991 Engine Fire On Highway - Car Destroyed -
#16
03-11-2017, 12:59 PM
Thanks for the heads up
That dealership must be the worst if they aren't making this right. It was their fault you almost died when your car went up in flames. It's truly awful when they screw around with you on a new car. I was in the market for a new Porsche and am in the Philadelphia area. Ain't no way I'm going there. Very poor taste. Sad!
Got to sue em and shame em.
Keep that pimp hand strong brotha.
Got to sue em and shame em.
Keep that pimp hand strong brotha.
#17
03-11-2017, 10:05 PM
That dealership must be the worst if they aren't making this right. It was their fault you almost died when your car went up in flames. It's truly awful when they screw around with you on a new car. I was in the market for a new Porsche and am in the Philadelphia area. Ain't no way I'm going there. Very poor taste. Sad!
Got to sue em and shame em.
Keep that pimp hand strong brotha.
Got to sue em and shame em.
Keep that pimp hand strong brotha.
#20
03-12-2017, 08:15 AM
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 17
Rep Power: 0 
Hello, Hurricane,
It seems you're incorrectly thinking of this situation as a dispute over an automobile collision in a "no-fault" insurance state. Thus, below is a portion of my reply to your more lengthy and surprisingly judgmental post to the same topic on Rennlist:
PCNA and the dealer participated in the forensic inspections, which took a while to arrange. Their rep was the same one involved in the crank sensor spacer issue and remembered me and this car. Although that issue was ridiculous, it was eventually fixed. This situation is quite different. PCNA's experts at the post-fire inspection agreed about the presence of the non-native fibers. They obviously also agree the car should't go up in flames, and also apparently believe this was the dealer's fault.
I haven't accepted anything and have sought legal counsel, so while nothing has been made "right" yet, eventually, that will happen. My insurance company was informed, but is nearly irrelevant to what's going here. Of course, my insurance would pay what the insurance contract says it should pay, which is very different from and less than what the dealer, as the responsible party, can be required to pay in compensatory and punitive damages.
It seems you're incorrectly thinking of this situation as a dispute over an automobile collision in a "no-fault" insurance state. Thus, below is a portion of my reply to your more lengthy and surprisingly judgmental post to the same topic on Rennlist:
PCNA and the dealer participated in the forensic inspections, which took a while to arrange. Their rep was the same one involved in the crank sensor spacer issue and remembered me and this car. Although that issue was ridiculous, it was eventually fixed. This situation is quite different. PCNA's experts at the post-fire inspection agreed about the presence of the non-native fibers. They obviously also agree the car should't go up in flames, and also apparently believe this was the dealer's fault.
I haven't accepted anything and have sought legal counsel, so while nothing has been made "right" yet, eventually, that will happen. My insurance company was informed, but is nearly irrelevant to what's going here. Of course, my insurance would pay what the insurance contract says it should pay, which is very different from and less than what the dealer, as the responsible party, can be required to pay in compensatory and punitive damages.
#21
03-12-2017, 10:50 AM
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Evergreen, Colorado
Posts: 2,272
Rep Power: 115 
Sorry to read about this. Glad you're okay.
I'm not sure what the average customer can do about this. It appears to be a case of negligence by the dealership, as opposed to a design flaw. Hopefully they will make things right for you.
I'm not sure what the average customer can do about this. It appears to be a case of negligence by the dealership, as opposed to a design flaw. Hopefully they will make things right for you.
#22
03-12-2017, 10:51 AM
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Chicagoland
Age: 51
Posts: 1,338
Rep Power: 74
Good thing in terms of seeking legal counsel here, but one thing we have to remember: the car is worked on by human beings. Humans can get into a rush. I'm sure this was not intentional...the individual was probably in a hurry, given the long backlog I'm sure he has in his queue.
Again, probably not intentional. Terrible? Yes, sure. But fortunately cars can be replaced; the driver, if harmed, cannot be.
Again, probably not intentional. Terrible? Yes, sure. But fortunately cars can be replaced; the driver, if harmed, cannot be.
#24
03-12-2017, 11:38 AM
Hello, Hurricane,
It seems you're incorrectly thinking of this situation as a dispute over an automobile collision in a "no-fault" insurance state. Thus, below is a portion of my reply to your more lengthy and surprisingly judgmental post to the same topic on Rennlist:
PCNA and the dealer participated in the forensic inspections, which took a while to arrange. Their rep was the same one involved in the crank sensor spacer issue and remembered me and this car. Although that issue was ridiculous, it was eventually fixed. This situation is quite different. PCNA's experts at the post-fire inspection agreed about the presence of the non-native fibers. They obviously also agree the car should't go up in flames, and also apparently believe this was the dealer's fault.
I haven't accepted anything and have sought legal counsel, so while nothing has been made "right" yet, eventually, that will happen. My insurance company was informed, but is nearly irrelevant to what's going here. Of course, my insurance would pay what the insurance contract says it should pay, which is very different from and less than what the dealer, as the responsible party, can be required to pay in compensatory and punitive damages.
It seems you're incorrectly thinking of this situation as a dispute over an automobile collision in a "no-fault" insurance state. Thus, below is a portion of my reply to your more lengthy and surprisingly judgmental post to the same topic on Rennlist:
PCNA and the dealer participated in the forensic inspections, which took a while to arrange. Their rep was the same one involved in the crank sensor spacer issue and remembered me and this car. Although that issue was ridiculous, it was eventually fixed. This situation is quite different. PCNA's experts at the post-fire inspection agreed about the presence of the non-native fibers. They obviously also agree the car should't go up in flames, and also apparently believe this was the dealer's fault.
I haven't accepted anything and have sought legal counsel, so while nothing has been made "right" yet, eventually, that will happen. My insurance company was informed, but is nearly irrelevant to what's going here. Of course, my insurance would pay what the insurance contract says it should pay, which is very different from and less than what the dealer, as the responsible party, can be required to pay in compensatory and punitive damages.
I'm not saying that the dealer isn't at fault. But if they aren't offering you the replacement value of your car, given it's age and mileage, I would tend to think that your insurance would and then recoup it from the dealer. But if you think your lawyer can get more, then good luck with that.
#28
03-12-2017, 12:06 PM
Do they pay for the replacement value of a four year old car or do they pay for a brand new car? Just curious. There is a huge delta there.
#30
03-12-2017, 12:18 PM
Lol! I want to see more pics, too.
This sucks for the OP, no question. Not sure he will get a brand new car out if it, but the dealership should make him whole and then some.
Most important thing - he was alright and not hurt!!!
This sucks for the OP, no question. Not sure he will get a brand new car out if it, but the dealership should make him whole and then some.
Most important thing - he was alright and not hurt!!!
