New transmission needed on 2003 X50: Porsche refusing to cover under warranty
02-10-2006, 05:38 PM
#196
Rennlist Member
faterik,
Don't get too preturbed. This board attracts a lot of guys who have succeeded doing something that creates enough money to buy a tt. Therefore, you have a preselected group of affluent people with justifiably strong egos, many years of education, passion for a subject, and often a sense of humor. This thread pales in comparison to some earlier ones.
Could you go back to "impressing drunk girls in bars"? I have never been good at that, and therefore have no insight to pass along to my sons. AS
Don't get too preturbed. This board attracts a lot of guys who have succeeded doing something that creates enough money to buy a tt. Therefore, you have a preselected group of affluent people with justifiably strong egos, many years of education, passion for a subject, and often a sense of humor. This thread pales in comparison to some earlier ones.
Could you go back to "impressing drunk girls in bars"? I have never been good at that, and therefore have no insight to pass along to my sons. AS
02-10-2006, 06:01 PM
#197
Still plays with cars.
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
AS - do you really expect us to believe you want the advice for your *sons*
02-10-2006, 07:13 PM
#198
Technical Guru
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Originally Posted by faterikcartman
Can't anyone figure out if they know what they are talking about before they chime in here?
Furthermore, what kind of idiots are you?
Did you monkeys read the whole thread?
If you don't want to read the whole thing they consider SHUTTING YOUR PIE HOLE!
Still, I'm faced with the comments above.
Some of you, on the other hand, are either unrepentant jerks or abject idiots. Seriously, being so **** sure when anyone who knows how to use a search engine and read can refute you is stupid, really stupid.
In the words of my namesake, "screw you guys, I'm going home."
Furthermore, what kind of idiots are you?
Did you monkeys read the whole thread?
If you don't want to read the whole thing they consider SHUTTING YOUR PIE HOLE!
Still, I'm faced with the comments above.
Some of you, on the other hand, are either unrepentant jerks or abject idiots. Seriously, being so **** sure when anyone who knows how to use a search engine and read can refute you is stupid, really stupid.
In the words of my namesake, "screw you guys, I'm going home."
02-10-2006, 07:16 PM
#199
Addict
Rennlist
Site Sponsor
Rennlist Member
Rennlist
Site Sponsor
Rennlist Member
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 2,768
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by faterikcartman
Look, I haven't even read Dock's post and I won't, but now some others are chiming in with their incorrect legal analysis. Can't anyone figure out if they know what they are talking about before they chime in here?
Quote (dpblessing):
"I thought 'class action lawsuits' were a group of plaintiffs (hence the 'class') ?
not one plaintiff against all of a group?"
Quote (lexpro):
"Bob:
I'm not sure it matters either, at least with respect to the question of Porsche warranty coverage... However, to the extent faterik is making problematic claims regarding the law and his legal expertise, even soliciting clients on the board (!) people should be careful.
Best"
First, I'm not sure where you got the idea anyone was talking about one plaintiff and many defendants. A class action is generally brought by one or more named representative plaintiffs on behalf of all who were similarly situated.
Regardless, by definition a class action CAN consist of one plaintiff against multiple defendants. For your edification I've included a quote from the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 23:
Rule 23, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure
(a) Prerequisites to a Class Action. One or more members of a class may sue or be sued as representative parties on behalf of all only if (1) the class is so numerous that joinder of all members is impracticable, (2) there are questions of law or fact common to the class, (3) the claims or defenses of the representative parties are typical of the claims or defenses of the class, and (4) the representative parties will fairly and adequately protect the interests of the class.
Please focus your attention on the "sue or be sued" line.
I also own a Porsche and am interested in buying another--a 997tt. I believe that information is somewhere on this board. Where you got the idea I don't own a Porsche is beyond me.
Furthermore, what kind of idiots are you? Dock has you believing he's right about the law because you think he owns a Porsche and I don't--that is some of the most pathetic reasoning I can imagine. Does someone actually pay you enough to buy a Porsche? No wonder this country is in trouble.
And some guy who isn't a lawyer gives his ERRONEOUS interpretation of class actions and suddenly I'm making "problematic claims regarding the law"???
WTF!!!
Morevover, I specifically state I am not looking for more work and I am soliciting clients? Did you monkeys read the whole thread? I started out suggesting Mike in La Jolla just go to small claims court! I have a place in Del Mar just up the road from La Jolla; if I were soliciting clients I would have sent Mike a private message as he would be a great plaintiff--ask Mike, I haven't!
Because Dock kept goading me to file a lawsuit because he couldn't come up with any cogent points for discussion I told him he could refer potential plaintiffs to me if he wanted. Again, later, upon his prompting, I told him I couldn't file a lawsuit on my own but said I would consider the situation of anyone who approached me--but that I wasn't looking for more work!
So here we are: I do own a Porsche. I am a lawyer in California. I have cited and even quoted the law--correctly--while others have stated it--WRONGLY. Everything I've said can be verrified if one has a rudimentary ability to Google and basic reading comprehension skills. In fact, some of the allegations can be dismissed reading this whole thread. If you don't want to read the whole thing they consider SHUTTING YOUR PIE HOLE!
Still, I'm faced with the comments above.
Bob, you sound like a great guy and rather thoughtful about the whole thing, as do a few others.
Some of you, on the other hand, are either unrepentant jerks or abject idiots. Seriously, being so **** sure when anyone who knows how to use a search engine and read can refute you is stupid, really stupid.
In the words of my namesake, "screw you guys, I'm going home."
Quote (dpblessing):
"I thought 'class action lawsuits' were a group of plaintiffs (hence the 'class') ?
not one plaintiff against all of a group?"
Quote (lexpro):
"Bob:
I'm not sure it matters either, at least with respect to the question of Porsche warranty coverage... However, to the extent faterik is making problematic claims regarding the law and his legal expertise, even soliciting clients on the board (!) people should be careful.
Best"
First, I'm not sure where you got the idea anyone was talking about one plaintiff and many defendants. A class action is generally brought by one or more named representative plaintiffs on behalf of all who were similarly situated.
Regardless, by definition a class action CAN consist of one plaintiff against multiple defendants. For your edification I've included a quote from the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 23:
Rule 23, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure
(a) Prerequisites to a Class Action. One or more members of a class may sue or be sued as representative parties on behalf of all only if (1) the class is so numerous that joinder of all members is impracticable, (2) there are questions of law or fact common to the class, (3) the claims or defenses of the representative parties are typical of the claims or defenses of the class, and (4) the representative parties will fairly and adequately protect the interests of the class.
Please focus your attention on the "sue or be sued" line.
I also own a Porsche and am interested in buying another--a 997tt. I believe that information is somewhere on this board. Where you got the idea I don't own a Porsche is beyond me.
Furthermore, what kind of idiots are you? Dock has you believing he's right about the law because you think he owns a Porsche and I don't--that is some of the most pathetic reasoning I can imagine. Does someone actually pay you enough to buy a Porsche? No wonder this country is in trouble.
And some guy who isn't a lawyer gives his ERRONEOUS interpretation of class actions and suddenly I'm making "problematic claims regarding the law"???
WTF!!!
Morevover, I specifically state I am not looking for more work and I am soliciting clients? Did you monkeys read the whole thread? I started out suggesting Mike in La Jolla just go to small claims court! I have a place in Del Mar just up the road from La Jolla; if I were soliciting clients I would have sent Mike a private message as he would be a great plaintiff--ask Mike, I haven't!
Because Dock kept goading me to file a lawsuit because he couldn't come up with any cogent points for discussion I told him he could refer potential plaintiffs to me if he wanted. Again, later, upon his prompting, I told him I couldn't file a lawsuit on my own but said I would consider the situation of anyone who approached me--but that I wasn't looking for more work!
So here we are: I do own a Porsche. I am a lawyer in California. I have cited and even quoted the law--correctly--while others have stated it--WRONGLY. Everything I've said can be verrified if one has a rudimentary ability to Google and basic reading comprehension skills. In fact, some of the allegations can be dismissed reading this whole thread. If you don't want to read the whole thing they consider SHUTTING YOUR PIE HOLE!
Still, I'm faced with the comments above.
Bob, you sound like a great guy and rather thoughtful about the whole thing, as do a few others.
Some of you, on the other hand, are either unrepentant jerks or abject idiots. Seriously, being so **** sure when anyone who knows how to use a search engine and read can refute you is stupid, really stupid.
In the words of my namesake, "screw you guys, I'm going home."
Best of luck to anyone in the pursuit of such an action against all Porsche dealers with respect to the subject matter within this thread.
02-10-2006, 09:17 PM
#200
Rennlist Member
Mea Culpa I think I was the one who raised the spectre of class action. I wasn't serious, though I have had enough dealings with huge companies to know that sometimes nefarious business tactics are used, even by companies so large you would assume all is legitimate. The definitions of "fraud" are very specific, but certainly these practices would be seen as "unfair"
You've noticed that nobody really knows what percentage of 996s have had RMS failure, or how many tt's have had warranty denial for "abuse" or tracking. That information is likely never to be available, except thru a contentious legal process and subpoena. That typically happens only when the damage is extreme.
Early reports of the GT2 quoted factory representatives as saying something like "The GT2 is for someone who has a tt for daily use, and wants a car for the track". I doubt that the tracking loophole will be applied to a CGT, since who on earth would buy one if you thought you could never legally get it out of 4th gear? To understand why Porsche changed it's tune, you'd need the data on repairs and costs. To document unfair practices, you would need evidence of discriminatory actions or deceptive practices. I have seen this type of material only in intracompany emails and files (obviously haven't seen it for PCNA, but did in an unpleasant action witha hospital system)
Bob, growing up in an orthodox jewish home, there are two things you can't learn. 1. Auto mechanics and 2. Bar skills. I've worked on the first, but the second is still a mystery. AS
You've noticed that nobody really knows what percentage of 996s have had RMS failure, or how many tt's have had warranty denial for "abuse" or tracking. That information is likely never to be available, except thru a contentious legal process and subpoena. That typically happens only when the damage is extreme.
Early reports of the GT2 quoted factory representatives as saying something like "The GT2 is for someone who has a tt for daily use, and wants a car for the track". I doubt that the tracking loophole will be applied to a CGT, since who on earth would buy one if you thought you could never legally get it out of 4th gear? To understand why Porsche changed it's tune, you'd need the data on repairs and costs. To document unfair practices, you would need evidence of discriminatory actions or deceptive practices. I have seen this type of material only in intracompany emails and files (obviously haven't seen it for PCNA, but did in an unpleasant action witha hospital system)
Bob, growing up in an orthodox jewish home, there are two things you can't learn. 1. Auto mechanics and 2. Bar skills. I've worked on the first, but the second is still a mystery. AS
02-10-2006, 09:56 PM
#201
Advanced
Thread Starter
I must say that I have learned much here.
Let me summarize:
-Some of you knew that Porsche transmissions are weak and use the ‘heartbeat method’ to shift when on the track. I have been following these forums for 7 years and never heard that this was needed before. The organization that I track with is associated with BMW and none of the instructors ever brought this issue up. This is good information and more or less proves beyond doubt that some/all X50 transmissions are somehow deficient either in design or manufacture. I state again that I, in NO WAY WHATSOEVER, ‘abused’ my X50 as Porsche has claimed and the transmission should have been able to tolerate the moderate forces required from a DE. This repairs should have been covered in full by the warranty.
-I have no intention of hiring lawyers. Porsche CLEARLY does not want enthusiasts such myself owning their cars. The Porsche rep stated that to me in no uncertain terms. So I will sell this X50 and get a car from a manufacturer that cares. Porsche does not. Not at all.
-Dock – You have added very little to this thread. And claiming that ‘PCNA has its finger on the pulse better than most people think.’ Is just plain wrong. They are utterly out of touch. The conversations I had with the Porsche Rep in Southern California couldn’t have been more degrading and insulting. He all but said, “You aren’t good enough to own this car. Grow up. Learn how to drive. Go away.” The factory-authorized service in San Diego is hostile at best. Porsche no longer cares about those of us who like to go just a little faster by trying to track our cars. The advertising and marketing of the ‘Porsche’ brand is misleading. These are not ‘trackable’ cars as they once were. I just wish Porsche would admit it, rather than trying to hide behind bogus ‘abuse’ claims. It would have saved me from buying a 450HP car that cannot be driven faster than 55 MPH on the freeway without going to jail.
-Some of you knew that Porsche transmissions are weak and use the ‘heartbeat method’ to shift when on the track. I have been following these forums for 7 years and never heard that this was needed before. The organization that I track with is associated with BMW and none of the instructors ever brought this issue up. This is good information and more or less proves beyond doubt that some/all X50 transmissions are somehow deficient either in design or manufacture. I state again that I, in NO WAY WHATSOEVER, ‘abused’ my X50 as Porsche has claimed and the transmission should have been able to tolerate the moderate forces required from a DE. This repairs should have been covered in full by the warranty.
-I have no intention of hiring lawyers. Porsche CLEARLY does not want enthusiasts such myself owning their cars. The Porsche rep stated that to me in no uncertain terms. So I will sell this X50 and get a car from a manufacturer that cares. Porsche does not. Not at all.
-Dock – You have added very little to this thread. And claiming that ‘PCNA has its finger on the pulse better than most people think.’ Is just plain wrong. They are utterly out of touch. The conversations I had with the Porsche Rep in Southern California couldn’t have been more degrading and insulting. He all but said, “You aren’t good enough to own this car. Grow up. Learn how to drive. Go away.” The factory-authorized service in San Diego is hostile at best. Porsche no longer cares about those of us who like to go just a little faster by trying to track our cars. The advertising and marketing of the ‘Porsche’ brand is misleading. These are not ‘trackable’ cars as they once were. I just wish Porsche would admit it, rather than trying to hide behind bogus ‘abuse’ claims. It would have saved me from buying a 450HP car that cannot be driven faster than 55 MPH on the freeway without going to jail.
02-10-2006, 11:07 PM
#202
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 3,802
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
[QUOTE=mike_la_jolla]Let me summarize:
....-Some of you knew that Porsche transmissions are weak and use the ‘heartbeat method’ to shift when on the track.... QUOTE]
Mike,
I've got to tell you that you are 100% wrong in your conclusion, now maybe given your emotional state 9faced with an expensive repair) you want to distort the facts.
Go back and read the posts, the "heartbeat" method of shifting is a learned skill, as is throttle steering, etc. It has nothing to do with a defective design, the same as understeer or oversteer had nothing to with defective design. they are design characteristics, nothing more, nothing less.
Such comments don't do your credibility any good, though I can understand why you're emotional.
I've owned over 60 new cars in my life and I can tell you from experience that you will go a long way, and for a long time, before you can get anyone to match Porsche's service and responsiveness.
The "curse" of Porsche is that once you appreciate the physics of driving you really don't want anything else.
Is Porsche perfect..NO! But they try, and I suggest, if you enjoy driving, hang with them for a while, they get a lot of things right, including Customer service. Relative to other Manufacturers they are light years ahead, and understand the family nature of the "passion" surrounding their automobiles.
If you bought your car used (that might be the problem)..if you've had it from new, then make your case with them. This forum can help, but "abuse" is abuse and just not covered, no matter how it occurs. If you have a "renegade" Rep then push it up the chain, through your Dealer.
But, it takes two to argue, and if you draw conclusions like the above quoted one I have to seriously question what you might have done to exacerbate the situation (and your credibility).
However, since I wasn't present I'll never know. But I'm pretty good at reading the tea leaves.
....-Some of you knew that Porsche transmissions are weak and use the ‘heartbeat method’ to shift when on the track.... QUOTE]
Mike,
I've got to tell you that you are 100% wrong in your conclusion, now maybe given your emotional state 9faced with an expensive repair) you want to distort the facts.
Go back and read the posts, the "heartbeat" method of shifting is a learned skill, as is throttle steering, etc. It has nothing to do with a defective design, the same as understeer or oversteer had nothing to with defective design. they are design characteristics, nothing more, nothing less.
Such comments don't do your credibility any good, though I can understand why you're emotional.
I've owned over 60 new cars in my life and I can tell you from experience that you will go a long way, and for a long time, before you can get anyone to match Porsche's service and responsiveness.
The "curse" of Porsche is that once you appreciate the physics of driving you really don't want anything else.
Is Porsche perfect..NO! But they try, and I suggest, if you enjoy driving, hang with them for a while, they get a lot of things right, including Customer service. Relative to other Manufacturers they are light years ahead, and understand the family nature of the "passion" surrounding their automobiles.
If you bought your car used (that might be the problem)..if you've had it from new, then make your case with them. This forum can help, but "abuse" is abuse and just not covered, no matter how it occurs. If you have a "renegade" Rep then push it up the chain, through your Dealer.
But, it takes two to argue, and if you draw conclusions like the above quoted one I have to seriously question what you might have done to exacerbate the situation (and your credibility).
However, since I wasn't present I'll never know. But I'm pretty good at reading the tea leaves.
02-11-2006, 10:13 PM
#203
Advanced
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 60
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Alex, your last two posts were great. Really. Calmed me down a lot. I'm sure the folks who can buy these cars are right about most things with most people they deal with day to day so why should they expect anything different here. Puts a different perspective on things and makes me take it less personally.
You are also right about fraud having certain specific elements, such as scienter, and it is very tough to prove. California, however, has laws that forbid misleading, deceptive and unfair practices and don't require proving the elements of fraud.
Again, this is what I do but I'm not looking for clients. If you've lost money from a denied warranty you may suck it up, change brands, or wish to speak to a qualified attorney about your situation. Personally, I've just really been floored by the revelations in this thread. I didn't know Porsche took a tracking = no warranty position. I have not been harmed by this policy but it seems, as a consumer, that Porsche doesn't advertise their cars to just drive on the street. And they don't advertise that tracking or competing voids your warranty.
For those who demand specific examples, these are from the just released GT3 brochure (I have not yet seen the new tt ad):
"The interior of the car has been completely upgraded with a focus on trackday and competition use."
"Drawing on pure racing origins, we have created a road-going car that is equally well suited to everyday driving and genuine competition use."
Um, call me crazy, but I read that as saying the car is built for use on both road and track and in competition.
You are also right about fraud having certain specific elements, such as scienter, and it is very tough to prove. California, however, has laws that forbid misleading, deceptive and unfair practices and don't require proving the elements of fraud.
Again, this is what I do but I'm not looking for clients. If you've lost money from a denied warranty you may suck it up, change brands, or wish to speak to a qualified attorney about your situation. Personally, I've just really been floored by the revelations in this thread. I didn't know Porsche took a tracking = no warranty position. I have not been harmed by this policy but it seems, as a consumer, that Porsche doesn't advertise their cars to just drive on the street. And they don't advertise that tracking or competing voids your warranty.
For those who demand specific examples, these are from the just released GT3 brochure (I have not yet seen the new tt ad):
"The interior of the car has been completely upgraded with a focus on trackday and competition use."
"Drawing on pure racing origins, we have created a road-going car that is equally well suited to everyday driving and genuine competition use."
Um, call me crazy, but I read that as saying the car is built for use on both road and track and in competition.
02-11-2006, 11:27 PM
#204
Still plays with cars.
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
wonder what dock will say about the brochure
02-12-2006, 11:43 AM
#205
RL Community Team
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Originally Posted by Bob Rouleau
wonder what dock will say about the brochure
Bob, does you regular auto insurance policy cover your car if it's damaged during a track event?
02-12-2006, 01:51 PM
#206
Rennlist Member
Chubb doesn't have racing photography on my insurance card. Bob, does your company?
Dock, isn't your question more akin to someone offering insurance "designed for the track" but then refusing to cover tracking? AS
Dock, isn't your question more akin to someone offering insurance "designed for the track" but then refusing to cover tracking? AS
02-12-2006, 02:03 PM
#207
Intermediate
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Longboat Key, FL
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Dock
I'll say the same thing I've been saying - read my previous posts.
Bob, does you regular auto insurance policy cover your car if it's damaged during a track event?
Bob, does you regular auto insurance policy cover your car if it's damaged during a track event?
If I can step on Dock's toes here, regarding the quote from the Porsche brochure in faterik's post, "Drawing on pure racing origins, we have created a road-going car that is equally well suited to everyday driving and genuine competition use," I understand this to be a description of the ultra high performance characteristics of the car: the qualities a racing car, the pinnicle of performance, but, unusual for such a car, civilized enought to be driven on the street. So I do not see this as a representation that Porsche is offering a retail consumer warranty for failures on a car purchased for racing and track events. You can buy a car for racing and track events, but you specifically don't get that warranty. (The factory has other incentives for those who race their cars, but retail consumer warranties are not among them.)
02-12-2006, 02:13 PM
#208
RL Community Team
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Originally Posted by Alexander Stemer
Dock, isn't your question more akin to someone offering insurance "designed for the track" but then refusing to cover tracking? AS
02-12-2006, 02:31 PM
#209
Interestingly the warranty booklet on the Ferrari Stradale explicitly states that occasional track days don't void the warranty (although wheel to wheel racing does void it).
02-12-2006, 02:37 PM
#210
Intermediate
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Longboat Key, FL
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by prg
Interestingly the warranty booklet on the Ferrari Stradale explicitly states that occasional track days don't void the warranty (although wheel to wheel racing does void it).