving an RV into the parking garage. He hit the height sign, which swayed into sprinkler head, busting the sprinkler.

        The height sign was at his windshield level…he had to be looking directly at the sign as he hit it.

  45. ICarney says:

    Oh please!! I’m very familiar with this lot and while it may not be perfect (what is?) it is hardly the “accident waiting to happen” this guy alleges. Even in the dark – which, BTW, is difficult at this site since neon rules the area – one can easily see the light poles, carriage correls and other possible dangers. Man chasing after publicity and money drives into lightpole and blames everyone but himself for mistake – now that’s the true story.

  46. Bagumpity says:

    This is part of Wal-Mart’s evil plan to sell auto parts. In some test markets, they are installing puncture strips directly in front of the tire installation areas.

    (Just joking. But please don’t forward this to any Wally World execs- we don’t want to give them any ideas!)

  47. Its_Miller_Time says:

    Believe it or not, this happened in my local grocery store parking lot. The lights were there and the parking lot was repaved and some garden islands were added, well they had to re-do the lights to meet code, and one literalyl was in the middle of the in/out part now as a result. Free standing, nothing near it for 50ft in any direction…then not even painted. COme in at night before they were lit not paying attention and you could hit it. It was hit 9 times in the three week period it was there…four people successfully recouped costs from the developer.

  48. GMurnane says:

    Unless the state/county/city has some sort of ordinance/law/regulation requiring parking lots to be configured or laid out in a certain way and/or making the store liable for “usual” parking lot configurations I doubt he has any case….

  49. sopmodm14 says:

    if walmart knew about the problem, or hired a contractor that paved the lot wrong, they are liable

    guy might have some ground

  50. Beeker26 says:

    How do you not see a pole in front of you, no matter where it happens to be? Sorry dude, epic fail. Time to find a new truck and maybe a pair of glasses.

  51. crazedhare says:

    Not exactly the same situation, but not long after getting my drivers license I defended a ticket on the same thinking after rear-ending someone.

    I was coming over a hill, and very close to the bottom of a hill was a stoplight. It’s a busy intersection, so cars would pile up. As such, and because there was no sign that a stoplight was coming, even though I was not exceeding the posted speed limit, I was unable to stop timely. They tried to ticket me for exceeding a safe speed (notwithstanding I was not exceeding the posted limit), and, with my parents’ help (I was only 16), I fought the ticket in court and won.

    Not only did I get the ticket thrown out, but now the hill has been flattened somewhat and there is a sign ahead of the hill that indicates a light is coming and whether it is red.

  52. jstimson says:

    It’s just karma.

    He’s one of those idiots that thinks it’s fine to drop a passenger off at the front of the store, thereby blocking a fire lane, blocking normal traffic, and just being a nuisance. I hate you people that do that.

    So obviously, the light pole was just channelling my rage and jumped at him.

    • crazedhare says:

      Seriously, you hate people that drop people off?

      Are you the crazy batshitinsane old woman who yelled at my husband for dropping me off at the curb in front of Hallmark the very same day I was released from the hospital after receiving a c-section and hysterectomy within an hour of each other and being barely able to walk (to the point that I nearly fell and had to ask someone to help me out of the store), but still insistent on picking out a Mother’s Day card for my mother since it was her first as a grandmother? Are you seriously that much of a jerk?

      God, I’m sorry, I have a lot of rage to spare as a human too but you are honestly pathetic.

  53. reds97 says:

    why cant people take responsibility for themselves anymore? Why is it always someone elses fault that you are stupid?

  54. kamiikoneko says:

    A. His 1997 chevy probably isn’t worth $2,918 total.
    B. They sell glasses at Walmart, someone should have told him.
    C. Walmart employees work in retail, not infrastructure engineering. Just because one says the lot is “not a normal configured lot” doesn’t mean anything except that there’s a reason said employee isn’t an english professor.


  55. hansolo247 says:

    “he then “drove into a free-standing pole,” totaling his 1997 Chevy S10.”


  56. Intheknow says:

    Want to bet he’s one of those people who drive all over the lot, not according to the markers or lanes?

  57. stevied says:

    Employee comments are about as meaningful as your Aunt Ester (who has never seen the parking lot).

    Get a traffic engineer to make the comment and you got something.

  58. suez says:

    I fail to understand this. Unless the pole was MOVING and jumped in front of his truck, he clearly was not looking where he was going when he hit it. I mean, unless he was qualifying for the Indy 500 in that parking lot, there’s no excuse–and particularly not for the level of damage that quote implies.

  59. Cantras says:

    I got my bumper scraped in the parking lot at work when I worked at McD’s. Got the guy’s insurance information and all, no big deal — but I don’t park there anymore. From the drive through window (now that I had reason to look), I had a good observation post to see that people almost never made that turn without clipping that spot (usually empty, many cars don’t have the turning radius to get into that spot either). It seriously should not be marked as a parking spot.

    So I understand the concept? But I’d have to see the pole. TFA says there was damage to license plate bracket, which seems to say to me he smacked right into, didn’t clip it or whatever. Front center of his truck into that pole.

  60. Bby says:

    The fact that you f’n people are debating this is what is wrong with America today.

    I have never once drove into a pole in a parking lot that was not walking towards me.

    The fact that you idiot Consumerist tards are seriously trying to pin a case of horrible driving and obvious personal fault on a retailer just goes to prove how ridiculous you are.

    • There's room to move as a fry cook says:

      Sigh. Three pages of comments. And you didn’t read any of them.

      • Bby says:

        Uh, actually I read the majority of the comments. There is a minority that actually have sense about a situation like this. Obviously, others do not. Those were who I was talking to. I can only guess where you fall in.

      • Bby says:

        Once you get past a few dozen or so replies about the relevance of the cost of repairs on that vehicle, and then others debating how it might have a case, you should see my point.

  61. Emtronics says:

    Hey! Light poles jump out in front of drivers all the time.

  62. maruawe says:

    this man was an accident waiting to happen,he must have been talking on his cell phone. the light poles are painted yellow for visibility .He was not paying attention to his driving and wants Walmart to pay for his negligence

  63. Grrrrrrr, now with two buns made of bacon. says:

    Maybe if the pole had been moving at the time, I’d side with the guy. Otherwise, he’s a complete moron :)

  64. consumerd says:

    If he would have traded it in on “cash for klunkers” he could have gotten more than what he will get from wal-mart!

    Somewhere around here in my head I hear the terms “Epic fail” coming to mind.