Update on 996tt that caught fire and burned
07-20-2008, 04:38 AM
#18
Burning Brakes
The warranty has nothing to do with this claim. This is not a warranty claim, this is a lawsuit over whether or not the dealer acted negligently. The elements of simple negligence are: duty, breach, causation and harm.
The real issue here, is whether, by virtue of servicing your car and instructing you to drive it, they owed you a duty, and whether their advice met the standard of care owed to you.
The real issue here, is whether, by virtue of servicing your car and instructing you to drive it, they owed you a duty, and whether their advice met the standard of care owed to you.
Lemme guess... you must be in sales?
Also, to the next posts point- the insurnace paid PART of the value of the car... he is still out all the maintenance and upgrades he paid hendrick prior to the autoflambe.
07-20-2008, 08:59 AM
#19
First let me state that I do not know any of the parties involved and I'm only posting here as my car is on my lift right now, and I'm replacing the clutch hydraulic parts that are in question here...
Car was in for clutch work... Here's the missing info some of you guys might not be aware of...
Pentonsin fluid is used to operate the CLUTCH master cylinder/slave cylinder/accumulator. On the back of the slave cylinder is a hard line that runs from the slave cylinder up to the power steering pump in the engine compartment...
Pentosin is VERY flamable.
If a techician didn't install the slave cylinder properly, or any of the lines on the slave cylinder were damaged, and especially if the lines got debris in them that would cause a clog, you could potentially see a failure like this. The fire could have resulted in a power steering failure, or it could have resulted from any number of clutch hydraulic system related failures that eventually impacted the powersteering system.
Bottom line is that car should have been towed to the dealer, NOT driven, and it's an excellent reminder to all of us. Pentosin is NOTHING to mess with, and you should always pay attention to those "sounds"... If the steering isn't working properly, don't drive the car... Get it towed to the dealer and have them troubleshoot it.
I am "fairly" knowledgable about cars, and would not have driven the car. However, I'm not the average porsche owner. Many won't even change their own oil, forget the work I'm involved in right now.
I don't expect many on this board to have done any different than the original poster. He asked those he trusted to know more than he did about the problem.
The DEALER advised him to bring it in.
The DEALER advised him to drive the car to them.
The DEALER did the work on the tranny/clutch and related area I'd suspect could have potentially been the root cause of the fire.
You tell me where the blame is...
Mike
Car was in for clutch work... Here's the missing info some of you guys might not be aware of...
Pentonsin fluid is used to operate the CLUTCH master cylinder/slave cylinder/accumulator. On the back of the slave cylinder is a hard line that runs from the slave cylinder up to the power steering pump in the engine compartment...
Pentosin is VERY flamable.
If a techician didn't install the slave cylinder properly, or any of the lines on the slave cylinder were damaged, and especially if the lines got debris in them that would cause a clog, you could potentially see a failure like this. The fire could have resulted in a power steering failure, or it could have resulted from any number of clutch hydraulic system related failures that eventually impacted the powersteering system.
Bottom line is that car should have been towed to the dealer, NOT driven, and it's an excellent reminder to all of us. Pentosin is NOTHING to mess with, and you should always pay attention to those "sounds"... If the steering isn't working properly, don't drive the car... Get it towed to the dealer and have them troubleshoot it.
I am "fairly" knowledgable about cars, and would not have driven the car. However, I'm not the average porsche owner. Many won't even change their own oil, forget the work I'm involved in right now.
I don't expect many on this board to have done any different than the original poster. He asked those he trusted to know more than he did about the problem.
The DEALER advised him to bring it in.
The DEALER advised him to drive the car to them.
The DEALER did the work on the tranny/clutch and related area I'd suspect could have potentially been the root cause of the fire.
You tell me where the blame is...
Mike
Last edited by Mikelly; 07-20-2008 at 09:22 AM.
08-04-2008, 07:23 PM
#20
Burning Brakes
Um...the Dealer?
08-05-2008, 01:11 AM
#24
08-05-2008, 09:36 AM
#25
Three Wheelin'
^^^^^^^^^
Yeah....
What's the go with your insurance company????
08-05-2008, 11:49 AM
#26
I sympathize with the owner of the car but it the insurance paid for the car I don't see why sueing. If he suffered burns and/or if the insurance did not pay etc etc I would have a different opinion. At most the dealer deserves the bad name for making the wrong call.
08-05-2008, 12:24 PM
#27
Race Director
If that work was paid for it should be refunded IMHO since the car is gone. Or at least the expense to make things right on the car.
It really boils down to that work was done incorrectly and that the dealership should correct this. Since there is no way to practically correct their mistakes money is the only way. Or perhaps a credit on a future work or purchase from this dealer.
08-05-2008, 03:39 PM
#28
Burning Brakes
While the insurer paid the 'value' of the car, there was considerable time and expense he had invested in upgrading the car in terms of labor and set up. I suppose one might argue that these expenses WERE captured in the 'value', he disagrees.
If you've ever had a car totaled (personally I have not, but I've been close to a few) you realize that the game the insurers play with 'value' often doesn't reflect the true loss. You put $20k into upgrades and service- bringing every possible item to spec...then they say "2002 996TT is...$58k, here's the check".
Virtually everyone rolls over for this...kudos for Dave for not doing so!
A
08-05-2008, 03:45 PM
#29
Nordschleife Master
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Spring, Texas (The Woodlands)
Posts: 5,147
Received 10 Likes
on
8 Posts
I believe this is laid out in the first post.
While the insurer paid the 'value' of the car, there was considerable time and expense he had invested in upgrading the car in terms of labor and set up. I suppose one might argue that these expenses WERE captured in the 'value', he disagrees.
If you've ever had a car totaled (personally I have not, but I've been close to a few) you realize that the game the insurers play with 'value' often doesn't reflect the true loss. You put $20k into upgrades and service- bringing every possible item to spec...then they say "2002 996TT is...$58k, here's the check".
Virtually everyone rolls over for this...kudos for Dave for not doing so!
A
While the insurer paid the 'value' of the car, there was considerable time and expense he had invested in upgrading the car in terms of labor and set up. I suppose one might argue that these expenses WERE captured in the 'value', he disagrees.
If you've ever had a car totaled (personally I have not, but I've been close to a few) you realize that the game the insurers play with 'value' often doesn't reflect the true loss. You put $20k into upgrades and service- bringing every possible item to spec...then they say "2002 996TT is...$58k, here's the check".
Virtually everyone rolls over for this...kudos for Dave for not doing so!
A
Documentation of work done to vehicle (prior to total loss) helps a great deal
with this problem.
I had a 1991 Chevy truck totaled (flooded in my garage) & they were going to give me Market value for the vehicle which at the time was ~$4900.
I had done MAJOR work to this vehicle & kept records of what I had done & even provided them with pictures PRIOR to the incident.
I was of couse paying higher premiums as well.
They came back with offers about 3 times & I finally agreed to $18,000 (still lost money, though).
