are there any lawyers on this forum?

[BoxsterLewis]

Im a young engineer and my IMS failled 2 weeks ago and warranty wont pay. I am screwed now I have called a couple lawyers and one has said i dont have a case bc the car was used and im waiting to hear back from another. this sucks..

[LoveBunny]

Originally Posted by BoxsterLewis

Im a young engineer and my IMS failled 2 weeks ago and warranty wont pay. I am screwed now I have called a couple lawyers and one has said i dont have a case bc the car was used and im waiting to hear back from another. this sucks..

That seriously does suck. Why won't the warranty pay? If you have a warranty, isn't that what it's for?

[LoveBunny]

Originally Posted by Frodo

Quote:

"Sad but true. I remember talking to a friend who was young and naive in law school. She said that a seasoned atttorney advised her that, contrary to its intent, the law has nothing to do with justice. It's a set of rules you play a game by and whoever plays the game better wins. Sometimes the innocent are guilty, and sometimes the guilty go free. If you can't live with that, don't go into the profession. She changed her career goal and is now a law professor."

Posted by Ofishbein.

Brings to mind the old expression, 'Those who can, do. Those who can't, teach'

It’s basically a system where one side presents their case (to include discrediting their opposition’s case) that paints a picture that’s often not very close to “the truth”. (I can’t get the image of Jack Nicholsan out of my head as I type that!) And their adversary presents their case (likewise casting doubt on the opposition’s case) that, as well, is typically not all that close to the truth, but in the opposite direction. When “the system” works, the judge/jury finds that elusive truth, somewhere in the middle. In close cases, however, presentation can make the whole difference, which is why the side with the most bucks often wins the case. The best attorneys are good theater, and in those close cases, that well-effected drama can swing the balance.

But like the trial attorneys say, that’s the system that’s developed over the centuries, and it’s a heck of a lot better that the judicial system that exists in much of the rest of the world. Devising a better one is tougher than one might suppose.

I think our system tries to do what it's supposed to, but of course when lawyers are involved everything gets complicated. I've seen a jury be given a two-hour video of a doctor with a thick accent testifying about some neurological condition. There is no way you are going to tell me that for two hours twelve lay people sat there and paid close attention to AND understand some dude who sounds like Triumph the Insult Comic Dog ramble on about intervertebral disks.

[Frodo]

Quote:

"I've seen a jury be given a two-hour video of a doctor with a thick accent testifying about some neurological condition. There is no way you are going to tell me that for two hours twelve lay people sat there and paid close attention to AND understand some dude who sounds like Triumph the Insult Comic Dog ramble on about intervertebral disks."

Posted by LoveBunny.

Yeah, I tend to agree with you on that one. Question: On the (I suspect) multitude of occasions when the judge had to interrupt the video to waken one or more jurors, was that made part of the court record??

[Brucelee]

I just completed a stint as a juror. I was impressed with the system all around, with the exception of the attendant costs to maintain it.

If I were charged with a crime, I would be comforted by what I saw. If I was paying for the system, I might feel otherwise.

[LoveBunny]

Originally Posted by Frodo

Quote:

"I've seen a jury be given a two-hour video of a doctor with a thick accent testifying about some neurological condition. There is no way you are going to tell me that for two hours twelve lay people sat there and paid close attention to AND understand some dude who sounds like Triumph the Insult Comic Dog ramble on about intervertebral disks."

Posted by LoveBunny.

Yeah, I tend to agree with you on that one. Question: On the (I suspect) multitude of occasions when the judge had to interrupt the video to waken one or more jurors, was that made part of the court record??

Actually, I didn't take down the video depo. It was already a deposition with a transcript that had been made, so I just sat there and played solitaire on my computer for two hours. I couldn't get away with a nap.

[jgatsby57]

Non-practicing lawyer here (got out while the gettin' was good);

The best answer I learned after $100k of law school was: "it depends."

From what I recall, a class would have to find some common defect in the engine that all members of the class share.

I also strongly agree with my man 23109VC's comments about a jury.

Reading this thread got me thinking about crap I haven't thought about for a while. Any other attorneys here remember that case from torts class about the guy that sued BMW over a paint job or something?

[LoveBunny]

After taking an arbitration yesterday, I am wondering if I, as a court reporter, can sue all of the members of the bar that I have ever worked with on the grounds that they are collectively driving me insane. Maybe I could start a class of all court reporters who are nuts.

[Frodo]

Quote:

"Actually, I didn't take down the video depo. It was already a deposition with a transcript that had been made, so I just sat there and played solitaire on my computer for two hours. I couldn't get away with a nap."

Posted by LoveBunny.

LB, for just such occasions you need to get yourself some of those eyeglasses that have the open eyes painted on the outside of the lenses.

Quote:

"After taking an arbitration yesterday, I am wondering if I, as a court reporter, can sue all of the members of the bar that I have ever worked with on the grounds that they are collectively driving me insane. Maybe I could start a class of all court reporters who are nuts. "

Posted by LoveBunny.

I think you lose on that one LB, under the old 'assumption of risk' theory. Working with lawyers day in and day out, what else can you reasonably expect?

[schnellman]

I worked as a free lance court reporter in Texas for ten years. There the reporter owns the transcript. It always pissed me off when lawyers made copies for their clients, for the appeals courts, for anybody they damn well pleased. Since the courts are run by and for attorney's I never felt I'd get very far with a law suit.

[thstone]

With about 225,000 Boxsters/Cayman's sold, my guess is that the IMS failure rate is somewhere around ~2%.

This is based on about 2,000 L&N IMS replacements sold to date (all assumed to be out of warranty repairs) and probably an equal number of warranty engine replacements for IMS failure.

Of course, not all L&N IMS replacements were failures, some were preventative replacements while replacing the clutch, but I am making an assumption that for every preventiative IMS replacement there is someone who simply replaced their IMS failed engine with a stock donor engine without any IMS upgrade.

Also, I haven't read any thing that would indicate that higher milage cars suffer a higher rate of IMS failures - if anything, the anectdotal postings indicate the opposite. This implies that failures are essentially random and that mileage is not a key factor (they will be evenly distributed in mileage). Thus, I am able to assume an equal number of failures occurs both under and out of warranty.

Any failure rate larger than 2-3% (for instance a 5% failure rate would be over 11,000 engine failures) just seems too big to ignore. In that case, we'd have owners crawling all over the internet looking for replacement engines and literally thousands and thousands of Boxsters flooding Craigslist and eBay with blown engines for sale. And I just don't see that, e.g., my search of eBay two days ago only found one Boxster with a IMS blown engine for sale.

Just my own back of the envelope estimates and assumtions. Would welcome to hear from anyone with some other ideas or numbers.

[mikefocke]

Originally Posted by thstone

With about 225,000 Boxsters/Cayman's sold, my guess is that the IMS failure rate is somewhere around ~2%.

This is based on about 2,000 L&N IMS replacements sold to date (all assumed to be out of warranty repairs) and probably an equal number of warranty engine replacements for IMS failure.

Of course, not all L&N IMS replacements were failures, some were preventative replacements while replacing the clutch, but I am making an assumption that for every preventiative IMS replacement there is someone who simply replaced their IMS failed engine with a stock donor engine without any IMS upgrade.

...

Just my own back of the envelope estimates and assumtions. Would welcome to hear from anyone with some other ideas or numbers.

Can really be supported because the assumptions are just that. No one but Porsche knows how many engine swaps and for what cause there have been. Enough so the IMS was redesigned twice and, if it was working perfectly, they wouldn't have. But to pluck some figure for engine replacements out of the air is to me a SWAG.

My own guess is the number that will fail over the car's lifetime is higher than your 2% but that is just because the car is so nice people try to extend the life of the car beyond what is normal. Another factor to consider is the treatment these cars now get as people buy them for less than $10k and may or may not maintain them as the original owner/aficionados did. That should increase the failure rate for whatever reasons they fail (and there are at least 21 known reasons that have been identified so far). Not to mention that so many are stored for long periods which is hard on lubricated parts.

But all cars fail...I'm going to take mine out for a spin in 15 minutes. I have my choice of 4 cars, it will get chosen.

[J Tinsby]

Originally Posted by BoxsterLewis

Im a young engineer and my IMS failled 2 weeks ago and warranty wont pay. I am screwed now I have called a couple lawyers and one has said i dont have a case bc the car was used and im waiting to hear back from another. this sucks..

Hello and sorry to hear of your expensive problem. I am curious to know what warranty you have that won't cover the damage.

Was it a 90 dealer warranty or one you purchased when you bought the car? Or a Porsche CPO one?

What year was/is the car and the mileage?

I wish you the best, this is no way to start out with a great car like the Boxster.

[litteng]

how about taking it to Louisiana, where they still use a form of the french civil code, now don't all go jumping on me cause i know almost nuthin about the french civil code, but the little I think i understand... it is not so much who can lie the best, but here' s the facts, the defendent is guilty, and here is the coarse of punishment...

anyone care to take a gander at how that would play out?

[thstone]

Originally Posted by mikefocke

I'm not sure that your conclusions can really be supported because the assumptions are just that.

@Mike - You are absolutely correct. I had to make several assumptions to come up with my estimate of ~2% and those assumtions could be incorrect. I wish that we all had more info to confirm the correct failure rate.

And this in no way is meant to downplay or minimize the heartfelt agony or financial impact that having an unplanned IMS failure can be. Its huge and I recognize that.

[litteng]

as i mentioned above i am in way qualified to adjudicate the law, but it seems to me that the compared to even Porsches' other produces, the 986/996/987/997 have suffered a very high number of failures at very low mileages, and the number of multiple and continuing failures with no absolute discernible trend during and after warranty is indicative of a product that is not fit for service.

aircooled porsche engines have a very good reputation for life and service... thats why they have been such a sought after sportscar.

the rub here is that because not evreyone drives their 987 (et all) 12-20,000 per year, in many cases the warranty has already time expired and the vehicle may have less than 25,000 mi. i as the second or third owner have a very low mileage vehicle with the desire to enjoy it for a long time, ...not so fast Tonto, do not pass go do not collect $200... you need a new engine, much worse that a game of monopoly

i think that the history of ongoing failures and the lack of being able to predict them should be seriously considered as part of the claim against the manufacturer... the 5th or 6th owner buying a used one at 10 yrs of age and 100,000mi should not be expecting anew engine, but some pro rated assistance would be appropriate.