Jump to content

New lawsuit $1.2B


Recommended Posts

12 hours ago, silvrsvt said:

All of that is true but,
This case is about the official figures being incorrect, if the official tests have been redone by the lawyers then,
those results may prove that Ford has not applied proper run down correction factors... that becomes a big deal
as in problem, especially if it leads to Ford having to restate all those figures.

Edited by jpd80
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, jpd80 said:

All of that is true but,
This case is about the official figures being incorrect, if the official tests have been redone by the lawyers then,
those results may prove that Ford has not applied proper run down correction factors... that becomes a big deal
as in problem, especially if it leads to Ford having to restate all those figures.

Redone tests by the lawyers would have to be done on the same road/track, same environmental conditions, same gas and then with a representative group of trucks.  It would be nearly impossible to do.

Their only hope is that they can find and insider who helped manipulate the program.  Just antidotal complaints from consumers won't hold up.  VW got caught manipulating software to pass Government tests, only if they have some insider who admits to it, or they can prove the final software load was changed from a more environmental to a performance map? after Gov testing.  Antidotally, if I run the speed limit, I get better than what was stated on my sticker.    

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Exactly - the only hope they have is if Ford and the EPA agree that the tests were done improperly and the window stickers have to be adjusted as a result.   And if that happens Ford will most likely compensate owners like they did with C max so no need for a lawsuit anyway.

Everything else is just scumbag ambulance chasing lawyer speak.

 

On a side note there must be two dozen personal injury attorneys advertising on TV in Atlanta.

"In a wreck?  Get a check!"

"Semi trucks carry huge insurance policies!   You can get a huge check!"

It's the new welfare/lottery system.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, mustangchief said:

Redone tests by the lawyers would have to be done on the same road/track, same environmental conditions, same gas and then with a representative group of trucks.  It would be nearly impossible to do.

Their only hope is that they can find and insider who helped manipulate the program.  Just antidotal complaints from consumers won't hold up.  VW got caught manipulating software to pass Government tests, only if they have some insider who admits to it, or they can prove the final software load was changed from a more environmental to a performance map? after Gov testing.  Antidotally, if I run the speed limit, I get better than what was stated on my sticker.    

No they don't, they can be done anywhere and go in front of a Jury that will find Ford guilty; true facts don't matter. Evil company making billions, vs poor consumer that was lied too. It might take them 5 or 6 jury's but they will find one (Texas, South Carolina or Alabama are always good) Then all the other lawyers jump on. Ford will most likely end up settling this. The lawfirm will get hundreds of millions and the people will get a $500 rebate to use off the purchase of their next truck good for a year.  Congress is the one that needs to step in on these Class Action suits but being that 1/2 are lawyers and some made their millions doing this exact type of law the chances of that happening are about 0. All you'd have to do is cap lawyers fees at 10%, and if the case is lost the law firm (partners) that sued become liable for costs of the other side not the named party.

VW is very different in that it was 100% malicious, they were using a different software programs that gave different results based on if a vehicle was being tested or not, it was completely blatant and 100+ people knew it was going on.

Ask anyone that has been in the class action for Asbestos exposure what a joke their payments are, vs what their fees are for being in the suit and that is actually going to kill them. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

nothing chaps me more than Ambulance chasing Law Firms with class action lawsuits...blatant go after deep pockets hoping something sticks...and the owners eventually get a check for 50c if the suit  gets settled. Bunch of WANKERS. I do wonder what their culpability is if the lawsuit and subsequent costs amount to zero.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, mustangchief said:

Redone tests by the lawyers would have to be done on the same road/track, same environmental conditions, same gas and then with a representative group of trucks.  It would be nearly impossible to do.

Their only hope is that they can find and insider who helped manipulate the program.  Just antidotal complaints from consumers won't hold up.  VW got caught manipulating software to pass Government tests, only if they have some insider who admits to it, or they can prove the final software load was changed from a more environmental to a performance map? after Gov testing.  Antidotally, if I run the speed limit, I get better than what was stated on my sticker.    

The EPA tests are performed in a lab on a dyno with road load and roll down factors added, all data and test conditions are therefore repeatable.

The lawyers would hav had an independent lab perform the tests exactly to EPA specifications used the EPA’s recommended roll down coefficients (the area in question) . So they probably already have those findings submitted as evidence or will if the case proceeds,

Ford is already on record with self reporting to the EPA that abnormalities occurred with Ranger’s testing, the incorrect roll-down coefficient was used but Ford also had an independent lab recheck its findings so all very interesting while the criminal investigation proceeds as another layer to this

 

Edited by jpd80
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, jpd80 said:

The EPA tests are performed in a lab on a dyno with road load and roll down factors added, all data and test conditions are therefore repeatable.

The lawyers would hav had an independent lab perform the tests exactly to EPA specifications used the EPA’s recommended roll down coefficients (the area in question) . So they probably already have those findings submitted as evidence or will if the case proceeds,

Ford is already on record with self reporting to the EPA that abnormalities occurred with Ranger’s testing, the incorrect roll-down coefficient was used but Ford also had an independent lab recheck its findings so all very interesting while the criminal investigation proceeds as another layer to this

 

I doubt the lawyers did any kind of tests.  They took somebody's posted anecdotal evidence combined with Ford's press release and ran with it.

Also I don't think Ford admitted they miscalculated yet.  I think they were looking for 3rd party confirmation based on something an employee reported.  Apparently this calculation is not an exact science.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, akirby said:

I doubt the lawyers did any kind of tests.  They took somebody's posted anecdotal evidence combined with Ford's press release and ran with it.

Also I don't think Ford admitted they miscalculated yet.  I think they were looking for 3rd party confirmation based on something an employee reported.  Apparently this calculation is not an exact science.

I swear these M'F'ers just get on blog sites of people complaining about Vehicular issues....Im quite sure if someone googled Mileage let down for eco boosts there would be a plethora. Fact is people HAPPY don't post very often...just people think when they bleat on a website they think they actually have a voice that's heard....ie Hargens Burman. And lets face reality...I witnessed a bunch of people saying they cant get close to what the Window states as mileage...which has absolutely ZERO to do with individual driving habits.  Accountability apparently only applies to the "deep pockets" of the manufacturer. GRRRRRRR.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, akirby said:

I doubt the lawyers did any kind of tests.  They took somebody's posted anecdotal evidence combined with Ford's press release and ran with it.

Also I don't think Ford admitted they miscalculated yet.  I think they were looking for 3rd party confirmation based on something an employee reported.  Apparently this calculation is not an exact science.

While we all hope that these are baseless and scurrilous accusations, Ford has some
form with miscalculating official fuel economy numbers and that's where the chink  in
their armor will be.

So thinking some more about this,
Maybe this suit is all about is getting hold of that independent review of Ford's testing
procedures - I bet they're looking for Ford not updating test procedures to reflect the
changes to Roll out calculations as required by the EPA. Now depending on what that
audit found, it might show a wider issue with Ford's testing of all new vehicles.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, jpd80 said:

While we all hope that these are baseless and scurrilous accusations, Ford has some
form with miscalculating official fuel economy numbers and that's where the chink  in
their armor will be.

So thinking some more about this,
Maybe this suit is all about is getting hold of that independent review of Ford's testing
procedures - I bet they're looking for Ford not updating test procedures to reflect the
changes to Roll out calculations as required by the EPA. Now depending on what that
audit found, it might show a wider issue with Ford's testing of all new vehicles.

And it might show there are manufacturing tolerances in every vehicle and hence the Government saying they are estimated numbers.  Fuel economy does not come with a guarantee and short of a crime like VW, this case will die in court with no merit.  Then the GM truck folks who started this will go home defeated by Ford Trucks one more time.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, mustangchief said:

And it might show there are manufacturing tolerances in every vehicle and hence the Government saying they are estimated numbers.  Fuel economy does not come with a guarantee and short of a crime like VW, this case will die in court with no merit.  Then the GM truck folks who started this will go home defeated by Ford Trucks one more time.  

The whole point of EPA fuel economy testing is to produce repeatable results in a test lab, on a dyno.
All the variables are taken out, the one biggie is the roll down value, was addressed a couple of years ago.

As akirby suggests that the lawyer are simply trying to link anecdotal stories of  poor fuel economy to Ford's
self reported irregularities with regards official testing, the burden of proof is still on the lawyers to make a case.
Good luck with that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I get 20 % better fuel mileage than the mfr. says i should.  Cars with 25 MPG highway, I get 31.  Why?  I very rarely have to stop for red lights.  I time myself, I know when they're going to turn green and when they're going to turn red and why. It takes way more brake wear to stop a two ton vehicle to a DEAD stop.  It also takes a lot more fuel to bring that vehicle up to speed from a DEAD stop. I used to get 52 MPG with my wife's 1996 Nisan Sentra.  Ford:  Give me one of those F150's and I'll get 10 percent better mileage easily!   Also, MPG doesn't mean anything. I want to know what the gallons per minute (GPM) rating is.  GPM at idle, GPM at 40 MPH (average speed on a secondary road), and GPM for 65 MPH (highway).  THAT is how they should be rated!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I get 20 % better fuel mileage than the mfr. says i should.  Cars with 25 MPG highway, I get 31.  Why?  I very rarely have to stop for red lights.  I time myself, I know when they're going to turn green and when they're going to turn red and why. It takes way more brake wear to stop a two ton vehicle to a DEAD stop.  It also takes a lot more fuel to bring that vehicle up to speed from a DEAD stop. I used to get 52 MPG with my wife's 1996 Nisan Sentra.  Ford:  Give me one of those F150's and I'll get 10 percent better mileage easily!   Also, MPG doesn't mean anything. I want to know what the gallons per minute (GPM) rating is.  GPM at idle, GPM at 40 MPH (average speed on a secondary road), and GPM for 65 MPH (highway).  THAT is how they should be rated!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
On 7/24/2019 at 11:55 AM, Deanh said:

nothing chaps me more than Ambulance chasing Law Firms with class action lawsuits...blatant go after deep pockets hoping something sticks...and the owners eventually get a check for 50c if the suit  gets settled. Bunch of WANKERS. I do wonder what their culpability is if the lawsuit and subsequent costs amount to zero.....

Based on my limited exposure, personal injury and consumer protection attorneys aren't cut from the same mold. Any more than shyster auto techs represent all dealer service staff. Their culpability is that they pay from their law firm's pot of money, so they could be out a shit ton of money betting on the wrong case. And some state Bar attorneys take their jobs pretty seriously when it comes to ethics. They aren't all as stupid and dishonest as some of you appear to believe. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, mybkvu said:

Based on my limited exposure, personal injury and consumer protection attorneys aren't cut from the same mold. Any more than shyster auto techs represent all dealer service staff. Their culpability is that they pay from their law firm's pot of money, so they could be out a shit ton of money betting on the wrong case. And some state Bar attorneys take their jobs pretty seriously when it comes to ethics. They aren't all as stupid and dishonest as some of you appear to believe. 

Sorry Deanh, shouldn't have singled your post out (or responded at all, but that's another story). I'd edit, but I guess there's a 15 minute timer for some odd reason, so knuckleheads like me can't go back and correct a post that should have never left draft form. I was simply defending my wife's honor, even though she would never have asked me to :). 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, mybkvu said:

Sorry Deanh, shouldn't have singled your post out (or responded at all, but that's another story). I'd edit, but I guess there's a 15 minute timer for some odd reason, so knuckleheads like me can't go back and correct a post that should have never left draft form. I was simply defending my wife's honor, even though she would never have asked me to :). 

To be clear I don't think we were referring to all attorneys although it may have come across that way.   At least I was referring to the ones who go fishing for cases that don't really have any merit to begin with.   A defective vehicle/part is not a reason for a lawsuit provided the mfr honors any and all warranty claims and safety recalls.   Even if they knew the product was defective - so what?  You buy a car it comes with a warranty.  You want more coverage?  Buy an extended warranty.   You don't want to pay for repairs after the warranty period?  Sell it and get something else.  Nobody is forcing you to own a particular vehicle.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...