Engine Failure 2003 996 C4S 118,000 miles, Gearbox failure and replace

[jmj996]

John,

It is possible for the source of a problem to evade even the best at times, but I still don't see a connection between the slight crank cradle flaking and the problems you experienced at the time. I wonder if the high mileage was a main factor in everyone's conclusion to disassemble it before really figuring out the problem. I wish you luck, please keep us updated.

Thanks,

John

Edited July 1, 2007 by John Jones

[Johnnyceesred]

SUCCESSFUL OUTCOME TO LEGAL ACTION :)

Many of you asked to be kept up to date on the outcome of my topic. I'm pleased to report that I was successful in my legal action through the English County Court system against the supplying OPC and the Judge awarded me compensation and costs. My claim was based on the Sale and Supply of Goods Acts 1979 and 1994 and the responsibility of suppliers within those Acts.

The formula he used to calculate the amount of compensation was based on his judgement that the original engine should have lasted for at least 200,000 miles before requiring any significant work and expense. He confirmed that I was absolutely within my rights to purchase the replacement engine and claim compensation.

If any of you would like further details I'd be happy to oblige if you send me a PM. The case was a public one so I'm not restricted to what I can comment on about the proceedings.

Kind regards,

John

[SPIRO]

Thanks for the follow up. Congrats!

[Johnnyceesred]

Thanks for the follow up. Congrats!

Thanks Spiro,

It took some time but it shows what can be achieved if you approach a situation with the right facts and support.

Kind regards

John

[norton-sp]

brilliant!!!! congrats john

cheers. kelvin

[demosan]

SUCCESSFUL OUTCOME TO LEGAL ACTION :)

Many of you asked to be kept up to date on the outcome of my topic. I'm pleased to report that I was successful in my legal action through the English County Court system against the supplying OPC and the Judge awarded me compensation and costs. My claim was based on the Sale and Supply of Goods Acts 1979 and 1994 and the responsibility of suppliers within those Acts.

The formula he used to calculate the amount of compensation was based on his judgement that the original engine should have lasted for at least 200,000 miles before requiring any significant work and expense. He confirmed that I was absolutely within my rights to purchase the replacement engine and claim compensation.

If any of you would like further details I'd be happy to oblige if you send me a PM. The case was a public one so I'm not restricted to what I can comment on about the proceedings.

Kind regards,

John

John,

All I can say to you is "to the victor go the spoils...." Congrats to you and your perseverence has paid off!! I ( along with many others I'm sure) has followed your thread for months and I applaude your determination and resolve to "make it right".

demosan :cheers:

[Johnnyceesred]

SUCCESSFUL OUTCOME TO LEGAL ACTION :)

Many of you asked to be kept up to date on the outcome of my topic. I'm pleased to report that I was successful in my legal action through the English County Court system against the supplying OPC and the Judge awarded me compensation and costs. My claim was based on the Sale and Supply of Goods Acts 1979 and 1994 and the responsibility of suppliers within those Acts.

The formula he used to calculate the amount of compensation was based on his judgement that the original engine should have lasted for at least 200,000 miles before requiring any significant work and expense. He confirmed that I was absolutely within my rights to purchase the replacement engine and claim compensation.

If any of you would like further details I'd be happy to oblige if you send me a PM. The case was a public one so I'm not restricted to what I can comment on about the proceedings.

Kind regards,

John

John,

All I can say to you is "to the victor go the spoils...." Congrats to you and your perseverence has paid off!! I ( along with many others I'm sure) has followed your thread for months and I applaude your determination and resolve to "make it right".

demosan :cheers:

Thanks Kelvin and Demosan for your comments. It shows I was right to pursue the faults in the crank cradle and de-couple the complaint and claim from the original misfire which started the whole diagnostic process. It also shows the value in taking lots of photos and getting expert reports, the full costs of which the Judge ruled I should be recompensed by the OPC as part of my award. In fact I received full payment from the OPC for all my legal and report expenses.

If I can be of help to anyone on Renntech if they are thinking about a claim or want to know in more detail the process I went through, I'd be more than happy to assist at any time.

Very best regards to all those that have been watching the topic.

John

[1schoir]

Thanks Kelvin and Demosan for your comments. It shows I was right to pursue the faults in the crank cradle and de-couple the complaint and claim from the original misfire which started the whole diagnostic process. It also shows the value in taking lots of photos and getting expert reports, the full costs of which the Judge ruled I should be recompensed by the OPC as part of my award. In fact I received full payment from the OPC for all my legal and report expenses.

If I can be of help to anyone on Renntech if they are thinking about a claim or want to know in more detail the process I went through, I'd be more than happy to assist at any time.

Very best regards to all those that have been watching the topic.

John

John:

There is nothing more laudable than someone who believes in their cause and fights the good fight, especially against an opponent with limitless resources.

You should be commended for that.

The fact that you prevailed just makes it that much sweeter.

Congratulations, and thank you for showing everyone that it can be done.

Regards, Maurice.

[rrspikemarty]

SUCCESSFUL OUTCOME TO LEGAL ACTION :)

Many of you asked to be kept up to date on the outcome of my topic. I'm pleased to report that I was successful in my legal action through the English County Court system against the supplying OPC and the Judge awarded me compensation and costs. My claim was based on the Sale and Supply of Goods Acts 1979 and 1994 and the responsibility of suppliers within those Acts.

The formula he used to calculate the amount of compensation was based on his judgement that the original engine should have lasted for at least 200,000 miles before requiring any significant work and expense. He confirmed that I was absolutely within my rights to purchase the replacement engine and claim compensation.

If any of you would like further details I'd be happy to oblige if you send me a PM. The case was a public one so I'm not restricted to what I can comment on about the proceedings.

Kind regards,

John

Outstanding ! You definitely have my admiration.. A very impressive narrative of a successful fight for 'consumer rights'.

I wonder if you could post (or PM) the information that identifies your case and ruling in the English courts? I realize that you had the British 'fit for purpose' law on your side, but it's possible the information in your arguments could serve as precedent if anyone here in the US is considering bringing suit against Porsche/its subsidiaries. I'm especially fascinated by the juge's comment that your engine "should have lasted for at least 200,000 miles before requiring any significant work and expense." :)

Once again, nicely done!

[Q-Ship986]

Anyone: What, exactly, is an OPC? I was under the impression that an "OPC" is the equivalent of a "dealer" in the U.S. Is an OPC a legal entity, affiliate, or subsidiary of Porsche SE?

John: What was the OPC's defense; can you outline it? Did they offer any expert testimony or report?

--Brian

Edited September 11, 2008 by Q-Ship986

[1schoir]

Anyone: What, exactly, is an OPC? I was under the impression that an "OPC" is the equivalent of a "dealer" in the U.S. Is an OPC a legal entity, affiliate, or subsidiary of Porsche SE?

....

--Brian

Brian:

I believe that "OPC" stands for "Official Porsche Centre" and that it is the equivalent of a U.S. "dealer".

Perhaps one of our UK friends can clarify it more definitively.

Regards, Maurice.

[Westcoaster]

John , I applaud you perseverance and outcome in this matter!

Wow, fascinating read! All the work and effort by you to detail the problem and possible causes just to have Porsche say no... amazing!

I would have likely followed the same path (logical) to try and prove the case as well, but I have to wonder why Porsche didn't come forward an do the 'right thing' before have a court tell them they must compensate you for the repairs.

I find all of it a bit scary, I have a Boxster still under warranty and worry that unless I trade it in that one day it could just suffer from an engine failure and I would be in the same predicament, a Porsche representative replying back with "prove it"

If finances allow I would like to trade this car in before the warranty expires, which is exactly what I did with my previous Porsche a 2003 Boxster.

Does anybody know if we have any laws like " Sale and Supply of Goods Acts 1979 and 1994 and the responsibility of suppliers within those Acts." in Canada?

Edited September 11, 2008 by Westcoaster

[Chuck Jones]

Very interesting, informative, and facinating thread. I compliment you on your tenacity and perseverance. I wonder if your case could be used as any sort of precedent for subsequent actions taken by other Porsche owners who have experienced the same sort of failure. I just don't know how the application of international law would allow the admission of this sort of precedent.

As I read through the entire discussion, it bacame obvious that Porsche was seeking to sequester their CEO and top execs to keep them away from the proceedings, thus saving them from exposure until subpoenaed, subjected to depositons, or included by reference at the very last. The continual denials of your claim are typical tactics employed by large corporations who hope to dissuade you from continuing on by their methodology of denial after denial....forcing you to use the legal system to its fullest. It is only when it actually hits the courts and you receive a judicial rendering in support that they start to pay attention. I'm sure that many of the Porsche owners who read this forum and who are corporate attorneys fully understand the modus operandi being used. It's all tactics designed to wear you down and exhaust and break your will, patience, finances....or all the above.

You stood your ground....stayed the course....and I commend you sir. I know you spent a lot of money, time, effort, and anxiety over this whole proceess......Shades of Brokovich I might add....makes those of us who might own these cars and have experienced similar failures take heart and feel a bit better, even though we might not have prevailed in our efforts through the most commonly used "goodwill" approach which is routinely, abruptly, and unceremoniously DENIED!!

Congratulations. I hope there is no protracted appeal process planned... You might also be cautious in posting since anything said by you on this thread could be twisted and used to counter your efforts.

Chuck

Edited September 11, 2008 by Chuck Jones

[Johnnyceesred]

Anyone: What, exactly, is an OPC? I was under the impression that an "OPC" is the equivalent of a "dealer" in the U.S. Is an OPC a legal entity, affiliate, or subsidiary of Porsche SE?

John: What was the OPC's defense; can you outline it? Did they offer any expert testimony or report?

--Brian

Hi Brian,

Maurice is correct OPC "Official Porsche Centre"

Rgds

John

Edited September 12, 2008 by Johnnyceesred

[Johnnyceesred]

SUCCESSFUL OUTCOME TO LEGAL ACTION :)

Many of you asked to be kept up to date on the outcome of my topic. I'm pleased to report that I was successful in my legal action through the English County Court system against the supplying OPC and the Judge awarded me compensation and costs. My claim was based on the Sale and Supply of Goods Acts 1979 and 1994 and the responsibility of suppliers within those Acts.

The formula he used to calculate the amount of compensation was based on his judgement that the original engine should have lasted for at least 200,000 miles before requiring any significant work and expense. He confirmed that I was absolutely within my rights to purchase the replacement engine and claim compensation.

If any of you would like further details I'd be happy to oblige if you send me a PM. The case was a public one so I'm not restricted to what I can comment on about the proceedings.

Kind regards,

John

Outstanding ! You definitely have my admiration.. A very impressive narrative of a successful fight for 'consumer rights'.

I wonder if you could post (or PM) the information that identifies your case and ruling in the English courts? I realize that you had the British 'fit for purpose' law on your side, but it's possible the information in your arguments could serve as precedent if anyone here in the US is considering bringing suit against Porsche/its subsidiaries. I'm especially fascinated by the juge's comment that your engine "should have lasted for at least 200,000 miles before requiring any significant work and expense." :)

Once again, nicely done!

Hi,

The case number was 7SY00777 in Shrewsbury County Court, Cambrian Centre, Chester Street, Shrewsbury. SY1 1NA.

Kind regards

John

[Johnnyceesred]

John , I applaud you perseverance and outcome in this matter!

Wow, fascinating read! All the work and effort by you to detail the problem and possible causes just to have Porsche say no... amazing!

I would have likely followed the same path (logical) to try and prove the case as well, but I have to wonder why Porsche didn't come forward an do the 'right thing' before have a court tell them they must compensate you for the repairs.

I find all of it a bit scary, I have a Boxster still under warranty and worry that unless I trade it in that one day it could just suffer from an engine failure and I would be in the same predicament, a Porsche representative replying back with "prove it"

If finances allow I would like to trade this car in before the warranty expires, which is exactly what I did with my previous Porsche a 2003 Boxster.

Does anybody know if we have any laws like " Sale and Supply of Goods Acts 1979 and 1994 and the responsibility of suppliers within those Acts." in Canada?

Hi,

Thanks for your reply and comments.

Kind regards

John

[Johnnyceesred]

Very interesting, informative, and facinating thread. I compliment you on your tenacity and perseverance. I wonder if your case could be used as any sort of precedent for subsequent actions taken by other Porsche owners who have experienced the same sort of failure. I just don't know how the application of international law would allow the admission of this sort of precedent.

As I read through the entire discussion, it bacame obvious that Porsche was seeking to sequester their CEO and top execs to keep them away from the proceedings, thus saving them from exposure until subpoenaed, subjected to depositons, or included by reference at the very last. The continual denials of your claim are typical tactics employed by large corporations who hope to dissuade you from continuing on by their methodology of denial after denial....forcing you to use the legal system to its fullest. It is only when it actually hits the courts and you receive a judicial rendering in support that they start to pay attention. I'm sure that many of the Porsche owners who read this forum and who are corporate attorneys fully understand the modus operandi being used. It's all tactics designed to wear you down and exhaust and break your will, patience, finances....or all the above.

You stood your ground....stayed the course....and I commend you sir. I know you spent a lot of money, time, effort, and anxiety over this whole proceess......Shades of Brokovich I might add....makes those of us who might own these cars and have experienced similar failures take heart and feel a bit better, even though we might not have prevailed in our efforts through the most commonly used "goodwill" approach which is routinely, abruptly, and unceremoniously DENIED!!

Congratulations. I hope there is no protracted appeal process planned... You might also be cautious in posting since anything said by you on this thread could be twisted and used to counter your efforts.

Chuck

Hi Chuck,

Thankyou for your comments. Thanks also for your concern about an appeal etc., I did wait until the dealer's cheque had cleared before updating the topic with the judgement!!!

Very best regards

John

Edited September 12, 2008 by Johnnyceesred