Auto Journalist Sued For $174,000 After Destroying A Rare Porsche’s Engine
01-23-2013, 06:52 AM
#16
Burning Brakes
1) it costs more to put things right (due to the time it takes to collect & collate information, submit to court, pay court fees, attend court etc) than it does to firm up a gentleman's agreement; and
2) that the motoring journalist profession has, unlike many other professions, avoided having to concern itself with loan/hire agreements before borrowing property belonging to other people.
Why attack the lawyers for what they charge, they didn't put anyone in the car, or make it break!?
The lawyers should have instructed their (respective) clients that there was a risk of wining/losing and that there would be financial implications from such. There should also have been an attempt to settle this without going to court. This clearly did not either happen or succeed, so for one of the parties, going to the High Court was always going to be an expensive affair.
01-23-2013, 08:42 AM
#17
> Why attack the lawyers for what they charge,
I don't. Lawyers are not to blame, they are just symptoms of the disease: a mix of self-righteous greed combined with an inability to stand up to commitments.
I think it's sad to spend less 25% of a given amount on 'making things' and the rest on 'bicker-blurb'.
I prefer the money to be spent on the flat 12, that's all.
> that the motoring journalist profession has, unlike many other professions, avoided having to concern itself with loan/hire agreements before borrowing property belonging to other people.
+1: That was not smart to gun the 917 without thinking: What if....
I don't. Lawyers are not to blame, they are just symptoms of the disease: a mix of self-righteous greed combined with an inability to stand up to commitments.
I think it's sad to spend less 25% of a given amount on 'making things' and the rest on 'bicker-blurb'.
I prefer the money to be spent on the flat 12, that's all.
> that the motoring journalist profession has, unlike many other professions, avoided having to concern itself with loan/hire agreements before borrowing property belonging to other people.
+1: That was not smart to gun the 917 without thinking: What if....
Last edited by Bertrand; 01-23-2013 at 08:44 AM. Reason: spelling
01-23-2013, 09:00 AM
#18
obviously well-drafted agreements will be have clear commitments and don't end up in court.
01-23-2013, 09:02 AM
#19
01-23-2013, 12:46 PM
#21
Three Wheelin'
Lessons to be learned for eveyone here. Not sure if anyone actually "won" there. With hindsight a written in stone agreement should have been in place.
I once loaned my car (not the '64!) to a friend to do a 1/4 mile run. He was bored of watching and I needed a break. He smoked the clutch all the way up the strip. The commentator didnt know what was going on. It cost me a clutch. It was probably the last time someone else used my car in anger
Chris
I once loaned my car (not the '64!) to a friend to do a 1/4 mile run. He was bored of watching and I needed a break. He smoked the clutch all the way up the strip. The commentator didnt know what was going on. It cost me a clutch. It was probably the last time someone else used my car in anger
Chris
01-23-2013, 01:34 PM
#22
Nordschleife Master
01-23-2013, 09:22 PM
#24
Burning Brakes
The scary thing is, if this is how poorly the courts deal with not-so complex mechanical concepts....how the heck do they manage to understand really complex financial stuff instead?
01-24-2013, 02:48 AM
#25
Pro
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Singapore
Posts: 623
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Speaking as a (a) ex owner of a 964; (b) lawyer; and (c) accredited Porsche journalist 
, I'd like to say firstly, it was a shame that such a wonderful car was damaged, and that Octane's insurers wriggled out of liability so easily.
Someone at Octane (and every other mag) should now review their insurance policies. Is Octane backing the journo? Can't tell, but they should, given that it was their policy everyone was relying on.
As everyone assumed insurance would cover the damage, in both the journo's and owner's minds, everything was simple. Unfortunately, assumptions don't hold up most of the time.
From reading the judgement alone, I would question why the journo did not bring in far more expert evidence on the possibilities as to why the car could have jumped out of gear. The jouno's lawyers are treading a fine line in criticizing the judge, but the fundamental issue at the time was the evidence adduced in court. If there is little or no expert evidence, not much a judge can do.
On lawyers fees, it may seem high in relation to the damages, but it's really based on how much work is done, and should never be seen as a percentage of the damages. If one wants to fight on principle, one has to pay for it. And if the defendant is unhappy with the size of the opposing side's bill, it can be sent to the registrar for taxation (ie to prove that the work was indeed done).
, I'd like to say firstly, it was a shame that such a wonderful car was damaged, and that Octane's insurers wriggled out of liability so easily. Someone at Octane (and every other mag) should now review their insurance policies. Is Octane backing the journo? Can't tell, but they should, given that it was their policy everyone was relying on.
As everyone assumed insurance would cover the damage, in both the journo's and owner's minds, everything was simple. Unfortunately, assumptions don't hold up most of the time.
From reading the judgement alone, I would question why the journo did not bring in far more expert evidence on the possibilities as to why the car could have jumped out of gear. The jouno's lawyers are treading a fine line in criticizing the judge, but the fundamental issue at the time was the evidence adduced in court. If there is little or no expert evidence, not much a judge can do.
On lawyers fees, it may seem high in relation to the damages, but it's really based on how much work is done, and should never be seen as a percentage of the damages. If one wants to fight on principle, one has to pay for it. And if the defendant is unhappy with the size of the opposing side's bill, it can be sent to the registrar for taxation (ie to prove that the work was indeed done).
01-24-2013, 04:34 AM
#26
01-24-2013, 08:02 AM
#27
Burning Brakes
Interesting insights into how flawed the legal system is. And we're not blaming the lawyers here...that's like blaming a doctor for inventing the disease
The scary thing is, if this is how poorly the courts deal with not-so complex mechanical concepts....how the heck do they manage to understand really complex financial stuff instead?
The scary thing is, if this is how poorly the courts deal with not-so complex mechanical concepts....how the heck do they manage to understand really complex financial stuff instead?
Speaking as a (a) ex owner of a 964; (b) lawyer; and (c) accredited Porsche journalist , I'd like to say firstly, it was a shame that such a wonderful car was damaged, and that Octane's insurers wriggled out of liability so easily.
Someone at Octane (and every other mag) should now review their insurance policies. Is Octane backing the journo? Can't tell, but they should, given that it was their policy everyone was relying on.
As everyone assumed insurance would cover the damage, in both the journo's and owner's minds, everything was simple. Unfortunately, assumptions don't hold up most of the time.
From reading the judgement alone, I would question why the journo did not bring in far more expert evidence on the possibilities as to why the car could have jumped out of gear. The jouno's lawyers are treading a fine line in criticizing the judge, but the fundamental issue at the time was the evidence adduced in court. If there is little or no expert evidence, not much a judge can do.
On lawyers fees, it may seem high in relation to the damages, but it's really based on how much work is done, and should never be seen as a percentage of the damages. If one wants to fight on principle, one has to pay for it. And if the defendant is unhappy with the size of the opposing side's bill, it can be sent to the registrar for taxation (ie to prove that the work was indeed done).
, I'd like to say firstly, it was a shame that such a wonderful car was damaged, and that Octane's insurers wriggled out of liability so easily. Someone at Octane (and every other mag) should now review their insurance policies. Is Octane backing the journo? Can't tell, but they should, given that it was their policy everyone was relying on.
As everyone assumed insurance would cover the damage, in both the journo's and owner's minds, everything was simple. Unfortunately, assumptions don't hold up most of the time.
From reading the judgement alone, I would question why the journo did not bring in far more expert evidence on the possibilities as to why the car could have jumped out of gear. The jouno's lawyers are treading a fine line in criticizing the judge, but the fundamental issue at the time was the evidence adduced in court. If there is little or no expert evidence, not much a judge can do.
On lawyers fees, it may seem high in relation to the damages, but it's really based on how much work is done, and should never be seen as a percentage of the damages. If one wants to fight on principle, one has to pay for it. And if the defendant is unhappy with the size of the opposing side's bill, it can be sent to the registrar for taxation (ie to prove that the work was indeed done).
If there were an error in fact, or the judge was incorrect on a point of law there is the right to appeal. As this does not appear (according to the opening gambit of the letter) to be considered to be an option the only real course is to take the decision on the chin, however unpalletable that may seem.
01-24-2013, 05:10 PM
#28
Three Wheelin'
What doe sthe fact Piper didnt keep maintenance records have to do with anything?
No proof for any work on the engine? how do tehy think it was fixed an later teh car sold for over 1mil, fairy dust? (it was repaired by a renowned ex factory mechanic in Germany)
And how Piper gave his evidence is utterly irrelevant
Hales on the other and made a statement in writing to his insureres teh failure was asa result of his error. That he chose to change his story 4 year late in court is a matter for his conscience, but unsurprisingly the judge didnt believe his revides version of events.
The judge also made clear in the judgement that Hales would have lost even without that statement as if his other versiomn of events was true and the gearbox was 'dodgy' why on earth didnt he continue to drive it, knowing that?
Hales shold have settled the initial bill of 37k, which I have no doubt he could have done reltively easily, by selling one of his planes maybe?
Now the bill has trebled and he's pleading poverty.
Not a great situation but I have little sympathy with Hales
David Piper is the one who was wronged here
01-24-2013, 08:29 PM
#29
Racer
I would have thought, that if i was paying someone to fix my engine, knowing I was expecting someone else to pick up the tab i'd make damn sure i had proper reciepts for the work that was carried out . Just in case at a later date said person might refute what work was actually carried out? If you were in the shoes of the person footing the bill would you not find it a little strange ?
Equally if i was the sort of person that kept no record of what maintenace work had been carried out on my car and then subsiquently loaned the car out and it blew up, i'd think i might expect a spot of bother from the person i was asking to foot the bill if he suspected that the car might actually have been an accident waiting to happen, perhaps.
Equally if i was the sort of person that kept no record of what maintenace work had been carried out on my car and then subsiquently loaned the car out and it blew up, i'd think i might expect a spot of bother from the person i was asking to foot the bill if he suspected that the car might actually have been an accident waiting to happen, perhaps.
01-24-2013, 09:54 PM
#30
Pro
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Singapore
Posts: 623
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I would have thought, that if i was paying someone to fix my engine, knowing I was expecting someone else to pick up the tab i'd make damn sure i had proper reciepts for the work that was carried out . Just in case at a later date said person might refute what work was actually carried out? If you were in the shoes of the person footing the bill would you not find it a little strange ?
Equally if i was the sort of person that kept no record of what maintenace work had been carried out on my car and then subsiquently loaned the car out and it blew up, i'd think i might expect a spot of bother from the person i was asking to foot the bill if he suspected that the car might actually have been an accident waiting to happen, perhaps.
Equally if i was the sort of person that kept no record of what maintenace work had been carried out on my car and then subsiquently loaned the car out and it blew up, i'd think i might expect a spot of bother from the person i was asking to foot the bill if he suspected that the car might actually have been an accident waiting to happen, perhaps.
All the court has to decide is how much it cost to restore the engine to what it was immediately prior to the damage. And in assessing damages, unless it was clear that the engine had one-off titanium con-rods costing $50K each and the journo was fully aware of this and still chose to proceed, the cost of restoration should only be to a level of a "normal" 917.
Again, if the defendant is unhappy with the quantum, he can go back to court to have the damages assessed, and the court will decide the quantum.
Last edited by ACSGP; 01-24-2013 at 10:18 PM.