What Evidence Do You Need to Prove a Defective Peloton Bike+ Injury Claim?
If you were injured when a Peloton Bike+ seat post suddenly broke or detached during exercise, the evidence you preserve may determine whether you can successfully pursue a product liability lawsuit. A defective exercise bicycle can cause a rider to lose support without warning, fall against the bicycle frame, or strike the floor or nearby furniture. The resulting injuries may include fractures, torn ligaments or tendons, spinal injuries, concussions, and other serious conditions. However, proving that an accident occurred is not the same as proving that a defective product caused it. Under New York law, an injured consumer generally must show that the bicycle had an actionable defect, that the defect substantially contributed to the accident, and that the accident caused compensable injuries. Physical evidence, photographs, medical records, witness testimony, and expert analysis may all become important.
On November 6, 2025, the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) announced a recall of approximately 833,000 Peloton Original Series Bike+ exercise bikes because their seat post assemblies could break and detach during use, creating a fall and injury hazard. The recall applies to certain Model PL02 bicycles with frame serial numbers beginning with the letter T, sold between January 2020 and April 2025. At the time of the announcement, Peloton had received three reports of seat post failures, including two reports of injuries resulting from falls. The CPSC instructed owners of affected bicycles to stop using them immediately and contact Peloton for a free replacement seat post. Although the recall identifies a recognized product safety concern, it does not automatically establish that a particular bicycle was defective or that the defect caused an individual injury. A successful lawsuit requires evidence connecting the specific equipment failure to the accident and the resulting damages.
At Greenstein & Pittari, LLP, our New York personal injury attorneys understand that important evidence can disappear quickly after an exercise equipment accident. A broken seat post may be discarded during a repair, a manufacturer may request the damaged component, surveillance footage may be overwritten, and witnesses may forget critical details. Our firm investigates defective product claims, preserves physical evidence, and evaluates the engineering and medical proof needed to establish liability and damages. We represent injured consumers throughout Manhattan, Brooklyn, Queens, the Bronx, Staten Island, Long Island, and Westchester County. If you or a loved one was injured when a Peloton Bike+ seat post broke or detached, contact Greenstein & Pittari, LLP at 1-800-VICTIM2 (1-800-842-8462) for a free consultation.
What Must You Prove to Win a Peloton Bike+ Product Liability Lawsuit?
To succeed in a Peloton Bike+ product liability lawsuit, an injured consumer generally must show the bicycle had an actionable defect, the defect substantially contributed to the accident, and the accident caused legally compensable injuries. The precise requirements depend on whether the claim involves a manufacturing defect, defective design, inadequate warnings, or negligence. For example, a manufacturing defect claim may focus on whether the seat post departed from its intended specifications. In contrast, a design defect claim may examine whether the product was reasonably safe for foreseeable use. A failure-to-warn claim may require evidence concerning the manufacturer’s knowledge of the hazard and the adequacy of its warnings. The plaintiff must also establish that the seat post failure caused the fall, not that the seat post was merely damaged in an unrelated accident. Medical records, physical evidence, witness accounts, and expert opinions may be necessary to prove these elements. The November 2025 recall can inform the investigation but does not replace the required proof.
Why Is the Original Broken Peloton Bike+ Seat Post So Important?
The original broken seat post may be the most important piece of physical evidence in a Peloton Bike+ product liability lawsuit because it can help establish why the component failed. A qualified engineer may examine the fracture surfaces, material characteristics, dimensions, and condition of the assembly to determine whether the failure resulted from a manufacturing irregularity, an unsafe design, prior damage, or another cause. The component may also reveal whether it fractured suddenly or exhibited evidence of an earlier developing problem. If you discard, repair, or substantially alter the seat post, you may lose some of that information. Preserve the broken component and all related pieces in their post-accident condition whenever possible. Do not clean, cut, bend, weld, or attempt to reassemble them. If the component remains attached to the bicycle, avoid unnecessary disassembly. An attorney can arrange appropriate inspection and preservation procedures while ensuring that the unsafe equipment remains out of use.
Should You Preserve the Entire Peloton Bike+ or Only the Broken Seat Post?
Preserving the entire Peloton Bike+ may be important because the bicycle’s condition can provide context that the broken seat post alone cannot establish. An engineering investigation may require examination of the saddle, seat adjustment mechanism, frame, mounting points, fasteners, and other components that interacted with the failed assembly. The seat post’s position, signs of wear, prior repairs, and the relationship between the broken component and the bicycle frame may help determine the failure mechanism. Peloton may argue that improper installation, adjustment, or modification caused the accident, making the condition of the complete bicycle potentially relevant. If practical, preserve the equipment in substantially the same condition as immediately after the accident, without attempting to recreate the failure. If you need to store or transport it, document its condition before moving it and keep records of who handled the equipment. An attorney can determine whether to retain the entire bicycle for inspection or use a narrower preservation arrangement.
What Photographs Should You Take After a Peloton Bike+ Seat Post Failure?
Photographs should document the broken Peloton Bike+ seat post, the bicycle’s condition, the accident location, and any visible injuries because these images may help reconstruct what happened. Useful photographs include close-up views of the fracture, the detached saddle or assembly, fasteners, adjustment mechanisms, and any visible deformation or damage. Wider images should show the complete bicycle and its position relative to the floor, walls, furniture, or other objects the rider may have struck. Photograph the model and frame serial number, any relevant warning labels, and the seat adjustment position if it remains visible. Images of bruising, swelling, abrasions, or other visible injuries may supplement medical records. Take photographs only when it is safe and without delaying necessary treatment. Preserve the original digital files with their available metadata rather than relying solely on cropped images, screenshots, or compressed copies. Photographs can be valuable, but they do not necessarily replace physical examination of the equipment.
How Do You Prove Your Peloton Bike+ Was Included in the November 2025 Recall?
You can determine whether your Peloton Bike+ is in the recalled product population by documenting its model number and frame serial number and comparing that information with the official CPSC recall notice. The November 2025 recall involves certain Original Series Bike+ machines, Model PL02, with serial numbers beginning with the letter T. You may find the frame serial number inside the front fork, behind the front fork, or behind the flywheel. Do not confuse it with the separate serial number associated with the touchscreen tablet. Purchase records, product registration information, photographs, and communications with Peloton may provide additional identification evidence. The recall covers approximately 833,000 affected bicycles sold from January 2020 through April 2025. Establishing that a bicycle was included in the recall may help investigate the identified seat post hazard. Still, it does not independently prove the specific component was defective or caused the accident. Those issues require additional evidence.
Can You Prove a Peloton Bike+ Injury Claim Without the Purchase Receipt?
Yes. A missing purchase receipt does not automatically prevent an injured consumer from proving ownership, identifying the product, or making a viable Peloton Bike+ injury claim. Alternative records may include a Peloton account history, order confirmation emails, financing documents, credit card statements, delivery records, warranty registration, repair invoices, or correspondence with the company. The bicycle’s model and frame serial number may help identify the equipment independently. Someone who received the bicycle as a gift or bought it secondhand may have different records, such as messages with the seller, marketplace listings, or payment confirmations. The original purchase date may be relevant to product history, but the central personal injury issues concern the defect, causation, and damages. An attorney can review available documentation and investigate additional sources when you can’t locate the receipt. The absence of one document should not be confused with the absence of all evidence needed to establish a product liability claim.
Can Peloton Account Records and Workout History Help Prove Your Accident?
Peloton account records and workout history may help establish that the rider was using the bicycle around the time of the accident. However, the availability and usefulness of particular data depend on what the platform actually records and retains. A workout history may identify the date, class, duration, or other activity information relevant to the rider’s account. This information can help corroborate the timeline, but it should not be assumed to prove that a seat post fractured or that the rider fell. If the accident interrupted a workout, preserve available screenshots, account records, and related communications without modifying or deleting them. Connected fitness devices may contain additional activity information, but interpret their records cautiously because they may not capture the mechanical failure itself. An attorney can evaluate whether to request relevant account data from Peloton through appropriate preservation and discovery procedures. Digital records are most useful when considered alongside physical evidence, witness testimony, and medical documentation.
Can Security Camera Footage Prove That the Seat Post Broke Before You Fell?
Yes. Video footage can be especially valuable if it shows the seat post failing before the rider loses balance, because the sequence of events can be central to a product liability lawsuit. A home security camera, recording device, or surveillance system in a gym, hotel, or apartment fitness facility may have captured the accident. Even footage that does not clearly show the fracture may help establish the rider’s position, the bicycle’s movement, and the immediate aftermath. Preserve the original recording with its available date, time, and metadata information rather than relying only on a shortened clip. If a third party controls the recording, prompt preservation matters because many systems automatically overwrite footage. An attorney may send an appropriate preservation notice or seek the recording through available legal procedures. Review video evidence carefully, and don’t assume it establishes technical causation when the relevant component isn’t visible.
How Can Witness Testimony Support a Peloton Bike+ Injury Claim?
Witness testimony can help establish the circumstances of a Peloton Bike+ accident, the bicycle’s condition immediately afterward, and the injured person’s symptoms after the fall. A family member, roommate, trainer, or other person may have seen the seat post detach, heard a component break, or seen the rider strike the floor. A witness who arrived immediately afterward may be able to describe the bicycle’s position, the presence of broken pieces, or the rider’s complaints of pain. The value of the testimony depends on what the person actually observed and how reliably they can describe those observations. Do not encourage a witness to speculate about engineering causes or provide details beyond personal knowledge. Obtain available contact information and preserve relevant messages or recordings. Witness accounts may be especially important when the original seat post is lost, or Peloton disputes whether the component failed before the rider fell.
What Medical Records Do You Need to Prove Your Peloton Bike+ Injuries?
Medical records are essential to establishing the nature, severity, treatment, and potential long-term consequences of injuries allegedly caused by a Peloton Bike+ accident. Relevant records may include ambulance reports, emergency department notes, hospital records, orthopedic evaluations, diagnostic imaging, operative reports, physical therapy documentation, prescriptions, and follow-up treatment notes. These materials can help establish when symptoms began, what injuries were diagnosed, and how the person’s condition developed after the fall. Accurate medical histories are particularly important because Peloton may dispute whether a shoulder tear, herniated disc, or another condition resulted from the accident or existed beforehand. The injured consumer should explain the mechanism of injury truthfully to medical providers and follow appropriate treatment recommendations. An attorney can review the records, identify missing documentation, and determine whether medical expert testimony may be necessary. Medical evidence supports the injury claim but must be connected to proof that an actionable product defect caused the accident.
Do MRI Results, X-Rays, and Surgical Records Help Prove the Injury Was Caused by the Fall?
Yes. Diagnostic imaging and surgical records may provide objective evidence of injuries sustained in a Peloton Bike+ accident, but they do not necessarily establish causation without additional medical analysis. X-rays may identify fractures, MRI studies may reveal torn tendons or spinal abnormalities, and operative reports may describe the condition of injured structures during surgery. These findings can help establish the injury’s severity and the required treatment. However, some imaging abnormalities may be degenerative or preexisting, and Peloton may argue that the accident did not cause the condition. Therefore, treating physician opinions, prior imaging, contemporaneous symptoms, examination findings, and the mechanism of injury may be important. A surgeon’s description of a tear does not automatically establish when it occurred. An attorney should evaluate whether the medical evidence supports a reasonable causal connection between the fall and the diagnosed condition rather than relying exclusively on the existence of an abnormal imaging result.
What If You Had a Preexisting Shoulder, Knee, or Back Injury?
A preexisting medical condition does not automatically prevent recovery if a defective Peloton Bike+ caused a new injury or aggravated an existing condition. However, the medical evidence must distinguish the accident-related harm from symptoms and limitations that existed beforehand. For example, a person with occasional back discomfort may develop substantial neurological symptoms after a fall. At the same time, someone with an asymptomatic shoulder condition may experience significant pain and loss of function following the accident. Peloton may argue that the claimed injury was degenerative or unrelated to the equipment failure. Prior medical records, comparative imaging, treatment history, and physician opinions may help establish whether the accident caused a meaningful change. Accurate disclosure of relevant medical history is important because inconsistencies can undermine credibility. An attorney can work with appropriate medical experts to evaluate whether the evidence supports a new injury, an aggravation, or another legally compensable consequence of the fall.
How Do You Prove That the Broken Seat Post Caused the Fall Rather Than Breaking During It?
Proving the seat post broke before the rider fell may require physical evidence, witness testimony, video footage, and engineering analysis. This distinction matters because Peloton may argue the rider lost balance for an unrelated reason and that the component was damaged in the resulting impact. The seat post’s fracture characteristics, the condition of surrounding components, and the distribution of damage may help an expert evaluate the sequence of events. Witnesses may describe a sudden loss of saddle support, while video may show the rider’s position immediately before the fall. Contemporaneous statements made to emergency personnel or medical providers may also help establish what the rider experienced. However, evaluate an injured consumer’s description alongside objective evidence rather than treating it as conclusive. A successful claim generally requires proof that an actionable defect substantially contributed to the accident, not merely that the bicycle was damaged afterward.
Do You Need an Engineering Expert to Prove a Defective Peloton Bike+ Seat Post?
An engineering expert may be important in a Peloton Bike+ product liability lawsuit, particularly when the cause of the seat post failure is disputed, or the claim involves technical design or manufacturing issues. A qualified mechanical or materials engineer may examine the damaged component, evaluate its construction, consider expected loads, and assess possible fracture mechanisms. Depending on the circumstances, the expert may compare the failed component with product specifications or other available information. Expert testimony may be necessary to explain matters outside jurors’ ordinary knowledge, especially in a design defect claim involving engineering alternatives and product safety considerations. However, not every product liability claim requires the same type or extent of expert proof, and some manufacturing defect theories may be supported by circumstantial evidence. After reviewing the available physical evidence, legal theories, and anticipated defenses, an attorney should determine what specialized analysis is appropriate.
What Is the Difference Between Evidence of a Manufacturing Defect and a Design Defect?
Evidence of a manufacturing defect generally focuses on whether the particular Peloton Bike+ seat post departed from the manufacturer’s intended specifications or from otherwise identical units. In contrast, evidence of a design defect concerns whether the product’s intended design was not reasonably safe for foreseeable use. A manufacturing investigation may examine material irregularities, improper dimensions, fabrication defects, or deviations from quality-control standards. A design defect investigation may involve engineering specifications, foreseeable loads, safety testing, alternative designs, and the risks and benefits associated with the product’s configuration. A seat post breaking does not automatically establish which type of defect, if any, caused the failure. Different theories may require different forms of expert testimony and documentary evidence. An attorney should evaluate the physical component and available product records before selecting the legal theories supported by the facts. The November 2025 recall identifies a hazard but does not, by itself, resolve every engineering question concerning the underlying cause.
What Evidence Is Needed to Prove Peloton Failed to Warn Consumers About the Seat Post Hazard?
A failure-to-warn claim may require evidence about the seat post hazard, the warnings Peloton provided, what the company knew or reasonably should have known, and whether an adequate warning would have prevented the injury. Relevant materials may include owner manuals, safety labels, product communications, customer complaints, warranty records, internal testing information, and recall notices. The timing of the accident matters. A consumer injured before November 2025 may investigate whether Peloton knew about the hazard before the public recall, while a consumer injured afterward may need to show whether they received a warning or whether one was reasonably available. However, the later recall does not automatically establish that Peloton knew of a legally actionable defect years earlier. The plaintiff must also show a causal connection between the alleged warning deficiency and the injury. An attorney can evaluate whether the evidence supports a failure-to-warn theory in addition to manufacturing or design defect allegations.
Can Previous Peloton Customer Complaints Help Prove a Defective Seat Post?
Previous customer complaints may help determine whether similar seat post failures occurred, whether Peloton had notice of a potential hazard, and whether the company investigated the problem before the November 2025 recall. Potential evidence may include warranty claims, customer service reports, repair requests, engineering evaluations, and product safety submissions. However, we must examine the complaints for factual similarity and reliability. An incident involving a different bicycle model, a different component, or an unrelated accident may have limited relevance. In particular, the November 2025 Original Series Bike+ recall involving Model PL02 should not be confused with the separate 2023 recall involving the original Peloton Bike, Model PL01. Prior reports also do not automatically establish that the reported failures occurred as described. An attorney may seek relevant incident information through discovery and evaluate whether it supports notice, defect, or another legally permissible purpose. The admissibility of particular complaints depends on the circumstances and applicable evidence rules.
Can Peloton’s Internal Testing and Manufacturing Records Be Used as Evidence?
Potentially, yes. Peloton’s internal testing, manufacturing, quality-control, and engineering records may provide important evidence concerning the design and production of the Original Series Bike+ seat post assembly. Depending on the claims and the scope of discovery, relevant materials might include component specifications, design revisions, testing protocols, inspection records, supplier communications, warranty data, and investigations of reported failures. These records may help determine whether the particular component departed from specifications or whether the intended design presented an unreasonable safety risk. However, injured consumers generally do not have automatic access to every internal company document. In New York litigation, CPLR § 3101 governs the general scope of disclosure, while CPLR § 3120 provides procedures for seeking documents and tangible things for inspection or testing. Discovery requests may be limited by relevance, subject to objections, and governed by protective orders. An attorney can identify appropriate categories of evidence and pursue disclosure through the applicable legal process.
Can the November 2025 Peloton Bike+ Recall Be Used as Evidence in Court?
The November 2025 Peloton Bike+ recall may be relevant to an investigation, but whether it can be introduced in court depends on its purpose and New York’s applicable evidence rules. New York generally restricts the use of subsequent remedial measures when offered solely to prove negligence or culpable conduct. However, distinctions and exceptions may apply depending on the legal theory and circumstances. A recall announced after an accident therefore should not automatically be treated as admissible proof that Peloton was negligent when the injury occurred. The recall may nevertheless help identify the affected product population, reported hazard, and categories of earlier testing or incident records that warrant investigation. Evidence developed independently of the recall may be significant in proving defect and causation. An attorney should carefully evaluate the recall’s evidentiary significance rather than assuming the announcement alone establishes liability or that every recall-related document is inadmissible.
What Evidence Can Defeat Peloton’s Claim That You Misused the Bike?
Evidence of ordinary, foreseeable use may help challenge an allegation that a Peloton Bike+ rider caused the seat post failure through misuse. Relevant proof may include the manufacturer’s instructions, photographs showing the seat adjustment position, maintenance records, service documentation, and testimony concerning the workout. If Peloton alleges that the rider exceeded a product limitation, installed an unauthorized component, or improperly adjusted the saddle, an attorney can examine whether that conduct occurred and whether it actually contributed to the failure. Engineering evidence may be particularly important when the manufacturer claims that a component broke because of forces associated with the rider’s conduct. The rider’s vigorous exercise alone does not automatically establish misuse. Conversely, evidence of a substantial alteration or prohibited use may present legitimate defenses. A thorough investigation should distinguish unsupported allegations from conduct that was both established and causally related to the accident.
What If the Broken Seat Post Was Repaired, Returned, or Thrown Away?
A Peloton Bike+ injury claim may still be possible even if the original broken seat post was repaired, returned, or discarded, but the loss of physical evidence can make it harder to establish the cause of the failure. An engineer may no longer be able to examine the fracture surfaces, test the material, or evaluate whether the component showed signs of prior damage. Alternative evidence may include photographs, repair invoices, communications with Peloton, witness testimony, and records describing the component’s condition before it was removed. If Peloton or a service provider received the original part, an attorney may investigate whether it remains available for inspection. The legal consequences of missing evidence depend on the circumstances, including whether there was a duty to preserve it and whether its loss prejudiced another party. Consumers should preserve all remaining materials and avoid further changes to the bicycle while an investigation is being considered.
Can You Prove a Defective Peloton Bike+ Claim Without the Original Broken Component?
Possibly. New York product liability law may permit certain defect claims to be established through circumstantial evidence, even when the failed component is unavailable. However, the plaintiff must still present sufficient evidence supporting an actionable defect and address other reasonable explanations for the product’s failure. Photographs, witness accounts, repair records, product history, and accident evidence may help establish what occurred. In some circumstances, a qualified expert may evaluate whether the available evidence supports a particular failure mechanism. The absence of the original component may also allow Peloton to argue that it cannot examine the equipment or determine whether misuse, prior damage, or modification caused the failure. The strength of the case therefore depends on the quality of the remaining proof and the applicable legal theory. A consumer should not assume that losing the part automatically defeats the lawsuit, but preserving the component whenever possible is substantially preferable.
What Evidence Proves Medical Expenses and Lost Wages After a Peloton Bike+ Accident?
Medical bills, treatment records, employment documentation, and financial records can help establish the economic losses resulting from a Peloton Bike+ accident. Medical evidence may include hospital charges, physician bills, diagnostic imaging expenses, therapy invoices, prescription costs, and records concerning future treatment recommendations. Employment evidence may include pay statements, tax returns, employer confirmations, attendance records, and written medical restrictions explaining why the injured person could not work. Self-employed individuals may need business records and other documentation to establish lost earnings. When permanent limitations affect future employment, vocational or economic expert opinions may be appropriate. The evidence must link the claimed losses to the accident-related injuries, not unrelated conditions or circumstances. Insurance payments and potential reimbursement obligations may also affect the ultimate financial recovery. An attorney should review the available records and identify any additional proof needed to support a complete, legally grounded damages claim.
How Can You Prove Pain and Suffering After a Peloton Bike+ Injury?
You may establish pain and suffering through medical records, treatment history, credible testimony, and other evidence showing how the Peloton Bike+ accident affected the injured person’s physical condition and daily life. A fractured wrist may interfere with dressing, driving, or working, while a shoulder injury may limit lifting and reaching. A spinal injury may affect sleep, mobility, and participation in recreational activities. Treating physician observations, physical therapy notes, documented restrictions, and evidence of ongoing symptoms may help support these consequences. The injured person’s testimony can also explain changes in ordinary activities that medical records do not fully reflect. However, statements should be accurate and consistent with the available evidence. New York does not assign a fixed amount to a particular injury, and a product recall does not determine the value of pain and suffering. The assessment depends on the severity, duration, and documented consequences of the accident-related injuries.
How Long Should You Keep Evidence After a Peloton Bike+ Accident?
Preserve evidence related to a Peloton Bike+ injury while a potential claim is evaluated and throughout any resulting litigation, subject to advice on applicable preservation obligations. Physical components, photographs, electronic records, medical documentation, and relevant communications may remain important for years after the accident. New York generally allows three years from the date of injury to bring an ordinary personal injury lawsuit under CPLR § 214, subject to applicable exceptions and tolling provisions, but filing a lawsuit does not mean the evidence can then be discarded. After the action begins, the parties may need to conduct inspections, exchange records, obtain expert opinions, and prepare for trial. An injured consumer should avoid deleting relevant digital information, discarding broken parts, or making unnecessary changes to the equipment. An attorney can advise on appropriate storage, documentation, inspection, and eventual disposition of evidence once they evaluate legal obligations.
Why Choose Greenstein & Pittari, LLP?
A defective Peloton Bike+ seat post accident can leave an injured consumer with serious medical problems and difficult questions about how to prove what happened. A manufacturer may dispute whether the component was defective, whether it broke before the fall, whether the rider misused the bicycle, or whether the claimed injuries resulted from the accident. These disputes often turn on evidence that must be identified and preserved long before a case reaches trial. At Greenstein & Pittari, LLP, we understand that a successful product liability investigation requires more than pointing to a recall announcement. Our attorneys focus on developing the physical, technical, medical, and documentary evidence needed to evaluate the accident’s cause and establish legally recoverable damages.
Our firm brings decades of experience representing injured individuals throughout New York and handling complex personal injury litigation. Claims involving the November 2025 Peloton Bike+ recall may require preserving and examining the broken seat post, investigating product design and manufacturing information, reviewing customer complaints and warranty records, and consulting with engineering and medical experts. Our attorneys understand the importance of pursuing appropriate discovery, identifying potentially responsible manufacturers, component suppliers, retailers, and other parties, and investigating available insurance coverage. We also prepare to address manufacturer and insurance company defenses involving alleged misuse, substantial modification, comparative fault, preexisting injuries, and disputed causation. Our goal is to develop the evidence needed to pursue full compensation under New York law when the facts support a claim.
Greenstein & Pittari, LLP provides personalized, compassionate representation to injured consumers throughout Manhattan, Brooklyn, Queens, the Bronx, Staten Island, Long Island, and Westchester County. Our English- and Spanish-speaking staff assist clients throughout the legal process. We offer free consultations and handle personal injury matters on a contingency fee basis, meaning our legal fee depends on a successful recovery. We prepare cases thoroughly and remain committed to providing individualized attention throughout the legal process.
If you or a loved one suffered an injury when a recalled Peloton Original Series Bike+ seat post broke or detached during exercise, preserving the available evidence may be one of the most important steps you can take. Our attorneys can investigate the equipment failure, evaluate the available medical and technical proof, and determine whether a product liability claim may be available.
Greenstein & Pittari, LLP
Call 1-800-VICTIM2 (1-800-842-8462)
Don’t Be a Victim Twice.
Our Fee Guarantee: No Fee Unless Successful.