Quadcammer

completely different circumstance. One, its clear to see who inflicted the damage, two, both the owner and the dealer have insurance to cover collisions.

There is no insurance that covers cars that just happen to break while the dealer has them. Engine damage is particularly difficult to prove when a failure occurred and for what exact reason (aside from the obvious).

Think about it, you could theoretically go into the dealer knowing you have an RMS leak, and tell them you need an oil change.

Then when they raise the car, they tell you about the RMS, and you say, well it never leaked while I had it, you must have broken it. It would be a scumbag's paradise.

If the dealership tech crashes the car, the dealers insurance would cover it no problem. This situation is different however.

hikejohn

Quad, I understand your rationale but here the guy is a good customer...the dealer maintained the car for the customer...we assume by the book...and now the failure. By the way another issue I have is the car companies rushing to push long oil change intervals...I never believed them for a minute and always changed oil and filter around 5K miles...not the up to 15k miles that MB said was OK...it took a class law suit for MB to accept responsibility, replace as I recall over a 1,000 V8 engines....and please note the flexible mile deal for oil and filter change is GONE....perhaps extended oil and filter change intervals have gone too far in Porsche...this is one reason I am getting increasingly nervous about buying a used 911...or any used Porsche...I am not a believer in not regularly changing fluids in a car....please note that MB also said their auto transmission fluid was life time....fortunately a sensor failed on my car at 30k mile...and the then Black fluid was replaced by nice new pink fluid....thus part of the responsibilty here may be that Porsche sales guys want to sell maintenance free cars.....while long lasting cars need more attention and from time to time a failure like this happens....thus I think Porsche should step up: first,its the right thing, second it keeps Porsche owners who have had unexpected failures like this from gathering information and perhaps filing a class lawsuit and reflects the true nature of how engines function

useridchallenged

An update. First the quick facts:

My first call on Friday morning was to PCNA. I plan on writing a letter to PCNA and needed a person and email address to send it to. I didn't speak with the person handling my case, but I asked someone if the research on my case had started. I was told "there has been a lot of activity". "Good", I thought - there appears to be a healthy discussion between the dealer and PCNA.

My next call was to my service advisor to discuss costs. He informed me that the rough numbers for the total parts/labor cost to get my car out the door for two scenarios:

Repair = $12,500 approx. (includes replacing failed parts, and some additional parts just to be safe, like the IMS and the other oil scavenging pump in case it has the same "flaw" as the failed pump)

Reman motor = $13,500 approx.

At the same time, I let my service advisor know that I was going to send a letter to PCNA. To this, he replied "PCNA wants to participate" (I guess that's Porsche speak for remuneration of some kind) and "a letter will certainly help your case".

Next up, I thought I'd go to the racing community to see what they know about failed oil scavenging pumps. I spoke with The Racers Group (TRG) and Jerry Woods. Let me be clear, both of these companies deal with racing motors (Cup and Koni GS) and not so much with street engines, but they do know how these engines fail under extreme stress. Neither TRG nor Jerry Woods see much in the way of oil scavenging pump failures on the street engines or even the race engines. So this has me scratching my head again if the oil scavenging pump could fail all by itself, or if it had some "help" (ie. foreign object debris). Companies like Jake Raby have seen enough oil scavenging pump failures due to FOD that they build a proprietary filter screen on the oil scavenging pump for their engines to prevent that failure mode.

I have also spoken with a prominent San Francisco trial lawyer (and friendly acquaintance) who owns multiple Porsches. He feels there's a solid case in my favor under the principles of embailment, just as another Rennlister noted earlier in this thread. It's worth mentioning that I have not once even breathed the words "lawyer" or "lawsuit" with the dealership. I'd rather see where the natural course of solving the problem takes us. In my view, bringing in a lawyer is the last step, and only if things cannot be resolved reasonably and to my satisfaction. But the good news is that I am well positioned with a lawyer lined up if need be.

And as an important aside - I do want the Rennlist community to know that my dealer has been professional and gracious, and my discussions with them very civilized, rational and open. The dealer has been extremely cooperative, calling and emailing me with regular updates, and answering all my detailed questions. They've had my car since March 24 (it will be 4 weeks this Monday) and have provided me with a nicely optioned loaner 2008 Cayenne since day one - before the engine even failed.

Now I need to write that letter to PCNA this morning!

gota911

This sounds promising. It would be great of Porsche cut you a good deal on a re-manufactured engine.

Even if you have to pay the entire amount (which I certainly hope is not the case) for the relatively small difference in cost, going with the reman engine as opposed to rebuilding your engine, would be the way to go, IMO.

I think your silence about a lawyer is a very wise move on your part. You might want to start thinking of what amount of financial assistance from Porsche and the dealer would be the minimum amount that you would deem fair. Obviously, 100% would be great, but if that doesn't happen, you need to establish what amount you would be satisfied with. That may help put into perspective any offer from Porsche that is less than 100%.

Good luck and thanks for the update.

ADias

I have the same right, as you, to express my opinion, even though you do not like it. I never said the dealer did it. I said " Guys, the engine was broken under the dealer's watch. The dealer must support the customer, period." I stand by that. Your violent reaction to my support of a fellow P-car enthusiast owner is, shall we say, disconcerting.

ADias

You are perfectly free to accept a world where excellence in service is not expected. I do know several cases of post-warranty M96/M97 engine failures where P-dealers were proactive to resolve the problem with excellent PCNA goodwill. In this case however, the OP stated that this dealer was not bringing this to PCNA and supporting a good will repair. It appears now that that has changed, and that is good.

boolala

Sounds like you are doing everything right and, I agree, to keep the lawyers out of the situation. Of course would he be willing to represent you on a contingency basis to back his contention that you have a good case? Or would you have to hire him at an hourly rate win or lose? If the latter is the case perhpas he does not have as much confidence in the merits of your claim as he is saying.

funcars

If I were you, I'd start talking to the Service *Manager* directly as he will be making the case to PCNA.

I had some out-of-warranty work needed on my 996, and I thought that PCNA should be offering some goodwill on the work. I talked to my advisor, and then personally visited the manager once he was back in the office. Both were down-playing any possible help from PCNA, but the manager went to bat for me with corp. He ended up getting everything covered 100%, including any related work once they got into the issue. This was a better upside than I was expecting...

cello

We can agree on the part bolded. Servicing the customer is always correct, obviously. If that is what you are asking from the Dealer than we are in agreement (unless of course some facts come forth to suggest the Dealer actively caused the problem and was not just handed a ticking time bomb at an inopportune time). BTW, I don't expect excellence, I demand it from my Dealer. But I also understand the Dealer too is in business (just like I am). It is not responsible per se for every problem that develops irregardless of fault or cause as some here seem to think.

PS: I guess I also should say I did not get the initial impression the Dealer was shirking that responsibility from the OP's prior posts (as you apparently did).

cello

I believe both ends will work toward the middle; and there will be a reasonable offer extended to you ultimately. GL!!

jury_ca

If the car was under warranty would you expect the dealer to cough up, just because the car was coincidentally under their care? No, you'd expect the manufacturer to pay.

Now that the vehicle is out of warranty, and there is no evidence that the dealer contributed to the failure, I think the onus is on the owner. Any contribution by the dealer or the manufacturer is goodwill.

The statistical odds of an engine failure at 70K miles, I would hope is very slim, but not impossible. Unfortunately, the owner happens to be unlucky in this situation.

Macster

elaborate.

I bought an 06 GTO (new) and wanted an early service of the tranny/diff fluid. I drive my cars alot and try to keep them in good condition and believe in preventative services.

Took car to local GM dealer. Left it.

During lunch break employee took car out and beat the cr*p out of the car. Only drove it a couple of miles away from dealer and back again but in doing so took vehicle up to over 90mph (on a city street limited to 35mph!).

He performed several hard accelerations from dead stop to 90+ mph and of course had to perform several hard brakes to slow car down. Then apparently he stopped to smoke a cigarette then repeated the exercise on the way back to the shop.

How do I know this? When I went to pick up car I immediately noticed the low fuel warning light on and range down by half, from over 60 miles when I dropped car off to under 30 miles. That's a lot of gas. Over a gallon of gas used.

Also, engine was very hot and in fact had a very distinct but hard to place smell. Was so hot I could feel the heat coming from under the car to the point I got out and raised hood. That's when I got strong whiff of a overheated clutch.

Long story short later I remembered I had a tracking device in car. Pulled the data and then I realized what had happened. Obtained satisfaction from dealer after I presented this info, though not without some effort on my part.

In hindsight I should have just taken data to police and filed a vandalism complant or taken data to county consumer fraud division and let this agency handle this.

Then more recently took car to another dealer where I bought car. At this dealer too car received rough treatment. Not as bad as 1st dealer but bad enough. Before I could confront dealer on this though dealer went out of business.

Now, I have never had any trouble of this sort with my Porsche at a Porsche dealer. The cars (oh, I now own two Porsches) are hardly driven at all, just from the driveway into the "barn" and service bay and out again. One time car required drive testing and service manager called me to get permission for him to test drive car.

But there is always the first time.

How in this case car owner would know vehicle mistreated while in dealer's possession I don't know. And that's the problem. Might never know.

Sincerely,

Macster.

phaphaphooey

Mac, remember reading the GTO story on PPBB I believe. I need to get a data recorder.

Quadcammer

I simply think the dealer abuse is less prevalent at porsche dealers.

The guys at the GM dealership are used to cobalts, G6s and minivans. When they get anything with a manual and a V8, its party time.

I don't think a relatively high-traffic porsche dealer tech would get all fired up about a plain jane 997 (i.e not a GT3 RS or Turbo) or something.

While its always possible, I don't think its probable.

jury_ca

In your case, you had evidence that someone at the dealer drove the car very aggressively. I don't think the OP is making any assertion about this at all.

Totally different circumstances.