Here is my take on the RMS bull s*&t
03-04-2005, 12:52 PM
#46
Three Wheelin'
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: San Francisco Bay Area
Posts: 1,572
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by TD in DC
I confess that I am an attorney (and an engineer). That is why I could not stay quiet any longer. You know how hard it is for attys to keep their big mouths shut. 
"Me either........ I have done three(3) RMS's this week.................. "
This rms thread is getting funny........
03-04-2005, 01:01 PM
#47
Originally Posted by Torags
Whose billing address do you have......
"Me either........ I have done three(3) RMS's this week.................. "
This rms thread is getting funny........
"Me either........ I have done three(3) RMS's this week.................. "
This rms thread is getting funny........
03-04-2005, 01:02 PM
#48
Three Wheelin'
Yes Porsche is honouring its warranty. No doubts about it. But there is more to it than just warranty.
First off this is far from a just warranty issue, t's a manufacturing default. The fault lies in the design and/or manufacturing process. In many cases it doesn't show up until the warranty has expired. Take my case, my 1st RMS showed up just a few months out of warranty but the problem was built-in. If it would have shown up in-warranty then I wouldn;t have a concern to worry about. So this manufacturing fault is not an issue of warranty but instead an issue of responsibility. And Porsche are responsible since they didn't do it right in the first instance.
Secondly, it's also a case of looking after customers to keep them satisfied enough for future repeat business. Your customers are your asset. Without them you don't exist. Take the asset away and what have you got left? So while the warranty system may cover them in legal terms they are not giving due consideration to the hand that feeds them. This is what I mean by them being arrogant and lacking compassion.
The legal issue is a difficult one. For starters we are talking global and not individual national law suites. While a case may succeed in the USA, it might not hold water in the UK. However, perception is a wonderful thing and since the US is the biggest customer for Porsche and is the most letigious nation, it would be the best place for the law suite to take place since such a law suite would have an embarrasing force for Porsche in the RoW. I think this is the main reason that Porsche give out a 4 year warrnty system in the US while in the RoW it is only 2 years warranty. IMHO, the best method is to gain the support of PCAM and PCGB and have them combine to act on their members behalf in pursuing a resolution to the problem or else threaten legal action. The might of both clubs acting together would be a big concern for Porsche. This is just MHO.
First off this is far from a just warranty issue, t's a manufacturing default. The fault lies in the design and/or manufacturing process. In many cases it doesn't show up until the warranty has expired. Take my case, my 1st RMS showed up just a few months out of warranty but the problem was built-in. If it would have shown up in-warranty then I wouldn;t have a concern to worry about. So this manufacturing fault is not an issue of warranty but instead an issue of responsibility. And Porsche are responsible since they didn't do it right in the first instance.
Secondly, it's also a case of looking after customers to keep them satisfied enough for future repeat business. Your customers are your asset. Without them you don't exist. Take the asset away and what have you got left? So while the warranty system may cover them in legal terms they are not giving due consideration to the hand that feeds them. This is what I mean by them being arrogant and lacking compassion.
The legal issue is a difficult one. For starters we are talking global and not individual national law suites. While a case may succeed in the USA, it might not hold water in the UK. However, perception is a wonderful thing and since the US is the biggest customer for Porsche and is the most letigious nation, it would be the best place for the law suite to take place since such a law suite would have an embarrasing force for Porsche in the RoW. I think this is the main reason that Porsche give out a 4 year warrnty system in the US while in the RoW it is only 2 years warranty. IMHO, the best method is to gain the support of PCAM and PCGB and have them combine to act on their members behalf in pursuing a resolution to the problem or else threaten legal action. The might of both clubs acting together would be a big concern for Porsche. This is just MHO.
03-04-2005, 01:07 PM
#49
Originally Posted by Scouser
Yes Porsche is honouring its warranty. No doubts about it. But there is more to it than just warranty.
First off this is far from a just warranty issue, t's a manufacturing default. The fault lies in the design and/or manufacturing process. In many cases it doesn't show up until the warranty has expired. Take my case, my 1st RMS showed up just a few months out of warranty but the problem was built-in. If it would have shown up in-warranty then I wouldn;t have a concern to worry about. So this manufacturing fault is not an issue of warranty but instead an issue of responsibility. And Porsche are responsible since they didn't do it right in the first instance.
Secondly, it's also a case of looking after customers to keep them satisfied enough for future repeat business. Your customers are your asset. Without them you don't exist. Take the asset away and what have you got left? So while the warranty system may cover them in legal terms they are not giving due consideration to the hand that feeds them. This is what I mean by them being arrogant and lacking compassion.
The legal issue is a difficult one. For starters we are talking global and not individual national law suites. While a case may succeed in the USA, it might not hold water in the UK. However, perception is a wonderful thing and since the US is the biggest customer for Porsche and is the most letigious nation, it would be the best place for the law suite to take place since such a law suite would have an embarrasing force for Porsche in the RoW. I think this is the main reason that Porsche give out a 4 year warrnty system in the US while in the RoW it is only 2 years warranty. IMHO, the best method is to gain the support of PCAM and PCGB and have them combine to act on their members behalf in pursuing a resolution to the problem or else threaten legal action. The might of both clubs acting together would be a big concern for Porsche. This is just MHO.
First off this is far from a just warranty issue, t's a manufacturing default. The fault lies in the design and/or manufacturing process. In many cases it doesn't show up until the warranty has expired. Take my case, my 1st RMS showed up just a few months out of warranty but the problem was built-in. If it would have shown up in-warranty then I wouldn;t have a concern to worry about. So this manufacturing fault is not an issue of warranty but instead an issue of responsibility. And Porsche are responsible since they didn't do it right in the first instance.
Secondly, it's also a case of looking after customers to keep them satisfied enough for future repeat business. Your customers are your asset. Without them you don't exist. Take the asset away and what have you got left? So while the warranty system may cover them in legal terms they are not giving due consideration to the hand that feeds them. This is what I mean by them being arrogant and lacking compassion.
The legal issue is a difficult one. For starters we are talking global and not individual national law suites. While a case may succeed in the USA, it might not hold water in the UK. However, perception is a wonderful thing and since the US is the biggest customer for Porsche and is the most letigious nation, it would be the best place for the law suite to take place since such a law suite would have an embarrasing force for Porsche in the RoW. I think this is the main reason that Porsche give out a 4 year warrnty system in the US while in the RoW it is only 2 years warranty. IMHO, the best method is to gain the support of PCAM and PCGB and have them combine to act on their members behalf in pursuing a resolution to the problem or else threaten legal action. The might of both clubs acting together would be a big concern for Porsche. This is just MHO.
03-04-2005, 02:33 PM
#51
Drifting
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Toronto Ontario Canada
Posts: 2,310
Likes: 0
Received 5 Likes
on
3 Posts
Hey Scouser
As i said in the first Post, there is some problem cars....yours being one......But you said you couldn't afford to get rid of it, and you will drive into the ground..correct me if i am wrong but how will you afford to keep doing all those RMS, after the warranty is done and after its done will you replace the engine after the third leak like Porsche does.....and then replace it again. I dislike the company as well but I will always drive a car like ours with warranty. With all due respect to the people who said a class action law suit, do you really think Porsche would loose this case? IN the Law's eyes they are doing what is required of them to do. It leaks they fix it, it leaks again they fix it again...then they replace the motor and it will to leak or most likely to. So in a nutshell there is not a dam thing to do about it.....**** or get off the pot... I Knew this would **** a few of you off.....This post was NOT directed to any one person....
As i said in the first Post, there is some problem cars....yours being one......But you said you couldn't afford to get rid of it, and you will drive into the ground..correct me if i am wrong but how will you afford to keep doing all those RMS, after the warranty is done and after its done will you replace the engine after the third leak like Porsche does.....and then replace it again. I dislike the company as well but I will always drive a car like ours with warranty. With all due respect to the people who said a class action law suit, do you really think Porsche would loose this case? IN the Law's eyes they are doing what is required of them to do. It leaks they fix it, it leaks again they fix it again...then they replace the motor and it will to leak or most likely to. So in a nutshell there is not a dam thing to do about it.....**** or get off the pot... I Knew this would **** a few of you off.....This post was NOT directed to any one person....
03-04-2005, 03:01 PM
#52
Advanced
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Mansfield, MA
Posts: 88
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree the RMS is not so much a legal action item and compared to other manufactures safety problems it is mostly an economic annoyance. What bothers me is "Where is the Porsche Engineering Excellence?" Wendelin Wiedeking may have done wonders to modernize the Porsche factory and reduce manufacturing costs, but did he lay off too many engineers/machinists. This problem has lasted through an extended manufacturing duration and apparently there is no foolproof fix for so many engines now on the road. Porsche Engineering excellence of yesteryear would have been all over this problem. Imagine that Porsche came up with a replacement seal that was 99% reliable for 50,000 miles. The problem would be over. Maybe Porsche would need to build a series of offset eccentric seals to be matched to particular engines based on the measured eccentricity. The solution could be a bit complicated like this. Maybe they should bring some of the brilliant German engineers/machinists out of retirement to fix this problem as they don't seem to have them on staff. Or maybe there is an opportunity for another firm to come up with a fix for this. I think one could get maybe $500?? per RMS kit times a few thousand?? units per year, this could add up to a good business if you had a good RMS kit. Those few with 7 RMS failures would surely pay more than this to put this problem behind them.
03-04-2005, 03:47 PM
#53
Three Wheelin'
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: San Francisco Bay Area
Posts: 1,572
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
About a year+ ago an atty from Louisana (or deep south) had just bought a CTT (& a 996TT) from the proceeds of a medical class action suit.
Because of the bitching and moaning, he was goaded into trying to collect names & the extent of the problem. It was about the same time as Scouser being called a heretic by many.
It sort of petered out because there weren't that many excuses.
In my gut I think you have a better chance with a state attorney general and the consumer protection laws of like say CA. The goverator may even side with the car owners.
BTW TD in DC, torags has moved to a country without an extradition treaty with the US, so forward the bill to C4S Surgeon (doctors make the big bucks) ;-)
Because of the bitching and moaning, he was goaded into trying to collect names & the extent of the problem. It was about the same time as Scouser being called a heretic by many.
It sort of petered out because there weren't that many excuses.
In my gut I think you have a better chance with a state attorney general and the consumer protection laws of like say CA. The goverator may even side with the car owners.
BTW TD in DC, torags has moved to a country without an extradition treaty with the US, so forward the bill to C4S Surgeon (doctors make the big bucks) ;-)
03-04-2005, 04:18 PM
#54
Originally Posted by C4S Surgeon
TD, I knew you were an atty, thought I might bait you out of the closet.
What would have to happen to certify this as a class action?
Chris
What would have to happen to certify this as a class action?
Chris
Before we get to the point of deciding whether a class action could be certified, we would first have to figure out the theory of the case. For example, if the RMS problem could be dangerous (e.g., if it caused oil to spill onto the tires, which in turn increased the likelihood of an accident), then we could sue to recover damages under various theories (e.g., actual damages, the cost of repairs, the cost of diminished value of the car due to an unreasonably dangerous defect, etc . . . ). The members of the class would have to have enough in common to warrant certification, which would depend upon the type of claim you are bringing (e.g., if you are only seeking actual damages, then the class would consist of only those who have incurred actual damages through a wreck). For this reason, I think that we have to start with a lucid articulation of the theory people are interested in pursuing, and I haven't seen one and I can't think of one (of course, that does not mean that one might not exist). Is this helpful?
TD in DC
03-04-2005, 04:19 PM
#55
Originally Posted by Torags
About a year+ ago an atty from Louisana (or deep south) had just bought a CTT (& a 996TT) from the proceeds of a medical class action suit.
Because of the bitching and moaning, he was goaded into trying to collect names & the extent of the problem. It was about the same time as Scouser being called a heretic by many.
It sort of petered out because there weren't that many excuses.
In my gut I think you have a better chance with a state attorney general and the consumer protection laws of like say CA. The goverator may even side with the car owners.
BTW TD in DC, torags has moved to a country without an extradition treaty with the US, so forward the bill to C4S Surgeon (doctors make the big bucks) ;-)
Because of the bitching and moaning, he was goaded into trying to collect names & the extent of the problem. It was about the same time as Scouser being called a heretic by many.
It sort of petered out because there weren't that many excuses.
In my gut I think you have a better chance with a state attorney general and the consumer protection laws of like say CA. The goverator may even side with the car owners.
BTW TD in DC, torags has moved to a country without an extradition treaty with the US, so forward the bill to C4S Surgeon (doctors make the big bucks) ;-)
03-04-2005, 04:37 PM
#56
Instructor
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Toronto
Posts: 214
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by rrys
I Or maybe there is an opportunity for another firm to come up with a fix for this. I think one could get maybe $500?? per RMS kit times a few thousand?? units per year, this could add up to a good business if you had a good RMS kit. .
Ok! line up here for my new $500 floating seal assembly.
It might work if I can bodge it in there somehow.
03-04-2005, 04:43 PM
#57
Wasn't the real question of this post around whether or not you should just chalk up an RMS leak as another oil leak and let it be? I haven't seen any concrete arguments behind why you shouldn't just live with the leak? Are you paying $800 a pop just to make sure things aren't out of alignment? A small percentage of cars have had RMS leaks... even fewer have needed engines replaced because of it. The question really is whether or not the $800 "check-up" is worth it when it is coming out of your own pocket? Just trying to get the conversation back on topic... I am not advocating an opinion either way...
03-04-2005, 05:38 PM
#59
Drifting
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Toronto Ontario Canada
Posts: 2,310
Likes: 0
Received 5 Likes
on
3 Posts
Originally Posted by itradem
Wasn't the real question of this post around whether or not you should just chalk up an RMS leak as another oil leak and let it be? I haven't seen any concrete arguments behind why you shouldn't just live with the leak? Are you paying $800 a pop just to make sure things aren't out of alignment? A small percentage of cars have had RMS leaks... even fewer have needed engines replaced because of it. The question really is whether or not the $800 "check-up" is worth it when it is coming out of your own pocket? Just trying to get the conversation back on topic... I am not advocating an opinion either way...
And to point out my Post was to suggest that the RMS problem is not as bad as we think.The dealers may replace these when it is not a problem...then the owner of that car comes on here and says oh well another RMS leak...and in fact if the dealer didn't do this ( because its a good warranty job)....the owner wouldn't come on her saying dam ....Porsche.... RMS.....damm them.....
This is a trickle effect of dealers taking advantage of PCNA and boiling down to making our confidence zero in Porsche.....There was a post the other day about someone wanting to change the RMS ............it wasn't even leaking, he wanted to change it like it was a maintenance, the guy was so paranoid that his motor would blow up because of the RMS. WHY?? because this is what he has seen , Not just on this forum, but on other forums and its partly to blame for this being bigger then it is. As i said there are some problems cars.....If my car had a RMS 3 times.........I would have purchased another car......END OF STORY
03-04-2005, 05:50 PM
#60
Instructor
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 223
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Guys...........this is heaven........... when are you ever EVER going to be able to get free legal advise from an attorney. Someone call the PRESS! 
Now, to my question:
TDin DC, hypothetically , what if an accident was caused by and engine light malfunction display. The driver was involved in an accident while glancing at his display console and suprised by the engine malfunction reading. The reading was in effect directly attributeable to RMS failure.
Can the automobile manufacturer or supplier be responsible for injuries caused by a defect in the automobile under the law of product liability.?
Cheers
Now, to my question:
TDin DC, hypothetically , what if an accident was caused by and engine light malfunction display. The driver was involved in an accident while glancing at his display console and suprised by the engine malfunction reading. The reading was in effect directly attributeable to RMS failure.
Can the automobile manufacturer or supplier be responsible for injuries caused by a defect in the automobile under the law of product liability.?
Cheers