carguy88

http://www.autoblog.com/2014/05/13/r...walker-report/

theiceman

Well you had to figure that was coming after the Banjamin Keaton case.

We live in a world of no accountability and litigation .. everything is someone elses fault and "i will get a lawyer so you have to pay" .

wc11

All of us are capable of driving like idiots whether it be a Porsche, a smart car or even a minivan

So if I speed and fail to negotiate a corner, crash my Smart car and kill myself or god forbid an innocent person, it's the car companies fault?

Sign me up then.

CarlEightySix

that lawsuit is going nowhere, the car had the original tires.

theiceman

i also thought i read somewher that rodas' compnay did extensive modifications to the car " warranty Void "

I agree this is going no where . When i rerad the article carguy posted it was asi thought , they are trying to piggyback the Keaton lawsuit and trying to use case law to get some coin ...

Torontoworker

The problem is that they will sue everyone involved. The City, Porsche, passenger sues drivers estate, family of victims sue for loss of loved one and their comfort etc etc. etc. The cost of litigation can exceed the payout so the lawsuit is but a ploy for a settlement that generally doesn't get near 50 cents on the dollar asked in the suit. Winnable or not, companies and organizations throw the lawsuit paperwork onto the desks of their insurance companies who are the group that have to pay out in these cases - it is these people who have to settle or pay out and whom make the decisions in the case - not Porsche. Many times costs aren't awarded (unless the case is ridiculous or you pizz off the judge) even if you win - you loose. Going to court to rehash and reopen the old issues of an urban legend (evil handling) - of a car long out of production or cut a cheque for a % of what is asked? Its a math problem.

CarlEightySix

About the tires with was Matt Farah that said on jalopnik, modifications I haven't read nothing.

CarlEightySix

Im my opinion cases likes this is just to get some fat cheque for the rest of their lifes, thank god I never decided to go live to America where everyone sue everyone and also probably they will hate me there.

djantlive

I hope Porsche fight it hard and win. Teach these frivolous widows for once and all

theiceman

Porsche was found partially responsible in the Keaton case . i think they payed out 5% of the setlement , cant remember exact figures.. It was quite a while ago but i think the finding was that Porsche could have made the vehicle far safer than they did as they had PSM technology. They consciously chose not to put it in the vehicle as part of a marketing decision as they were selling the car as a true sports car with no driver assists. That conscious decision made them partially responsible. Hopefully if someone knows more about the case they can clarify any errors I may have made.

500

I beleive there was no judgement in the Keaton case, rather it was a settlement. Porsche contributed 8% to the overall settlement. Many may view that as a finding of responsibilty, but is not. Porsche's payout was 360,000, which is a small amount relative to the likely costs to defend in court. In the industry I work, lawsuits related to accidents are routine and in the vast majority of situations we settle, even though we consider the cases winnable. The bottom line is it is too expensive to win. The whole process is a negotiation. A sum such as 360,000 in this type of case may be regarded as "go away money" (i.e. "Here, take some money and go away and leave us alone" - sad, but true). In my view, the relatively small portion Porsche contributed suggests that the parties involved (insurance companies etc.) recognized that Porsche had little, if any, contributory responsibility.

Torontoworker

http://www.autoweek.com/article/2013...news/131209924

http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/200...ra-gt-lawsuit/

Imo000

Not all companies pay out just because its cheaper than going to court. That's mostly an urban myth. They pay out if they feel they could be found liable to a certain %. Otherwise, most fight it based on principal.

ronnie993tt

This is my understanding as well. Years ago Allstate was McKinseyed and found settling was costing a fortune, so they started fighting everything. Profits rose. Tort lawyers' association bitched loudly to no avail.

Turbodan

when you sue in civil, you only need to have possible fault not beyond reasonable doubt like in criminal case, so greater chance they will get something.