are there any lawyers on this forum?

[ChrisZang]

Hi,

I am an avid poster of this on other Boxster forums and it seems to me that the # of posts about engine failures is steadily increasing.
I am NOT a lawyer and and for my amateur mind it seems to me that this is a class action law suit waiting to happen.
I am somehow bedazzled that no lawyer has picked it up yet.

Any lawyer on this forum could fill me in, why that could be ?

Happy Thanksgiving

[rick3000]

I am not a lawyer, but I know a few members here are.
I don't think a class action lawsuit has ever happened because there is no hard data on the frequency of Boxster engine failure. In the year and a half I've been on this forum, I have seen 5-8 posts of people actually having engine failures, but there are over 200,000 Boxster worldwide.
It is hard to tell the frequency and you need some facts before you get into a lawsuit.

[Lil bastard]

+1... not only that, but I would guess that most of the engine failures happen outside the warranty period to 2nd/3rd owners. Failures during the warranty period are generally covered.

EVERY engine fails at some time or another. And, engines of the same type will generally fail within a given mileage.

Add the variables of driving style, differing maintenance, oils, fuel and fuel quality, and the fact that the best available statistics (ad hoc though they may be) seem to point to a failure rate of only around 20% (certainly some of which are attributable to the driver/owner), and you'd have a fairly steep uphill climb to prove your case.

Also, Porsche wouldn't just lie down and die; they'd likely mount a pretty stiff and expensive defense. Such an action could well cost you close to a new engine anyway. It's not likely an attorney would take the case on a contingency basis, so you'd be out $$ upfront with no guarantees. Everyone could end up winning (Porsche, Attorneys, etc.) except you.

[23109VC]

I'm a lawyer - but I do criminal law - so I'm not much help. Unless of course in a fit of rage over your blown motor you assault your Porsche dealer and get arrested..

Seriously - I'd like to hear from some of the civil attorneys here on the forum. What I do as a criminal lawyer tends to be more focused on trial work - and not on civil litigation/discovery/motions. Those guys can speak to the strenths/weaknesses from a liability standpoint.

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...

Like I said, I'm not a civil attorney - so I hope I'm wrong - I just think that if/when this case made it to a real courtroom with a real jury - no one would care - and that matters.

[KevinH1990]

I'm not a lawyer so don't consider this authoritative.

I've owned a few products that have been the subject of class action lawsuits. In the two cases I remember clearly, both were settled out of court.

One involved our Maytag Neptune washer. The initial design of the washer promoted mildew growth and it would smell very bad. Maytag developed a fix that reduced the problem, but did not eliminate it. (They replaced the door gasket and timer. They also developed a "freshen up" procedure in which I basically have to run the washer through a special cycle using bleach and dishwasher detergent every few months.) By the time the lawyers got involved, the washer was repaired to the point I could live with it.

If I recall correctly, the settlement was on a pro rata basis. People with older washers received less and people with newer washers received more. My washer was a few years old at the time, and I would receive a $100 coupon good for buying a new washer in the next two years. I also had to give Maytag another shot at fixing the washer before I could collect.

It looked to me that the people who did the best in the whole deal were the lawyers. I assume that would be the case in any class action against Porsche.

[ChrisZang]

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"

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...

[raddoc]

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.

[nola911]

http://www.porscheenginefailure.com/

[Jacques79]

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...

[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.

[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?