BRZ :(

[celica73]

Originally Posted by JCW

I have a lawyer that is overseeing the situation. I'm not going to pursue any legal actions unless Subaru tries to screw me. As for the questions mentioned earlier, I got the new fuel pump because of the crickets and the TSB sent out by Subaru. The gears not going in correctly is something kind of hard to explain, I would put it into gear and let go of the clutch but when i gave it gas it was unresponsive. It would catch on about 5 seconds later and car would jerk a bit. And yes this car was brand new when I bought it in sept, only 8 miles on it. The car was bone stock, haven't done any mods to it.

I'll keep everyone updated as it happens.

The gear change issues are easy to explain. The fuel was leaking onto the clutch (the transmission bell housing isn't sealed that tight), so it wasn't working right (lots of slipping). Same thing happens if you get crap on the brakes - the car won't stop.

Good luck with the negotiations.

[Razz]

They're gonna hit you up for a used car and try to offer you a replacement where it will cost you 3500 to 5k or more for it.

Technically insurance covers it by the dealer, but only market value.

They will try to screw you as they don't want to pay the difference.

[DBacon1052]

I would definitely throw i lawsuit at them. You should at least get a brz free of charge.

[Gixxersixxerman]

Originally Posted by Razz

They're gonna hit you up for a used car and try to offer you a replacement where it will cost you 3500 to 5k or more for it.

Technically insurance covers it by the dealer, but only market value.

They will try to screw you as they don't want to pay the difference.

Then this is where the lawyer comes in at.. They abide by your demands up to a point and if they can't make right then talk with a lawyer

[Gixxersixxerman]

Originally Posted by DBacon1052

I would definitely throw i lawsuit at them. You should at least get a brz free of charge.

This is what's wrong with America.. They don't owe paying off his car and getting him another.. Upgrading a bit sure.. But a free car.. No

[strat61caster]

Originally Posted by Gixxersixxerman

This is what's wrong with America.. They don't owe paying off his car and getting him another.. Upgrading a bit sure.. But a free car.. No

HE COULD HAVE DIED, everyone will have a different interpretation of what just compensation should be in this scenario but he didn't just "loose a car", the dealer put his life at risk.

bring on the debate about how dangerous this actually was and how he certainly should have noticed in time and his life was in no danger and how gosh darnit back in my day seatbelts were for pussies.

[xjohnx]

Originally Posted by strat61caster

HE COULD HAVE DIED, everyone will have a different interpretation of what just compensation should be in this scenario but he didn't just "loose a car", the dealer put his life at risk.

He COULD have lost his shoes in the fire, but he didn't. Should the dealer buy him new shoes too because the possibility was there?

[ST185RC]

Lol, never knew we had so many lawyers with so much to say in a car forum

[f0rge]

Originally Posted by xjohnx

He COULD have lost his shoes in the fire, but he didn't. Should the dealer buy him new shoes too because the possibility was there?

That logic doesn't follow, he's not asking for a new life, he's asking for a new car, because it was actually destroyed.

There's also a big difference between putting someone's life at risk and putting someone's shoes at risk.

If I lit your car on fire while you and your whole family was in it, not on purpose but through an act of negligence on my part, would you be cool with that? Probably not. Would you sue me? Hells yes you would.

[DBacon1052]

Originally Posted by Gixxersixxerman

This is what's wrong with America.. They don't owe paying off his car and getting him another.. Upgrading a bit sure.. But a free car.. No

are you kidding?! What's wrong with america is trying to sue someone over stupid things. (like google taking you on a walking route with no sidewalk). From the looks of it, the entire car looks like it caught fire. This is something that could have actually killed him and there's nothing that he could have done to prevent it. Ive seen settlements of hundreds of thousands of dollars for stupid stuff. $40,000 is being nice for something like this.

[DBacon1052]

Originally Posted by xjohnx

He COULD have lost his shoes in the fire, but he didn't. Should the dealer buy him new shoes too because the possibility was there?

Shoes you can replace... A life you can't. I don't see your point. Are you saying that if he died, then it would be right to sue?. People win suits all the time over escalators not having "watch your step" signs on them and other b.s. Im pretty sure he can win this one. The difference here is that it is common sense to watch your step when using an escalator.

[Meehow86]

Originally Posted by xjohnx

He COULD have lost his shoes in the fire, but he didn't. Should the dealer buy him new shoes too because the possibility was there?

lol, this makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.

[b.e]

This thread used to be interesting.

[Braces]

Originally Posted by russv

Do you think the dealership or Subaru has lawyered up?

Of course they have. They and Subaru have attorneys on retainer. But as others have said .... I believe the best course of action is to allow the dealership to do the RIGHT THING. Give them a chance. All large corporations know that to "settle" is more economical than to risk this going to trial where a jury is going to be more sympathetic to the plaintiff (in this situation).

I believe the dealership will do the right thing.

Keep us informed. Best of luck.