Honestly, you should forgo arbitration (I can't recall but it may be binding arbitration) and just sue under the Lemon Law. Each state has it's own criteria but it is generally a reasonable bar related to time spent in the shop and extent of the problem encountered. Again, depending on the state, there may even be a "loss of use" clause which might allow for damages above what the car is worth. Arbitration is fine in some circumstances but the mere fact that PCNA is advocating this should set of an alarm indicating that they think this option will cost them the least.

We had a DFI engine problem with a 2007 A4 and got No Joy from Audi (and this was just a CEL that kept coming on; you'd never know there was a problem but the CEL belied something bigger). It got so absurd that at one point Audi of North America accused us of putting "bad gas" in the car - and then they suggested arbitration. I think this was the point where decided to use the California Lemon Law to file a claim.

The point is, once you file you are going to force the manufacturer to specifically respond and they are not going to be able to respond with a bunch of technical crap. (They either identified the problem and fixed or they didn't and if they didn't, why not?) At ay rate, with legal recourse, you are no longer relying on the goodwill of someone at PCNA to answer your call or move the process along - they answer the complaint or risk summary judgement. In most case these things are settled before trial.

 

WOW! This is pitiful. PCNA, a company that DOES NOT stand behind their product. Good cars, lousy company.

 

I don't know how long you've lived in the US, but in addition to seeking a resolution to their saddling you with a ****ty car, you can sue them for the weight gain and resultant health risks. Might as well get all you can while you're at it. Here in America, it's always somebody else's fault. And since PCNA is obviously intent on opening their purse strings, you may as well reach in with both hands. What a country. If you have a good lawyer and an attitudinal teenager, you may be able to hold PCNA accountable for your kid's incredibly disrespectful disposition. You know, you're neglecting his/her needs while having to spend so much time trying to get PCNA to do the right thing. This could really add up! All it takes is the right lawyer.

Good luck.

 

how is sales tax handled under lemon law cases.

 

I can hear the sarcasm in you voice but unfortunately its the truth. When there is no consequence for losing you might as well ask for everything under the sun. All the judge can do is say no.

 

Covered in CT.

ChuckJ

 

Typically if you loose in arbitration you can take it to court but the manufacturer can not. If you choose court and loose you are out of luck. If you win, the manufacturer can appeal. Appeal courts are not fun to deal with. Did you win one in court and get a big pain and suffering award?

ChuckJ

 

HotHonda, I see your point of not liking PCNA stance on this issue. What I don't understand is one not wanting one of the top cars a consumer can purchased based solely on the situation of another car owner. The only ones you know the complete facts of this situation is Mr. Murray, PCNA, and probably the dealer used. Now its only money if you don't want your car anymore but since I haven't seen you complaining about your car, I think it's rather silly to want to get rid of it because of this situation. Two each his own though. I, like SMATL has mentioned, enjoy every time I go to turn it on. If it doesn't turn on Ill get it fixed. If they can't fix it, Ill use the steps in place to get it remedied. VW didn't want to take back my old jetta initially either. I got an arbitration date, went, and after the judgement they took the car back. It was a lease so the judgement was for me to just turn the car in not having to pay the remaining 15 months on the lease. I wasn't given any past money back, I was just relieved of the remaining payments. I actually bought another VW when I turned it in. All manufactures are going to stick behind their product even if its a lemon. I understood that, sought out the best recourse for me, and was done with it. It sucks when we are the one that gets the lemon but it happens. I hope Mr. Murray get this situation resolved to his satisfaction, but it doesn't affect my view of Porsche one bit. My buddy bought another Ferrari after fighting with them. Why? Because it's a great car. So is a Porsche. Enjoy, whatever car it may be. Good luck.

 

What about all the IMS/RMS failures, and how difficult it is for those owners to get a favorable resolution? And I always question those highly-subjective "initial quality" reports; the first 90 days of ownership are not always a true indicator of reliability, particularly given that a new 911 owner might not put the same kind of mileage on their car in the first 90 days as say, a new Camry owner. Less time in the car and more time spent swooning over it as it sits in the garage means that you probably won't have too many issues with it during that timeframe.

Anyhoo, this story just hit Jalopnik, and I fully support you Nick. PCNA's behavior is ridiculous for such a high-end company that wouldn't be in a position to act this greedy if it wasn't for its die-hard customer fan base, that routinely shells out thousands more for this badge than any other brand on Earth. I hope things go better for you once the media coverage picks up steam.

 

Awesome. I was one of those who submitted it to Jalopnik two days ago!

http://jalopnik.com/the-saga-of-the-...ust-1564141012

 

Good news!

I have been contacted by PCNA to settle this. This whole mess will end today hopefully. Good that they are doing the right thing. Good for them.

 

I've watched all your videos. I feel your pain. Hope all gets resolved in a timely fashion. As a car fan, I empathize with you. Good luck and I think everyone in the forum stands behind you.

Cheers

 

Glad they got a "little" help to do the right thing

 

Great news Nick!!! I hope you get exactly what you were looking for.

ChuckJ

 

ChuckJ is correct, but the real question is if you take it to court following arbitration, what is the standard of review. If it is de novo or "new", great. The court will look at it as if the arbitration did not happen (well, it will carry some weight). But, if we assume that you are in court because you lost the arbitration, and if the standard of review is high, I might take my chance with a court. Often, the standard of review from arbitration is quite high.


I would be more concerned initially with how the arbitrator is picked. With a judge you will get someone who is "unbiased." With an arbitrator, that may not always be the case. Financial and investing contracts specify the arbitration route and often what arbitration group and rules - trust me when I say that they had a team of lawyers look for arbitrators and rules that are "friendly".