jcnesq

FYI, I just contacted class counsel (whose office is a block from mine though don't know him), and he said the "official" notice won't go out until probably May, so whatever is floating around now is just a draft.

Ahsai

Just ignore the 9th digit, which is a checksum. For 996s, we only care about the 10th digit, 3=2003, 4=2004, etc. Then the 8th and 12th digits, which are 9 an 6 => 996. Then only the last 5 digits are the serial number of the 996.
http://stuttcars.com/technical/vin-decoder/

Mspeedster

^What he said, ignore the 9th digit. One needs to understand Porsche's complicated VIN number scheme, which is quite confusing. I've seen this listed as an example for a MY05 997 car:

WP0 - Manufactured in Germany by Porsche
C - Body Code (Cabriolet)
A - Engine Code (Base)
2 - Restraint System (airbag)
99 - first 2 digits of model range
5 - Test Digit (basically meaningless)
5 - Model year
S - Assembled in Stuttgart
7 - 3rd digit of model range
55227 - Sequence of production

So if you look at the digits in bold...

MiamiC70's VIN WP0AA29994S621794 does seem to fall in this range: WP0AA29974S620062-WP0AA29934S623041

rpm's S2

Actual concrete information! Thank you.

So... what is your informed opinion as to how done a deal this draft represents?

Rob996

DK570, thanks for your help!!
i have now included my complete VIN WP0AA29941S622718. If you could kindly let me know if my car is included in the eligability listing?
Many thanks

alpine003

Realistically there's going to have to be a mandatory inspection by a Porsche dealer or someone on Porsche's approved list on the owner's dime the way I see it.

It will be up to the owner to decide if they want to risk and bear the hefty inspection cost which might show up as a non direct IMS issue in which the owner will be responsible for, not only the repair/replacement but also the inspection costs.

As we know there are other modes of failure but the IMS is one that's been documented and publicisized the most with the most occurances.

Porsche wasn't born yesterday and there are no free lunches. Remember, the burden is going to be on the owner to prove that the IMS was at fault. Collateral damage might also play a factor in additional headaches as well.

I do wonder whether the take over from the VW group had any role in this decision for some kind of settlement agreement. They could potentially have more to lose from bad PR(viral is the worst kind) now that they got Porsche under their umbrella.

KrazyK

Mine just refuses to blow up and continues to run perfectly. Im stumped as to what the next step should be.

alpine003

That's because you never drive it and change the oil every month or 200 miles, whichever comes first. You are every car manufacturer's ideal customer.

JMLavoie

If I may, you would have to be within: WP0AA2999 1 S62 2763-WP0AA2990 1 S62 3641: Spaces added for clarity.
Your VIN tells me you have a 2001, Coupé with a production # of 2718 but you would have to be within Prod #s of 2763 to 3641, so you missed it because your car was produced before that sequence.
I believe it is a good thing since it might indicate that your IMS is of better repute than those listed ... but that is a big assumption on my part and I am an eternal optimist.
Good luck to your IMS!

bhmkv

10 years means most wont get anything. Too bad.

MJP911

The proposed settelment was filed with the Court yesterday. Basically, the parties filed a a motion asking the Court to approve the settlement agreement. The filing includes the Settlement Agreement, the notice that will be sent out and the claim form. This last one is important as it will give you guidance as to what you will need to make a claim. The settlement still has to be approved by the Court. After that, the notice will be sent and you will have a certain amount of time to respond - ie by submitting a claim. Right now there is nothing for you to do, but you can start collecting the documents.

I have copies of the filings and I'm happy to share (they are public). Rather than respond to hundreds of PMs I can maybe email to a modertor to post somewhere for download by members.

Cefalu

Wow! has any one here heard of discovery? Once the plaintiff, (here the class members) demands production of documents and things, depositions, admissions, interrogatories, etc. Porsche MUST turn over all records which the plaintiff demands which are relevant to the IMSB issue.

There is no doubt that if the plaintiff law firm has already rung up a bill of $950,000.00 in legal fees, there are a lot of very interesting documents that have been turned over by Porsche. CA discovery laws are incredibly powerful.

That is unless the law firm is just trying to make a quick buck and bail out before the pain of discovery hits.

Whoever is in contact with the Plaintiff's law firm should ask about this stuff.

I have a '99 with a dual row, so I am not on the list nor a member of the class.

Cefalu

To simplify the suit here is how it works:

If you incurred out of pocket expenses for engine damage arising from a failed IMS bearing, you can submit those actual out of pocket expenses for reimbursement. There is a % reduction based on the mileage / age of the car at the time of failure.

Now they take away, You become disqualified for reimbursement if the IMSB failure occured 10 years or later from the date of original delivery of the car, or if the IMSB failure occurs after 130,000 miles. In other words, if your bearing when it failed was more than 10 years old, and had 130,000 miles on it, it's not Porsche's problem.

Those people who sold their car with the failed bearing (at a huge loss) when the IMSB failed and never paid to repair it appear to be screwed here.

SWK6Cup

Cefalu:
and your take, please, on those who did not suffer an engine failure, just bank account damage when we stepped up to replace the IMS, proactively? I realize this is only an opinion, but I am interested, nonetheless.

Cefalu

Country: If you did not incur monetary damages due to an actual IMSB failure, you are not an included party for purposes of this suit. So, unless your IMSB fails, you get nothing. Consequently a preemptive upgrade is not covered.

Those persons who paid to repair their cars due to an IMSB failure, are qualified persons to be reimbursed. Even if they previously sold the car. I would argue that if you had private insurance, and the bearing failed, you might be able to be reimbursed too.

This suit is intended to "make whole" those persons whose cars experienced an IMSB failure, and paid to repair it, at the time when their cars were less than 10 years old and had less than 130,000 miles on them.

If your bearing failed, and you sold the car in disgust, (without repairing) you get nothing. If you voluntarily upgraded without a IMSB failure you get nothing.

Lastly, you must have owned or leased the car, so insurance companies cannot recover the costs they shelled out to replace IMSB failure repairs.