File An Objection...Preserve YOUR Rights!

[Homeboy981]

The FINAL date for IMS settlement is October 15th, 2013 - which is fast approaching. In order to preserve YOUR ability to collect for IMS repairs, you MUST let the the attorneys know about it. The ONLY WAY to force a larger settlement from Porsche (a.k.a "widen the class of affected persons") is to object IF you are not included in the suit.

Porsches' own lawyers have a dispute about the settlement class as being inadequate (10 years/130,000 miles), as proof here is my correspondence. It includes address, email and phone for you object on YOUR OWN BEFORE a decision is made. This is MY STORY, sorry if you do not like it or want to hear it but maybe some of you NEED to understand what can happen to your car and no matter how much you love to drive it, IF you suffer a loss - IT HURTS!

BTW just replacing the IMS bearing is NO GUARANTEE you will not have a future IMS failure. My car is now a giant paperweight and made it approx. a thousand miles AFTER THE NEW IMS bearing was installed before it CROAKED! I also have opened a case with Porsche North America. Only when ALL our collective voices are raised will anything be done. Sitting here complaining OR dissing me does not help Porsche make it right when you SUFFER A CATASTROPHIC ENGINE LOSS.

FACT: This is NOT normal maintenance. It IS a FACTORY DEFECT that has gone unaddressed for years. While I may not be popular, I will NOT be screwed over by anyone either….you may do as you wish! This was my decision, just don't think it will NOT happen to you!

I have sent this letter to Porsche NA, dealerships mentioned in Dallas, TX, the judge presiding, and the Eisen settlement attorney. Some of this information may be confidential, so I am just telling my friends here on 986Forum.

Here is the email excerpt from the attorney and his contact info (in chronogical order):

Mark, I have a dispute with Porsche about whether or not failures beyond the 10 year/130,000 mile limitation are covered by the settlement. If you want to preserve the option to sue them individually for your IMS failure, you can opt out of our settlement and then not be bound by it. You also have the opportunity to remain in the class and object, but if your objection is not sustained, you may very well have released any claim you have if Porsche’s construction of the release is upheld.

Regards. Steve Harris.


Stephen M. Harris
KNAPP, PETERSEN & CLARKE
550 N. Brand Boulevard, Suite 1500
Glendale, CA 91203-1922
Tel: (818) 547-5149
Fax: (818) 547-5329

***

Sent: Thursday, September 19, 2013 7:02 AM

On or about April 10th, 2013. The final IMS failure was in May 2013.

Mark
homeboy981@gmail.com

***

On Sep 19, 2013, at 8:49 AM, Stephen M. Harris wrote:


Mark, when was the IMS failure

Stephen M. Harris

***

On Sep 19, 2013, at 5:27 AM, "Mark-Gmail" wrote:

Hi Steve,

I am merely trying to get Porsche to try and understand that this settlement is inadequate and is overlooking a number of failures OUTSIDE PARAMETERS CURRENTLY SET UP.

We can talk, if you still need to, anytime after 10:00 AM CST. I now have a giant Porsche paperweight that has literally cost my family our financial security. Although I may not be able to sue today. I will NOT forget and will strive to share my experiences. Toyota even replaced defective items in their vehicles well AFTER that warranty to preserve their reputation. As a "no compromise" sports car should not have been designed this way. Further, this was a car I have wanted for years only to have it fail worse than ANY vehicle I have ever owned. What does that say?

Porsche has an opportunity to save its' brand by "doing right by their customers", and, so far, they are not doing more than taking 'baby steps' to remedy problems. This has been their philosophy for some time. However, when you are affected by their design flaw...your opinion of the company changes - especially when they ignore you!

Thank you in advance.

Mark Ingrum
homeboy981@gmail.com
972-333-6165

***

On Sep 18, 2013, at 5:01 PM, Stephen M. Harris wrote:

Mr. Ingrum, I am responding to the email below. I am the attorney handling the case on behalf of Porsche, and I am happy to speak to you. If you want to discuss this matter, just let me know when I should call you. Steve.

Stephen M. Harris
KNAPP, PETERSEN & CLARKE
550 N. Brand Boulevard, Suite 1500
Glendale, CA 91203-1922
Tel: (818) 547-5149
Fax: (818) 547-5329

***

Sent: Wednesday, September 18, 2013 2:06 PM
To: info@imsporschesettlement.com

"The suit parameters are too narrow. I too suffered an IMS failure. Worked all my life to buy one of your cars as a goal. And at age 51 I was able to afford to purchase a 2002 Boxster S. I must say I am disappointed as I spent $15,000 on a good, used, and well maintained vehicle only to have the IMS fail on me. I carefully, dutifully, maintained the car too totaling over $8,000 spent in addition to the purchase price to make the car PERFECT! Well, it wasn't because of an error in YOUR PRODUCTION. Further, your current Class Action IMS Settlement DOES NOT address YOUR FAILURE to me. Therefore, I am giving you an opportunity to make it right BEFORE I decide to whether to file an additional lawsuit. Porsche should be ASHAMED! Any other auto maker would fix this type of problem! Toyota fixed vehicles up to 100,000 that were out of warranty to protect their reputation. Porsche is making a MISTAKE IF THEY SETTLE as this suit DOES NOT address numerous purchases by people like myself who fall OUTSIDE the suit parameters. I have owned many German cars, yours was the one I looked forward to owning the most...and it let me down the WORST! BMW, Mercedes, Audi all have served me well and DID service their vehicles WHEN A KNOWN PROBLEM EXISTED, UNLIKE PORSCHE. I purchased a 2002 Boxster S with 55,000 miles in premium condition with a known maintenance record and it suffered an IMS failure at 68,000! That's $23,000 for 13,000 miles!!! It was NOT from lack of maintenance either, I put in $8,000 in repairs to that vehicle (more than ANY OTHER VEHICLE I HAVE EVER OWNED)..now it's a paperweight! A replacement engine costs MORE than the car is worth! I paid $15,000 for it and still owe $8,500! It is $10k for a replacement engine, AND ANOTHER $2k for IMS and seals, etc w/o installation! Porsche has almost single-handedly FORCED my family into Bankruptcy as a direct result of negligence and a problem that should have been fixed. Moreover, the settlement DOES NOT ADDRESS MY LOSSES. So expect further lawsuits and bad publicity to continue. I have spoken to Boardwalk Porsche, Park Place Porsche and several others in Dallas, Texas and NONE OF THEM WILL STAND UP AND FIX OR EVEN OFFER TO HELP THEIR CUSTOMER. Therefore, I will ensure that EVERYONE I CAN TALK TO WILL KNOW OF THE WAY I HAVE BEEN TREATED BY PORSCHE. Ferdinand Porsche would roll over in his grave if he KNEW all he had worked for, his reputation, is being soiled by executives that are more interested in making money than taking care of their customers. I am even embarrassed to admit I am German. Now I have a paperweight and does Porsche stand behind it? Noooo! Let an American car company try to get away with that and they would be sued to Bankruptcy court and back again. I have submitted my paperwork to the Court anyway and sent a letter to the judge presiding.

[evo-r]

I agree with you and do plan to op-out before the deadline (my 2003 has 80k and is over 10 years old)... this is my first PORSCHE and hopefully not the last becuase of how PORSCHE handles the IMS defect. Reputation is GOLD!

[Trey T]

I'm not understanding your objective, OP. Do you want everyone, if interested, to file an objection by sending an email to info@imsporschesettlement.com? Or do you only want the people whom have engine failure due to IMS design flaw?

[woodsman]

--------------------------

[jggibson]

I am perhaps a little late commenting on this thread/forum, however, here is my take on the appropriate action for many of us who own a 986/996.

If you are part of the class (own/lease a 2001-2005 MY 986/996) but have >130,000 miles or 10 years after first service - you are EXCLUDED from the settlement and any future reimbursement for costs of an IMS failure.

The only way you can preserve your rights to enter into litigation with Porsche in the future is to opt out of the settlement. You may object to the settlement but my view is that the chances are "slim and none" of having a positive outcome.

I am in the situation outlined above and I plan to opt out. I am happy to reconsider if others know something about this that I fail to see.

Jim Gibson

[thom4782]

I am going to suggest what I believe is the more pragmatic approach unless you have very deep pockets. Object to the settlement rather than opt out because, even if the chances or prevailing are slim, the settlement may change if enough people object to its proposed terms and conditions.

If you do opt out and subsequently suffer IMS caused damages, you will have to sue on your own because the court will not allow another class action suit to go forward. And, pragmatically, the legal costs to sue on your own will far exceed the cost of a new engine.

[dghii]

The is tough...punish Porsche or support a class action law situ. I will no object, nor participate. Class action is BS for the participants. The only ones who end up with enough cash to fix their cars are the lawyers representing the class.

I was aware of the IMS issue before purchasing my car so how can I hold Porsche responsible when I purchased the car anyway?

[1olddude]

There is a reason Hyundai is one of the fastest growing car companies in the world. They stand behind their automobiles. I don't own one but find it interesting that they can build nice vehicles, at reasonable prices, and offer double to triple the mileage warranties than other manufacturers. They are quickly building a loyal customer base. Porsche is losing on this one in the eyes of the consumer. I refused to be one of their statistics and sold a beautiful, 2002 Boxster S, only 15,000 miles. It wasn't worth the risk in my opinion and I wasn't about to spend 2k extra to make a practically brand new car less likely to suffer a catastrophic failure by installing a ceramic bearing as that should have been Porsches responsibility. I sold it and will keep my eyes open for an 09 or newer. I have my peace of mind intact and there's a huge part of me that doesn't want to give Porsche any more of my money. They are fun cars but seem to lack the customer loyalty that I prefer. Good luck to all of you and hope your bearings stay intact.

[AKnowles]

Originally Posted by dghii

I was aware of the IMS issue before purchasing my car so how can I hold Porsche responsible when I purchased the car anyway?

I was not aware of it, but bought a used car AS IS and regardless of whether it is a design defect or not is an immaterial issue.

I get the pain and suffering aspect of the IMSB issue. Really I do, but let's get real about it. If you buy a used car with no warrenty how can you expect anyone to pay for a failure that occured while you owned the vehicle?

[nefarious986]

While I'm saddened to hear your IMS horror story, I'm not sure Porsche is the one who "almost single-handedly FORCED my family into Bankruptcy as a direct result of negligence".

When I hear generically that someone bought a $15k toy under financing ( and still owe $8.5k ) then go out and spend another $8k making it nice / personalized / "pimped", I expect that person is either (a) a 18 yr old with no real financial responsibility, and not a care in the world .. or (b) someone with a decent amount of expendable cash. The last thing that comes to my mind would be a 51 year old with a family to support with little savings. This scenario from my outside view screams personal finance irresponsibility looking for someone to blame.

My 2c. I sincerely hope you're able to win your suit and get your car back and running.

[thstone]

I feel your pain.

The only question I have is if 10 years/130,000 miles is inadequate; what parameters do you think would be adequate?

When I thought about this question, I found it hard for me to come to a conclusion that seemed fair to those who have suffered failures and yet fair to the mfg who can't be expected to warranty low-mile cars forever.

[1olddude]

Originally Posted by thstone

I feel your pain.

The only question I have is if 10 years/130,000 miles is inadequate; what parameters do you think would be adequate?

When I thought about this question, I found it hard for me to come to a conclusion that seemed fair to those who have suffered failures and yet fair to the mfg who can't be expected to warranty low-mile cars forever.

I guess my answer to that is get rid of the years and go strictly by miles. A majority of Porsche owners put low miles each year on their cars. The IMS bearings that fail seem to, for the most part, happen early in the mileage but the cars are 10 years old before they even hit the 50,000 mile mark. Most IMSB failures happen in the 02-05 cars and those autos are almost past the ten year old mark anyway. Porsche lawyers aren't stupid. They are trying to save face when they should have recalled those faulty parts and fixed the problem but it isn't a safety issue so they swept it under the rug. Face it, most of the cars in the year range of the class haven't had a failure but they are past the ten year mark and way below the mileage. Ticking time bombs. Sure you can spend 2k and get some piece of mind so that is what we do. Too bad the IMSB failures don't start the car on fire. You can bet that Porsche would have a different solution then.