11-26-2008, 11:44 AM
|
#1
|
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: San Carlos, CA 94070
Posts: 1,450
|
thanks for your response, yes all your points make a lot of sense.
Well, at least I can feel like I am in the same league with "The Donald"
Quote:
Originally Posted by 23109VC
What I can comment on, as a trial lawyer, is that a case like this would be a tough sell to a jury. EVEN IF PORSCHE IS LEGALLY LIABLE (and I don't know that they are) - good luck getting a jury to give a rats a$$ about it.
Jurors don't just listen to a case, listen to the law, and then actually follow the law. They are supposed to - but guess what - they don't. Ever hear of a guy named OJ??? Jurors are not judges and lawyers. They are lay people, not necessarily the sharpest tool in the shed, and they are often times motivated more by emotions and lay person standards, than the actual law the judge reads to them. So even though you may have a case from a "legal" perspective, you still need to make Joe Six Pack care enough to find the other guy liable and pay you money.
A bunch of Porsche owners who are complaining that the engine was poorly designed because it broke when it was OFF warranty will not generate much sympathy.
The average joe - who will be your jurors - don't own Porsches. They think anyone who owns one is rich enough to fix anything that could go wrong with it, and they will figure if you bought a Porsche, you assumed that risk when you bought it.
Imagine Donald Trump trying to sue the manufacturer of his private jet because the engines took a dump after the warranty expired. Would you let "The Donald" collect from the maker of his Gulfstream? That's kind of how the guy in the Accord will view all the "rich" guys whining about their Porsches...
|
__________________
I still wave at Boxsters, but they no longer wave back :-(
2002 Boxster S "Violet" (sold but not forgotten)
2009 Carrera 4S "Kelsey" (current ride)
2015 FIAT 500e "Nikki" my commuter car
|
|
|
11-26-2008, 06:59 PM
|
#2
|
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Ambler, PA
Posts: 35
|
When my 2005 MB SLK 350 started using 1 quart of oil every 700 miles , MB said "oh, that's normal" . When it failed 3 oil consumption tests (after the dealer bungled the first two) they said , " maybe there's a problem". This process took 7 months. When my neighbor the lemon lawyer got involved I got $8500 and a new engine within 3 months. I dumped that car as soon as my 987S was ordered. All manufacturers will deny that any individual owner has a problem vehicle, but any lemon lawyer knows better and can solve your problem. If the car is not too far out of warranty and has spotless maintenance records , mileage under 50K and no black box documenting frequent over-revs , you may have a case.
|
|
|
11-26-2008, 07:14 PM
|
#3
|
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: mandeville, la
Posts: 474
|
|
|
|
11-27-2008, 02:04 AM
|
#4
|
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Montreal
Posts: 171
|
I'm a lawyer here in Canada but we don't have as many class-action law suits as you guys do so I wouldn't be of much help
I am going to sell my Boxster S before my CPO warranty expires next year though...
|
|
|
11-28-2008, 06:25 AM
|
#5
|
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Southern New jersey
Posts: 1,054
|
Wow, a 20% failure rate! If that's even close to being accurate, I won't be buying a Boxster. I'm even hesitant assuming a 1-2% failure rate, ( not due to negligence).
|
|
|
11-28-2008, 01:28 PM
|
#6
|
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Oklahoma City
Posts: 1,209
|
Quote;
"Imagine Donald Trump trying to sue the manufacturer of his private jet because the engines took a dump after the warranty expired. Would you let "The Donald" collect from the maker of his Gulfstream? That's kind of how the guy in the Accord will view all the "rich" guys whining about their Porsche's..."
That is a terrible correlation to our situation. Again, known manufacturing defects in a product should be addressed by the manufacturer. If they're not, the judicial system should be called upon to protect consumers. I don't remember reading "WARNING: Because of know manufacturing deficiency's, IMS failure in this automobile could happen at any time and will result in a total loss of the engine" on my window sticker.
If it did would any of you bought your cars? BTW, I love my little red devil
P.S. In the event an aircraft engine failure does occur, the engine is torn down to find the failure, determined why the failure occurred and initiation of a fix is instituted. Depending on the severity, a world wide grounding of all aircraft will happen. Gee, Porsche should follow their lead.
__________________
Sadly on the outside looking in.
"Drive it like the Doctor ordered"
Last edited by Jaxonalden; 11-28-2008 at 03:21 PM.
|
|
|
11-28-2008, 02:50 PM
|
#7
|
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Du Monde
Posts: 2,199
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by stephen wilson
Wow, a 20% failure rate! If that's even close to being accurate, I won't be buying a Boxster. I'm even hesitant assuming a 1-2% failure rate, ( not due to negligence).
|
I need to ammend this. The 20% seems the likely number for RMS failure not IMS failure (which is indeed usually more serious).
IMS failure rate is much lower, but still higher than one would expect for a 'normal' reject rate for a manufactured engine.
There can be catastrophic RMS failures which kill the motor, but these are pretty rare. RMS usually develops as a slow drip which increases. The big issue with RMS is the extent and expense of fixing it (with no guarantee the fix will work).
IMS on the other hand almost always takes the engine with it.
|
|
|
11-28-2008, 03:13 PM
|
#8
|
There Is No Substitute.
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West Coast
Posts: 3,253
|
From what I've heard/read, RMS does not normally cause an engine failure, because you can catch it if you notice the oil leak under the engine and have the seal replaced for around $800. I think 20% is a fair number for the people that have an RMS leak, but I think the % of people that have to replace their engine is much lower.
IMS normally occurs without warning and suddenly but IMS only affects Boxster's built from 2001 and on, because they have the "better" redesigned IMS.
The pre-2001 Boxster's very, very rarely have IMS failures. The only major worry about pre-2001's is a slipped sleeve issue from a 10/98-03/99.
This what I now about what can cause an engine failure, I'll let everyone else try and figure out what the percentages are.
__________________
1999 Ocean Blue Metallic Boxster - blueboxster.com
Last edited by rick3000; 11-28-2008 at 03:16 PM.
|
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is On
|
|
|
All times are GMT -8. The time now is 03:21 AM.
| |