Coolant Pipes Litigation Update!

[Pkscheldt]

Lawyer Bob,

 

I have no doubt you're a great lawyer, and there are other great lawyers.. but when I see a lawyers fee of $4,500,000 (which I believe is what the class action law firm in this settlement gets) vs their expenses (which are also being paid) of $250,000 - well, it appears fee is excessive.. That irks me.  If this was being handled on a normal contingency basis - the law firms would be entitled to 1/3rd of the settlement and expenses, which to me sounds like a fair return.  These sort of fee awards do nothing to advance the feeling of trust the average person has in the law profession. Speaking as a non-member of the lawyer class.

 

As far as US courts having jurisdiction over Porsche AG - they certainly have jurisdiction over Porsche North America, so there was a safe target they could go after.

 

BTW - thanks for this surfacing again. I just dug out my paperwork and see I have about a month to get the claim in. Have to do that tomorrow.

I too appreciate the update on the case.

 

I may be wrong, and I certainly don't want to argue that the lawyers are being underpaid,  but it looks to me like there are multiple firms and based on the court docs I read the expenses are WELL in excess of 250K.

 

Considering that the total settlement is in excess of $36,000,0000. It seems to me the class got a discount.

 

http://www.coolantpipesettlement.com/court

 

Regards,

[rbaron]

  If this was being handled on a normal contingency basis - the law firms would be entitled to 1/3rd of the settlement and expenses, which to me sounds like a fair return.  

 

And your point is.......?

[rbaron]

Thanks, Pkscheldt, for posting that link to some of the court filings.  In particular, anyone interested should read http://www.coolantpipesettlement.com/docs/fao.pdf 

 

As I noted above, I looked at the court filings online earlier this week and can give this status update as of then:  The sole objector filed an appeal to the (Sixth?) Circuit Court of Appeals after the District Court overruled her objections.  She was ordered to file her brief in support of her appeal by a certain date, which she failed to do.  The Circuit Court of Appeals, per its rules, dismissed her appeal.  She then filed a motion to reinstate her appeal, which has been opposed in briefs by the law firms representing the class and the law firms representing the defendants.  Of course, no settlement funds can be distributed to anyone until her appeal is once and for all concluded.  

 

The beat goes on......

[btmansfi]

I'm curious to know how they arrived at $36.6M in benefits for those affected by the coolant pipe issue.  I for one will not be submitting a claim due to the exorbitant dealer repair cost ($3k) compared to a measly $375 "rebate".  A friend of ours also owns a CTT and will also not be submitting for reimbursement.  

 

I would place a sizable gamble that PCNA ends up paying less than $25M as a result of the settlement.  On top of that, it is a requirement that current work be done at an authorized Porsche dealer where they are guaranteeing themselves a substantial payday.  Win win for PCNA.

[rbaron]

My understanding is that one or more economists did an analysis of the claims using a statistical model based on probabilities versus the size of the potential class; there may have been a reduction to present value as well.

 

I'm not propounding or defending the settlement but I do remember the old aphorism that a good settlement is one that leaves both sides unhappy.

[Pkscheldt]

I'd just like to get some $$$ back. I replaced mine in 07 with low miles I went round and round with PCNA and they denied vehemently that there was any chance it was a design flaw, it was then re-replaced with the metal versions a couple years later. I was extremely frustrated, although this Attny/claimant out of Boise definitely has  taken disgruntled to a level quite a bit beyond where I was. It is shocking that she is holding this up, I've been involved in this class with an Attny since 2007. It was pretty clear on my end that joining the class was the only route.

Edited November 10, 2014 by Pkscheldt

[Nylon]

I'm curious to know how they arrived at $36.6M in benefits for those affected by the coolant pipe issue.  I for one will not be submitting a claim due to the exorbitant dealer repair cost ($3k) compared to a measly $375 "rebate".  A friend of ours also owns a CTT and will also not be submitting for reimbursement.  

 

I would place a sizable gamble that PCNA ends up paying less than $25M as a result of the settlement.  On top of that, it is a requirement that current work be done at an authorized Porsche dealer where they are guaranteeing themselves a substantial payday.  Win win for PCNA.

I am on same page abtmansfi.

 

Porsche is making money on their scam.  The attorneys are making an embarrassing amount of money as usual.  Only reason they jumped on this.  The gal from Idaho should hold out.  Porsche should have called in the cars and fixed the pipes.  Simple.  It would go a lot further in goodwill and is the "RIGHT THING TO DO".  AND it would have cost them less than fighting it.  Not to mention the taste left to anyone who may make another purchase.  Nothing more pathetic than a donkey dance of denial and being drug into class action.  There will be a whole bunch of us in this same boat who can't "afford" their settlement and the rest who do will still be getting the shaft.  Only in a different way.  The argument that both sides should be happy that neither side is happy is a false equivalent and is a testament to where the American legal system is parked.

[Pkscheldt]

 

I'm curious to know how they arrived at $36.6M in benefits for those affected by the coolant pipe issue.  I for one will not be submitting a claim due to the exorbitant dealer repair cost ($3k) compared to a measly $375 "rebate".  A friend of ours also owns a CTT and will also not be submitting for reimbursement.  

 

I would place a sizable gamble that PCNA ends up paying less than $25M as a result of the settlement.  On top of that, it is a requirement that current work be done at an authorized Porsche dealer where they are guaranteeing themselves a substantial payday.  Win win for PCNA.

I am on same page abtmansfi.

 

Porsche is making money on their scam.  The attorneys are making an embarrassing amount of money as usual.  Only reason they jumped on this.  The gal from Idaho should hold out.  Porsche should have called in the cars and fixed the pipes.  Simple.  It would go a lot further in goodwill and is the "RIGHT THING TO DO".  AND it would have cost them less than fighting it.  Not to mention the taste left to anyone who may make another purchase.  Nothing more pathetic than a donkey dance of denial and being drug into class action.  There will be a whole bunch of us in this same boat who can't "afford" their settlement and the rest who do will still be getting the shaft.  Only in a different way.  The argument that both sides should be happy that neither side is happy is a false equivalent and is a testament to where the American legal system is parked.

 

 

I can't imagine any Cayenne V8 owner whose vehicle was built from 2002 to Dec, 2006 wouldn't agree that they/we got shafted. Of course Porsche should have done the right thing and recalled these years ago.....

 

There were multiple lawsuits that have taken over seven years to progress to where we are now. Porsche should have fixed these cars and did not, would not and wouldn't acknowledge there was even a "known" fix at first, as I mentioned the first time I paid to fix it they (dealer) replaced the plastic pipes with plastic pipes. I was told it was simply a part failure. 

 

I was involved in one of the original individual suits filed. If this were some exercise we were sitting around observing that would be one thing, but many did take action because Porsche did not and the lawsuits that were filed against Porsche were combined into this class. Porsche didn't "jump" on this, they came along kicking and screaming. It was important that the settlement was arranged in a manner that gave individuals the opportunity to exclude themselves from the class and pursue their claims independently if they chose. This "gal" had that opportunity to take that route as did any others because we took action. It is VERY clear at this stage that this "gal" is once again going to be denied AGAIN because she waited too long and did not opt out when she could have and is now just slowing the small payout to the rest of the class of tens of thousands.

Edited November 11, 2014 by Pkscheldt

[btmansfi]

 

My understanding is that one or more economists did an analysis of the claims using a statistical model based on probabilities versus the size of the potential class; there may have been a reduction to present value as well.

I'm not propounding or defending the settlement but I do remember the old aphorism that a good settlement is one that leaves both sides unhappy.

 

Sorry for the blank post.  I have a BS in Economics and to me, the $36M makes no sense whatsoever.  Although I am not an expert on class action suits regarding automotive defects, it just doesn't sit well with me.  It would be nice if PCNA actually disclosed what they paid out to claimants when it was all said and done.  Highly unlikely that they would do that, but it would be interesting nonetheless.  

[hahnmgh63]

As mentioned the Lawyers won and we (the consumers/owners) lost. I have an '06 Turbo S and a decent shop out back so I chose to purchase the parts from Porsche and did the work myself so I won't get a dime from Porsche since I didn't use a dealer or shop that I can show a receipt for the repair. I'm going to keep my Cayenne but probably won't purchase another one. I was shopping for a 911 Turbo (997, 991) but now I'm probably going to go with an Audi RS car or Nissan GT-R. I think Porsche has lost my business. Look at what has happened on the 996 911's with the IMS failures. Anyone looking at a 996, Boxster, or Cayman in the affected years is playing Russian Roulette. Enough of my rant. I'll keep my old '74 Carrera for now and the old '06 Cayenne but a new or newer Porsche isn't in my future.

[porschy1]

I have owned my 2006 Cayenne S since new. Last spring, I started loosing a small amount of coolant, no drips, just missing fluid. That was the trigger to get the coolant pipes replaced before more damage done. The total bill was about $2400 from my Porsche dealer here in Atlanta. The vehicle had about 85,000 mikes on the odometer at the time. I believe about $700 dollars was picked up by the settlement and I paid for the remainder out of pocket. At least I know now that my Cayenne has the aluminum coolant pipes in place. No issues since. 

[rbaron]

I have owned my 2006 Cayenne S since new. Last spring, I started loosing a small amount of coolant, no drips, just missing fluid. That was the trigger to get the coolant pipes replaced before more damage done. The total bill was about $2400 from my Porsche dealer here in Atlanta. The vehicle had about 85,000 mikes on the odometer at the time. I believe about $700 dollars was picked up by the settlement and I paid for the remainder out of pocket. At least I know now that my Cayenne has the aluminum coolant pipes in place. No issues since. 

 

You might double-check on this.  My understanding is that no settlement funds have nor could have been released yet so maybe you got a discount but still might have cash coming from the settlement fund, which requires documentation to be submitted by next month.

 

Caveat:  I am often wrong.

 

--Bob

[porschy1]

I had already submitted all of the paperwork in advance and had a claim number. The dealership told me that the partial reimbursement had come from the settlement fund through PCNA. Who knows. At least the problem got fixed with no starter or transmission seal/gasket problems from the leaking coolant. Also got new radiator hoses as we'll. Cayenne now has 90,000+ miles on it and still looks and runs like a new one.