|
I don't understand how you can say that the only people who win in a class action suit are the lawyers who organize it. Let's say that a class action is started against Porsche for IMSB defective design and it is successful and everyone who ever purchased a car with the defective design is given a free oil change at a dealership (value $200), whether you experienced engine failure or not. Those who had a failure may be awarded more. At that point, if you didn't have a failure, you have a free oil change and it didn't cost you anything. No one asked you to contribute to the costs of the suit or participate in any way. You didn't have to go to court or hire an expert witness. All you had to do was maybe fill out a form and mail it back. Who cares how much money the lawyers make? What if Porsche doesn't settle and the case has to go to trial? You don't pay anything. If the class action fails, which is much more likely than for it to succeed, the lawyers who started the class action get nothing and are out all of their costs, expenses and time. Again, you don't pay anything. As I see it, since Porsche has offered NOTHING to M96 engine owners, anything you get from a class action suit is a bonus. If Porsche were covering even a part of the cost of engine upgrades or repairs, there would be no need for a class action suit and I might think differently about it. As far as small claims court is concerned, it is a good idea if your claim is for failure to repair something under warranty or other circumstances where expert testimony is not required. In the case of the IMSB, you can't prove defective design without expert testimony and unless you are Jake you will have to hire an expert at significant cost, if you can find one, to testify. This often makes it cost prohibitive for an individual to prosecute a case for a single car. The prospective award is often outweighed by the cost involved. Just my two cents.
|
Threaded Mode
