1. Deliberate Neglect of Vehicle Maintenance
[Defendants] allegedly implemented policies or fostered a culture where commercial vehicle maintenance was deliberately minimized or overlooked. This resulted in a fleet of vehicles that were not consistently roadworthy, posing significant risks to drivers and the public.
2. VIN Tampering and "Rebirthing" of Written-Off Vehicles
A critical component of the alleged scheme involved acquiring vehicles that were written off or severely damaged (e.g., from auctions, scrapyards). Their Vehicle Identification Numbers (VINs) were then systematically altered or swapped with those of legitimate vehicles. This allowed these unsafe vehicles to be illegally re-registered and operated, circumventing safety regulations and insurance checks.
3. Post-Incident Blame-Shifting and Document Falsification
When mechanical failures inevitably led to incidents or accidents, [Defendants] allegedly employed a strategy to divert blame from their practices to the drivers. This involved:
- **Backdating Documents:** Altering maintenance logs, inspection reports, or incident reports to create a false narrative that suggested proper procedures were followed or that the vehicle was in good condition prior to an incident.
- **Ignoring Defects:** Suppressing records of known defects or mechanic reports flagging safety concerns.
- **Coercion and Threats:** Pressuring drivers and mechanics to accept blame or to remain silent about the true causes of incidents.
4. Financial and Professional Retaliation Against Victims
Individuals who were blamed for incidents often faced severe consequences:
- **Wage Deductions:** Unjust deductions from wages for repairs or damages that were not their fault.
- **Legal Threats:** Intimidation through legal threats to discourage speaking out or pursuing claims.
- **Forced Out of Work:** Termination or creation of hostile work environments that forced affected individuals out of their jobs.
5. Evidence Suppression and Obstruction
The alleged pattern includes proactive measures to suppress or destroy evidence that could expose the fraud, making it difficult for victims to prove their cases individually. This creates a systemic barrier to justice, necessitating a class action approach.
This systematic approach allowed [Defendants] to cut costs, avoid accountability, and perpetuate a dangerous cycle at the expense of their employees and the public.