Does South Carolina Law Allow You to Sue if You Modified or Altered the Defective Product?

Consumers modify products all the time. From upgrading a vehicle's suspension to removing a cumbersome plastic safety guard on a table saw, altering products is a standard part of ownership. However, if that product catastrophically fails and causes severe injury, the manufacturer's corporate attorneys will immediately point the finger at you. They will argue that your aftermarket modifications voided their liability and caused the accident.

Under South Carolina law, a modification does not automatically destroy your right to sue. The state uses a comparative negligence system, meaning a jury will weigh your actions against the manufacturer's original defective design. If you have been injured by an altered product, finding an experienced product liability lawyer in our directory is essential to navigate these complex defenses and secure the compensation you deserve.

The Substantial Change Defense Explained

When you file a strict liability lawsuit under S.C. Code Ann. § 15-73-10, the statute explicitly requires that the product reaches the user 'without substantial change in the condition in which it is sold.' Under S.C. Code Ann. § 15-73-30, which incorporates the comments to Section 402A of the Restatement (Second) of Torts, an unforeseen, substantial alteration that contributes to the harm operates as a complete defense barring strict liability recovery.

To overcome this hurdle, injured plaintiffs frequently bring a parallel claim for negligence alongside strict products liability. In negligence actions, South Carolina applies a modified comparative negligence standard judicially established in Nelson v. Concrete Supply Co., 303 S.C. 243 (SC Supreme Court 1991). Under this rule, a plaintiff may still recover damages as long as their own negligence (including any modification or misuse) is not greater than that of the defendant (50% or less). If a jury finds the manufacturer was 60% at fault for a design failure and the aftermarket alteration was 40% responsible, the plaintiff can prevail under negligence, with the recovery reduced by 40%. Furthermore, if the modification was foreseeable or if the original factory defect was the true proximate cause of the injury, the manufacturer remains liable.

Removing Safety Guards on Power Tools

In construction jobs across Columbia and Spartanburg, workers frequently remove blade guards from table saws or grinders because the guards jam or slow down the work. If the blade shatters and causes a severe laceration, the manufacturer will claim your removal of the guard was a substantial change. Your lawyer's job is to prove that the blade was manufactured with microscopic cracks (a manufacturing defect) that would have caused it to shatter and injure you regardless of whether the plastic guard was attached.

Aftermarket Car Part Modifications

Car enthusiasts frequently install lift kits, custom tires, or aftermarket engine tunes. If a vehicle rolls over on a South Carolina highway, the automaker will immediately blame the lifted suspension. To win under the standard set in cases like Branham v. Ford Motor Co., 390 S.C. 203 (SC Supreme Court 2010), your attorney must bring in automotive engineers to prove that the vehicle's original roof-crush strength was inherently defective, and the roof would have collapsed and caused the traumatic brain injury even if the car had a factory suspension.

Jailbreaking Electronic Devices

If you 'jailbreak' a smartphone to download unauthorized apps, or bypass software limits on an e-bike to make it go faster, you alter the product's software. If the lithium-ion battery subsequently overheats and catches fire, the manufacturer will claim your software bypass caused the battery to over-volt. Your lawyer will require electrical engineering experts to demonstrate that the battery lacked fundamental thermal-runaway protections-a flaw present in the original factory design.

Using Equipment Against the Manual's Instructions

Manufacturers often hide behind the instruction manual, claiming you 'misused' the product. However, South Carolina law recognizes 'foreseeable misuse.' If it is common knowledge in the industry that users occasionally use a product in a certain unintended way, the manufacturer has a legal duty to design the product to be safe during that foreseeable misuse, or at least provide adequate, prominent warnings against it.

How to Win By Proving the Original Defect

To overcome the substantial change defense, your legal team must follow a strict procedural path:

• Step 1: Secure the Product. Do not attempt to 'undo' your modification to hide it from the manufacturer. This is spoliation of evidence and will destroy your case.
• Step 2: Hire Expert Witnesses. Your lawyer will retain independent engineers to perform failure analysis testing on the product.
• Step 3: Establish Proximate Cause. The experts will draft reports proving that the original defect-not your modification-was the 'proximate cause' (the primary legal cause) of the failure.
• Step 4: File Suit in Civil Court. Your attorney will file the lawsuit using Form SCCA 234, South Carolina, Judicial Department, Civil Action Coversheet at a local court, such as the Spartanburg County Court of Common Pleas, Spartanburg, preparing to argue comparative negligence before a jury.

Costs of Litigating a Modified Product Case

Defending against a 'substantial change' argument is highly technical and expensive. Engineering experts who can definitively separate the effects of your modification from the original defect charge premium rates, often totaling $15,000 to $30,000 for trial preparation. Fortunately, South Carolina product liability attorneys operate on a contingency fee. They will pay these expert costs upfront and only recover them, alongside a standard percentage fee (usually 33% to 40%), if they successfully secure a settlement or jury verdict in your favor.

How Long Does the Process Take?

Cases involving modified products are aggressively defended by corporate lawyers who know they have a strong initial defense. You can expect extensive discovery, expert depositions, and summary judgment hearings. This pushes the timeline to roughly 2 to 4 years before reaching a jury trial or a substantial settlement offer.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)