Published in: Truck Accidents

Defective Truck Parts and Mechanical Failure: Who Is Liable in Texas?

Author Jonathan Herrera

Published on: October 14, 2026

By Jonathan Herrera, J.D., Herrera PLLC | Houston, Texas

Picture an 18-wheeler approaching a line of stopped traffic on I-45 during the evening rush. The driver presses the brake pedal, and the truck does not slow the way it should. Within seconds, the trailer is closing on a row of passenger cars. Afterward, the driver says the brakes failed, the company says the truck was well maintained, and a parts supplier says its product was installed incorrectly. Each account points away from the one who gave it.

The short answer: responsibility for a mechanical failure depends on why the part failed. A design or manufacturing defect may point to the manufacturer, poor installation or repair may point to a shop, and neglected maintenance or ignored defect reports may point to the carrier or driver. Having spent over a decade as an insurance adjuster reviewing claim files from the carrier side, I have seen how often the paper trail behind a vehicle, its maintenance records, repair orders, and inspection reports, ends up shaping the way responsibility is argued.

Common Types of Mechanical Failure

Mechanical problems can involve almost any system on a tractor-trailer, but a few categories come up repeatedly in truck crash investigations.

Brakes. Brake problems are among the most frequently cited mechanical issues. In the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration’s (FMCSA) Large Truck Crash Causation Study, which examined crashes from the early 2000s, brake problems were coded for almost 30 percent of the trucks. That coding identifies an associated factor and does not by itself establish that brakes caused a given crash, since the same study found that driver-related factors also played a major role.
Tires and wheels. Blowouts, tread separation, underinflation, and wheel-end problems can cause a driver to lose control or leave debris in the roadway.
Steering and suspension. Worn or broken components can affect a driver’s ability to keep the vehicle stable and in its lane.
Coupling devices. Fifth wheels, kingpins, and trailer connections hold a tractor and trailer together, and a failure can allow a trailer to separate or swing out of line.
Rear impact guards and lighting. Equipment designed to protect other motorists and make a truck visible can contribute to the severity of a crash if it is damaged, missing, or inadequate. Federal equipment rules, including requirements in 49 CFR Part 393, address these systems, and our page on underride and override accidents explains related issues.

Weight can add stress to every one of these systems. A truck carrying more than it should places extra demand on brakes and tires, and our article on overweight trucks and weight violations on Texas highways discusses how that can come into play.

Not every mechanical failure is a “defective part” in the legal sense. A component can fail because it was designed or built poorly, because it was installed or repaired incorrectly, or because it was worn out and never replaced. These situations can point to very different parties, which is why the cause of the failure matters as much as the failure itself.

The Role of Federal Inspection Requirements

Commercial motor vehicles that operate in interstate commerce are subject to federal inspection and maintenance rules. 49 CFR Part 396 addresses inspection, repair, and maintenance, and several of its provisions often become important in a claim:

Systematic inspection, repair, and maintenance (Section 396.3). Motor carriers must systematically inspect, repair, and maintain the vehicles under their control, and they must keep maintenance records for each vehicle. Those records are retained for 1 year while the vehicle is under the carrier’s control, and for 6 months after it leaves.
Driver vehicle inspection reports (Section 396.11). Drivers must report defects they find, and carriers must repair or certify the repair of any defect likely to affect safe operation before the vehicle goes back on the road. Carriers keep these reports and certifications for three months.
Periodic inspections (Section 396.17). Every commercial motor vehicle must pass a periodic inspection at least once every 12 months, and the inspection report must be kept for 14 months under Section 396.21.

Equipment standards in Part 393 set minimum requirements for components such as brakes and tires, and separate driver rules, including Section 392.7, require a driver to be satisfied that key equipment is in good working order before driving. These federal rules apply to covered commercial vehicles, and state rules may apply to some in-state operations, so whether a particular rule governs a particular truck can be a fact question. Our overview of federal trucking regulations that can matter in a Houston accident claim provides additional context.

The records these rules require can be valuable. A missing inspection report, an unresolved driver defect report, or a gap in maintenance history may help show whether a carrier followed its own obligations. The short retention periods, particularly the three-month period for driver reports, are also a reason timing can matter. Records that exist today may not exist later, so written requests to preserve evidence are often sent early in a claim.

Potentially Responsible Parties

Responsibility for a mechanical failure depends on why the component failed. Depending on the facts, claims may be directed at one or several of the following:

The driver. A driver is generally expected to inspect the vehicle before operating it and report problems. A driver who knew of a defect and drove anyway may face scrutiny.
The motor carrier. A trucking company that skips maintenance, ignores reported defects, or sends a vehicle out in unsafe condition may face claims for its own negligence, in addition to claims based on the driver’s conduct. Our article on what trucking companies do after a Texas truck crash explains how carriers often respond when such questions arise.
A repair or maintenance provider. An outside shop that performed work incorrectly, used improper parts, or missed an obvious problem may share responsibility.
A parts manufacturer. If a component was defectively designed or manufactured, or lacked adequate warnings, a product liability claim may be possible. Texas products liability law is addressed in Chapter 82 of the Civil Practice and Remedies Code. For a design defect claim, Section 82.005 generally requires a claimant to show a safer alternative design existed and that the defect was a producing cause of the injury.
A seller or distributor. Section 82.003 generally limits the liability of sellers that did not make the product, with exceptions in certain circumstances, such as when the seller participated in the product’s design or actually knew of a defect.
Other parties. Trailer owners, equipment lessors, and parties responsible for overloading a truck may also be part of the analysis.

Texas also limits how long a product’s liability claim may be brought. Section 16.012 of the Civil Practice and Remedies Code generally sets a 15-year limit that runs from the date the defendant sold the product, with statutory exceptions, so the age of a component can matter to whether a claim against its manufacturer or seller remains available.

When several parties are involved, Texas follows a proportionate responsibility system under Section 33.001 of the Civil Practice and Remedies Code. A claimant whose percentage of responsibility is greater than 50 percent may not recover damages, and recovery is otherwise reduced by the claimant’s percentage. In a mechanical failure case, each party may point to another, and those arguments can affect how a claim is valued. Our Houston 18-wheeler accident page describes how these multi-party situations are generally approached.

Why These Cases Often Require Technical Investigation

A mechanical failure case usually turns on questions that cannot be answered by looking at a crash report alone. Was a component defective, or was it worn? Did it fail before the crash or because of it? Was a failure foreseeable, or did a repair record show it had been ignored? Answering those questions often takes specialized work, including:

Preservation and inspection of the failed component. Physical evidence may be repaired, discarded, or altered if it is not preserved, and a careful inspection protocol helps show the part’s condition at the time of the crash.
Maintenance and inspection records. Repair orders, parts purchase records, inspection reports, and driver defect reports can show what was known and when.
Electronic data. Onboard systems may record speeds, braking events, and fault codes.
Recall and defect history. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration publishes recall information that can show whether a part or vehicle was subject to a known safety issue.
Carrier safety history. Public registration and inspection information is available through the FMCSA SAFER system.
Expert analysis. Mechanical engineers, metallurgists, and accident reconstruction professionals may be needed to explain why a part failed and what the evidence shows.

Having reviewed high-exposure claims from the carrier side, I know insurers and defense counsel often retain their own experts early, which is one reason these claims can move on parallel tracks. Our article on what happens inside a truck accident claim walks through how investigation, evaluation, and negotiation typically unfold, and what to do after a trucking accident in Houston covers the immediate aftermath.

Texas generally allows two years from the date of injury to file a personal injury lawsuit, and two years from the date of death in wrongful death cases, under Civil Practice and Remedies Code Section 16.003. Those who want to know what documents are useful to gather before a first meeting can review what to bring to a personal injury consultation. The firm’s Houston defective truck parts and mechanical failure attorney page describes how these cases are handled, within the broader truck accidents practice area.

Frequently Asked Questions

What are the most common mechanical failures in truck accidents?

Brake problems are among the most frequently cited, and FMCSA’s Large Truck Crash Causation Study coded brake problems for almost 30 percent of the trucks in its sample. Tire failures, steering and suspension problems, coupling device failures, and issues with rear impact guards and lighting also appear in truck crash investigations. A mechanical problem identified in a crash does not necessarily mean it caused the crash, and driver-related factors often appear alongside it.

Who can be held responsible for a defective truck part?

Depending on the facts, responsibility may fall on the driver, the trucking company, a maintenance or repair provider, a parts manufacturer, a seller, or others involved with the vehicle or its cargo. The right parties depend on why the part failed, whether through design, manufacturing, installation, maintenance, or neglect. Texas also divides responsibility by percentage among parties under Chapter 33 of the Civil Practice and Remedies Code, which can affect how a claim is valued.

Are trucking companies required to inspect vehicles regularly?

Yes. Under 49 CFR Part 396, motor carriers operating covered commercial vehicles must systematically inspect, repair, and maintain them, address defects reported by drivers, and have each vehicle pass a periodic inspection at least once every 12 months. Carriers must also keep certain records for set periods. Whether a specific federal rule applies to a particular truck and trip depends on the vehicle and the type of operation.

Can a parts manufacturer be held liable for a truck accident?

It may be possible, depending on the facts. Texas products liability law, including Chapter 82 of the Civil Practice and Remedies Code, addresses claims against manufacturers and sellers. A design defect claim generally requires a showing of a safer alternative design, and time limits, including a 15-year limit from the date of sale in many cases, may apply. An attorney can evaluate whether a particular component and set of facts support such a claim.

What evidence is needed to show a mechanical failure caused an accident?

Evidence that can matter includes the failed component itself, maintenance and repair records, driver vehicle inspection reports, periodic inspection reports, parts purchase records, onboard electronic data, and recall history. Expert analysis is often needed to explain whether a part was defective or worn and whether its failure caused the crash. Because some records are kept for limited periods under federal rules, early preservation requests are common in these claims.

This article is for general educational purposes only and is not legal advice or a substitute for advice about your specific situation, and no outcome can be guaranteed. The attorney-client relationship begins only when both sides agree to it.

If you or a family member were hurt in a collision involving a commercial truck, you may have options. You are welcome to contact Herrera PLLC or call 832-891-3210 for a free, confidential consultation with no obligation. Serious injury cases are handled on a contingency fee basis, which means no attorney’s fees are owed unless compensation is recovered, and the firm advances case costs, which are reimbursed only if the case is successful.

Jonathan Herrera, J.D. is the founder of Herrera PLLC in Houston, Texas.

Before becoming an attorney, Jonathan spent over a decade as a licensed insurance adjuster, managing high-exposure casualty and property claims for insurance carriers and third-party administrators across multiple states, and he founded JH Claims LLC, an independent adjusting firm. He later practiced insurance defense at Rymer, Echols, and Nelson-Archer before opening his own firm to represent injury victims, policyholders, and businesses. He is a member of the Texas Trial Lawyers Association, the Houston Trial Lawyers Association, and the American Association for Justice. Learn more about Jonathan Herrera and Herrera PLLC.