Happy Porsche 911 owner

[moving2]

Originally Posted By: whip
I agree that Porsche should replace the car, but why does he deserve anything beyond that? Has our society degraded so far that we must be compensated every time things don't work out like we expect?


He said he's had to take the car back to Porsche at least 7 times so far. Assuming the man has a job, his time is not free, is it? I think it's a safe assumption that the man has had to take at least some vacation time to handle this, and 7 times for the same problem(s) is more than reasonable. That's why he deserves something beyond that. If our society has degraded, I wonder why you aren't pointing the finger at the dealer's handling of the case to date?

 

[SteveSRT8]

Originally Posted By: whip
Originally Posted By: Trav
They should give him a 911 Turbo plus some cash.........

Originally Posted By: sparky123
IMO, he needs to be paid MORE than what he paid for his vehicle considering his time and aggreviation.

I agree that Porsche should replace the car, but why does he deserve anything beyond that? Has our society degraded so far that we must be compensated every time things don't work out like we expect?


Indeed.

Buy enough cars and you will eventually get one of these no matter the brand. It happens a lot behind the scenes.

I really detest the posting of everyone's issues on the Internet, but that's just me. He will get compensation but no matter what amount he'll probably whine and [censored] some more for you guys to watch...

 

[Win]

With the exception of water coming from the dash, these electrical problems sound very familiar - my GTO exhibited all of them after it was struck by lightning.

First it was dead as a hammer.

Then as they were able to repair and start bringing the electrical systems back to life, there were all kinds of intermittent glitches and wierdo stuff, including intermittent contact issues from burnt connectors. It takes many months of diligent work to track down and solve things like this. Impatience is not helpful.

I wonder if there is more to this. Perhaps the car was near a strike, if it didn't take a direct hit. My car was next to a tree that took the initial hit. Lightning damage is common enough that decent insurance policies expressly cover it. GM repaired my car under warranty, even though my insurance would have covered it.

As far as being an internet crybaby .... man up, mister. If you can afford a Porsche, you can afford to, and should, act like a grown up. If he handled things differently, he probably would have a better outcome.

 

[rjundi]

Originally Posted By: domer10
Originally Posted By: rjundi
EVERY single car maker and every single model has a small percentage of bad apples. Just the way it goes. Unfortunate for the owners but at least a slight risk only in new car buying.

This guy deserves nothing from Porsche. He shot himself in foot making this lame video, hope Porsche does nothing above lemon laws and warranty.



I hope this happens to you X100......did you really just say that. I guess its ok for you in your world to get jacked for 100 grand. I wish I could live in this magical weld where its ok to screw people.


There are lemon laws and other methods to pursue instead of crying on the internet for poor me negative attention from social media. In my state if in lemon law period >30 days in shop would qualify it. He is not telling the whole story of what was offered from Porsche etc. He does not have a brand new car so he does not deserve a brand new one. He reveals little of what is happening and shot himself in the foot now with a car no one will ever want.

 

[moving2]

This story just got an update, with more backstory, today on Autoblog here.

It's funny to me how a subset of people on this forum just assume that total strangers are (pick one: whiners/leechers/playing the system/want something for nothing/don't want to take personal responsibility) when they don't actually know the people involved or the details of the issue at hand. If you read the latest Autoblog story, you'll see that:

1. He didn't start posting the videos just to whine when he started having problems. As the article states:
"He specially ordered his car with thousands of dollars in extras tailored just to him, and he captured all of the options on his YouTube channel. The love affair didn't last long. Eventually the channel became a place for Nick to air his growing list of grievances about his deteriorating 911."

Earlier videos show that he was posting videos when he first got the car and liked it, videos like this one.

2. He did file for lemon law protection:
"Murray filed for Lemon Law protection. Porsche Cars North America contacted him for the first time to fix the problem, but it didn't help."

3. Porsche apparently only offered him partial value, and not an exact replacement of the vehicle:
"He began arbitration with Porsche and asked for either his full purchase price back or an exact replacement. The company countered with a portion of what the car was worth, based on its mileage. Murray refused and turned to his YouTube watchers for help."

4. What some of you called "whining" and claimed would work against him, has worked for him. In spades:
"He asked them to spread the word, and the video went viral with over 800,000 views as of this writing. Supporters posted it multiple times on Porsche's Facebook and Twitter sites.

The pressure may have worked. Murray posted on the 6 Speed Online forums: "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." Later, he added another note on the forum and Facebook that the situation was resolved without going into detail.

Nick Twork, Product Communications Manager Porsche Cars North America, told Autoblog the that company was "very aware of these videos." He confirmed that the Customer Care Department had been in contact with Murray, and it met "with him one-on-one." He promised that PCNA would work with him until "everyone is satisfied."

Something tells me he would not have received the same treatment had he not taken the Youtube route. And actually, points (2) and (3) above bear this out.

 

[whip]

Originally Posted By: moving2
Originally Posted By: whip
I agree that Porsche should replace the car, but why does he deserve anything beyond that? Has our society degraded so far that we must be compensated every time things don't work out like we expect?


He said he's had to take the car back to Porsche at least 7 times so far. Assuming the man has a job, his time is not free, is it? I think it's a safe assumption that the man has had to take at least some vacation time to handle this, and 7 times for the same problem(s) is more than reasonable. That's why he deserves something beyond that. If our society has degraded, I wonder why you aren't pointing the finger at the dealer's handling of the case to date?

Should a person be compensated for warranty work? What about a recall? Is the recall compensation rate higher or lower than the warranty rate? Is the compensation based on the price of the car, or the income of the buyer?

 

[moving2]

Originally Posted By: whip
Should a person be compensated for warranty work? What about a recall? Is the recall compensation rate higher or lower than the warranty rate? Is the compensation based on the price of the car, or the income of the buyer?


whip- we're talking lemon law in this case- where the following typically applies (I believe this is for CT):
"- You must own or lease a new vehicle that does not conform to the manufacturer's warranty.
- The vehicle must have substantial defects affecting its use, safety, or value.
- The vehicle must have undergone at least 4 attempts for repair.
- The vehicle must be within the first 2 years of its original delivery date to the owner or within the first 24,000 miles on the odometer (whichever period ends first)."

This case is not just about warranty work or recalls, so please try not to confuse the issue. As to whether or not you can receive compensation for vacation time, etc., that depends on your state lemon laws. Here is an example of a state lemon law that can include compensation for vacation time taken to address the problem:

"Damages -[...] Consumers take time off from work, miss vacations, get stranded, worry about their safety - i.e., when and where the vehicle will next break down, and even have strains within the family when inflicted with a lemon. In recognition of this, West Virginia includes "annoyance or inconvenience" as damages to be recovered [...]"

...as for compensation based on price of the vehicle vs. income of the buyer, I would guess the latter, but would probably be better to ask a lawyer.

 

[antiqueshell]

I think the Aussie native was astute when bringing up what I think has become something common in the USA...browbeating or trying to intimidate the customer with antics a real adversarial approach which I too find so disgusting that it has made me NOT want to make brand new expensive large purchases, I have personally experienced this with a number of businesses both large and small that I have dealt with in the past decade or so, the attitude towards the customer in this country has increasingly become one of confrontation and what I consider to be outrageous behavior in many cases, it shows the apparent contempt many businesses have in the US towards their customers especially when that customer has a very legitimate issue, problem, or concern.

I wish the owner would comment on how Porsche Australia would have handled this, I am sure they would have been more reasonable and accommodating, after all this guy spent a LOT of money on this car.

Oh, and I seriously doubt it was PCNA that finally just decided to grant the owner a new car in exchange for the old one back with no additional charges or depreciation fees, Porsche AG probably ORDERED the US distributor to do it.

You can find similar poor management at VWoA and AoA the two sister US controlled distributors in the USA.

They have typical Americans behaving in the petty and petulant way that many business types operate in our culture today.

That being said I was a bit surprised to hear an Australian
use so many swear words, and yes, he did sound a bit whiny. Not what I would have expected from the typical Australian guy.

Shannow what do you say?

 

[Doug Hillary]

Hi,
IMO I think the appropriate Laws should apply - and now, quickly!

Some Australians are certainly very uncouth - the majority aren't! In this case the use of swear words diminished his case IMO

I have owned three Porsche cars - two were purchased via a Porsche Australia's Dealer. The cars were under warranty and both were trouble free during that period

My first involvement with Porsche cars was in Denmark in the 1960s - the 356 era. As there wasn't a Porsche Dealer there then and via my employer (Caltex-Chevron) we did do warranty work etc. - on the first of the 911's too. Many came to Denmark/Sweden via the US Forces in Germany at the time. It was a breeze to deal with them (Porsche) in Germany and I often had my people go Gedser/Travemunde-Lubeck return to pick up warranty and other parts from the Dealership there

I have been to the Porsche Factory in Zuffenhausen and the Museum many times and had other dealings over the years too. Their personnel have always been excellent

Things change of course and now as part of VW - Porsche will be a different animal!!!

In my experience over several decades with a number of German vehicle/equipment Manufacturers, they do drive a hard bargain on major Warranty and vehicle/component Development matters

In the end they like to make the major decisions at their HO. But they make the Dealership and Country Franchise holder do the ground work first

In the end though a purchase is a two way deal, seller and buyer, both must honour their commitments IMO!