Class Action Suit IMS failure
07-23-2013, 07:49 PM
#18
Rennlist Member
As much as I HATE LAWYERS, this is fantastic news for anyone affected (thankfully, I am not).
It is a REAL SHAME that Porsche would simply screw their customers like this due to a design flaw that themselves identified and fixed in future revisions of the engine. It never had to get to this point, no lawyer had to get paid, and none of this was necessary if Porsche just fixed IMS issues in/out of warranty for the affected drivers. I bet the cost would have been a lot less.
It is a REAL SHAME that Porsche would simply screw their customers like this due to a design flaw that themselves identified and fixed in future revisions of the engine. It never had to get to this point, no lawyer had to get paid, and none of this was necessary if Porsche just fixed IMS issues in/out of warranty for the affected drivers. I bet the cost would have been a lot less.
07-23-2013, 08:22 PM
#19
I found this in the class action declaration: It sounds like what we all believed.
Discovery and investigation establishes that Porsche adopted a single row design for the IMS in 2001. The payment of warranty and goodwill claims of owners of Porsche vehicles with this design of the IMS (all Class Vehicles) spiked up to between 4% to 8% of all such Vehicles in the United States, and 4% to 10% of all Class Vehicles in California. Warranty claims for Porsche Boxster and 911 vehicles relating to IMS issues, which had different versions of the IMS, have uniformly involved claims of far less than 1% of such vehicles. Indeed, to date, Porsche has spent over $20,000,000 reimbursing customers for the parts and labor necessary to repair vehicles experiencing engine damage or failure as a result of the defective IMS shaft. (This entails approximately 3,100 claims granted under warranty or good will.)
Discovery in this matter has shown that approximately 57,929 Class Vehicles were sold in the United States, and approximately 30% of the Class Vehicles were sold in California.
Discovery and investigation establishes that Porsche adopted a single row design for the IMS in 2001. The payment of warranty and goodwill claims of owners of Porsche vehicles with this design of the IMS (all Class Vehicles) spiked up to between 4% to 8% of all such Vehicles in the United States, and 4% to 10% of all Class Vehicles in California. Warranty claims for Porsche Boxster and 911 vehicles relating to IMS issues, which had different versions of the IMS, have uniformly involved claims of far less than 1% of such vehicles. Indeed, to date, Porsche has spent over $20,000,000 reimbursing customers for the parts and labor necessary to repair vehicles experiencing engine damage or failure as a result of the defective IMS shaft. (This entails approximately 3,100 claims granted under warranty or good will.)
Discovery in this matter has shown that approximately 57,929 Class Vehicles were sold in the United States, and approximately 30% of the Class Vehicles were sold in California.
07-24-2013, 05:12 AM
#20
Race Car
Damn, my car is approaching 10 years old in 2014 and I am the 3rd owner with no CPO, guess that leaves me out.
07-24-2013, 05:57 AM
#21
Got the letter. With 85 K after 8 years of ownership I'm (partially) covered for the next 2 years or 45 K miles whichever comes first. Would be interested to hear how many tiptronics have had IMS failures. I'm betting not very many.
07-25-2013, 08:26 PM
#22
Rennlist Member
Sucks about the limits of the reimbursement. I just received a class action letter on my A4 CVT transmission. Covers all owners, including owners who took a loss selling a known troubled car. A key item is ten years in service limitation.
I was lucky that audi replaced my cvt outside of warranty under a customer support program before the class action. The SA was very helpful on this, and the numerous other issues I had with the car led to the assistance program.
Interesting how things go.
I was lucky that audi replaced my cvt outside of warranty under a customer support program before the class action. The SA was very helpful on this, and the numerous other issues I had with the car led to the assistance program.
Interesting how things go.
08-07-2013, 01:15 PM
#23
Rennlist Member
Yes. Having bought 2001 Boxster S with 25K miles, privately from the 2nd Owner in 2012 means I am SOL if it fails or I decide to pay for the repair in advance of failure. I wonder if I should "opt out" as there is no protection for me within the Class Action.
