IMS Class Action?

This is news to me - figuring you've all seen this, though worth a repost in any event.

IMS Class Action

I've always been worried about the build date on my 2006 997S, but checking VINs on this post I think things are okay.

Thoughts on this?

Grant

gee-lenahan-at-gee-mail-dot-com

What about Canucks?

Grant

gee-lenahan-at-gee-mail-dot-com

[i.telegraph.co.uk]

Grant

gee-lenahan-at-gee-mail-dot-com

I went to a fight the other night, and a hockey game broke out.

The settlement states that we must actively opt out or we will be bound by the terms, and ineligible to bring independent suit. Is this true? How can i be bound by something i never signed?

It states that if a fix (e.g.; IMS replacement) was performed, they need not reimburse me. Any insight into how this is likely to be handled, given my car is within the VIN range, but i elected to take preventative action two years ago?

Grant

Grant

gee-lenahan-at-gee-mail-dot-com

Does anyone know even approximate worldwide sales figures for the affected models?

This is an interesting statement:

Quote
Indeed, to date, Porsche has spent over $20,000,000 reimbursing customers for the parts and labor necessary to repair vehicles experiencing engine damage or failure as a result of the defective IMS shaft. (This entails approximately 3,100 claims granted under warranty or good will.)

Using totally rough numbers to get an order-of-magnitude estimate:

If the number of vehicles is 400,000, the percentage of failures good willed by Porsche at 0.775 %. If they good will 1 out of 10 failures (I would actually guess it's more than that) then the failure rate is ~7%.

I'm sure are eagerly anticipating the discovery process in this case.

is that the discovery phase and negotiations between the class-representing attorney have already taken place and the hearing this month is only to have the court bless the agreement already reached between the two parties.

If that is right, you have learned all you will have by reading the proposed settlement language. The reason these get settled is to minimize the publicity about the company being sued.

I've guesstimated somewhere between p=0.5% and 1% per year, cumulative.

These ranges are similar.

I would guess the total # manufactured is much lower however, since it only covers 5 years, i'd guess its more like 150k units.

Grant

Grant

gee-lenahan-at-gee-mail-dot-com

But I think the $20MM number they quoted was for all cars, not just ones included in the suit.

There's no reason to estimate, according to docs provided by Porsche through discovery, the Failaure rate for double row IMSBs and the post 2005 models is less than 1 percent. The failure rate for single rows is 8-10 percent. The numbers are posted somewhere on rennlist but I can't find the exact post.

Grant

gee-lenahan-at-gee-mail-dot-com

1) I didn't know that facts about the failure rate had been posted (I have certainly seen lots of opinions)
2) My estimate jives with that figure. Being able to estimate is generally useful.

There are failures Porsche through its dealers have seen.
Failures owners have solved after warranty expiration with wreck motors through DIY or independent mechanics.
Failures people have prevented by pro-active replacement.
Cars that got parted out as uneconomical to repair.
Maybe some other category I haven't thought of.

Porsche knows the first category and acknowledges them. But Porsche not knowing the other categories, those wouldn't be subject to disclosure.

So, to my mind, the probable failure rate number must be greater than the one Porsche acknowledged and a fair subject for estimating/guesstimating.

The given stats could be based on extrapolation, research, or by strict numbers (examples seen by Porsche). If Porsche had done experiments to determine the actual failure rate that could be subject to disclosure.

Information is good. I look forward to hearing more.

Porsche serviced many cars during the warranty years for all types of problems including IMS failures. Given this sample size of serviced cars and the percentage of IMS failures, statistics would say that the 'true' failure rate is what Porsche reported to the court. At worst, there may be some uncertainty (+/-%) about the reported rate, but it's likely to be very small (<1%) given the sample size.

As to why some VINs are included and others are not, my answer is who knows. It reflects the legal strategies of the people suing Porsche and Porsche itself. The sad part of all of this is that Porsche could have scored a huge PR victory by simply saying something like this: Porsche will replace or repair all M96 engines that suffer a proven IMS failure before 150,000 miles. But they chose the conservative protect the bottom line approach instead. This is not what buyers, who are asked to fork out $50K and more for cars, like to hear.

Which i don't think is reasonable. I would guess most 986s are driven lightly - say 5-7k/year.

At this rate most will have only 20 or 30 k miles at end of warranty. So very few problems would be expected even with a defective design.

After that we have no reason to believe that the Porsche serviced cars are representative of the population. I would expect many self-selection bias' would be present.

Grant

Grant

gee-lenahan-at-gee-mail-dot-com

Since the class action suit pertains to model years 2001-2005, does that mean the earlier 1997-2000 Boxsters don't have this potential IMS failure problem?

... they're not covered just like MY 2006-2008 even though they still have an IMS bearing that's known to fail.
Porsche is only including the first generation single-row bearing cars.
And due to the stipulations in the class action, those that are covered will have a difficult time collecting.
Good luck to all of the plaintiffs.
Happy Boxstering
Pedro

Pedro Bonilla
1998 Boxster 986 - 311,000+ miles: [www.PedrosGarage.com]
PCA National Club Racing Scrutineer - PCA National HPDE Instructor - PCA Technical Committee (Boxster/Cayman)

---

Racecar spelled backwards is Racecar

"Racing is life. Anything before or after is just waiting" ... Steve McQueen as Michael Delaney in "LeMans"

"If you wait, all that happens is that you get older"... Mario Andretti

"Being second is to be the first of the ones who lose" ... Ayrton Senna

Pedro, your reply states that "Porsche is only including the first generation single-row bearing cars." That being the case, could you tell me what is different about the 1997-2000 Boxsters that would preclude them from being included in the class action suit? Thanks.

... have a dual row bearing.
I don't know why they were excluded, as I also don't know why the 2006-2008 were excluded as I also don't know why some (many) VINs within the 200-2005 model years were excluded.
Happy Boxstering,
Pedro

Pedro Bonilla
1998 Boxster 986 - 311,000+ miles: [www.PedrosGarage.com]
PCA National Club Racing Scrutineer - PCA National HPDE Instructor - PCA Technical Committee (Boxster/Cayman)

---

Racecar spelled backwards is Racecar

"Racing is life. Anything before or after is just waiting" ... Steve McQueen as Michael Delaney in "LeMans"

"If you wait, all that happens is that you get older"... Mario Andretti

"Being second is to be the first of the ones who lose" ... Ayrton Senna

Which stipulations are you refering to?

2001 Base, purchased in 2004, replaced engine at 130K+, RIP 2017

... that there's a 10 year window for the failure to occur, the ones that exclude a bunch of VINs within the included model years, the fact that unless you had a failure you won't collect even if your failure happens eventually anyway, etc.
Happy Boxstering,
Pedro

Pedro Bonilla
1998 Boxster 986 - 311,000+ miles: [www.PedrosGarage.com]
PCA National Club Racing Scrutineer - PCA National HPDE Instructor - PCA Technical Committee (Boxster/Cayman)

---

Racecar spelled backwards is Racecar

"Racing is life. Anything before or after is just waiting" ... Steve McQueen as Michael Delaney in "LeMans"

"If you wait, all that happens is that you get older"... Mario Andretti

"Being second is to be the first of the ones who lose" ... Ayrton Senna

I am the owner of an American 2005 boxster which was shipped to Canada and purchased in Canada. Do I qualify for the law suit?

Anyone have any idea why my 05 isn't listed as being covered? Fortunately, I haven't had (and hope not to) had an issue, just wondering why some cars within a model year are excluded?

Ed

Ed from Long Island (Tampa)
05S Cobalt/Blue/Blue

The age of the vehicles in the case of the early 996/986s
The lead plaintiffs in the lawsuit had vehicles of that design
Porsche's desire to limit the damages
Ease of obtaining a settlement for the lawyers (recall they have the investment and if they are rebuffed...they lose the money they have investigated)

But these are only estimates

... but it is a very restricted class.
Happy Boxstering
Pedro

Pedro Bonilla
1998 Boxster 986 - 311,000+ miles: [www.PedrosGarage.com]
PCA National Club Racing Scrutineer - PCA National HPDE Instructor - PCA Technical Committee (Boxster/Cayman)

---

Racecar spelled backwards is Racecar

"Racing is life. Anything before or after is just waiting" ... Steve McQueen as Michael Delaney in "LeMans"

"If you wait, all that happens is that you get older"... Mario Andretti

"Being second is to be the first of the ones who lose" ... Ayrton Senna

Porsche has every interest in restricting the size of the class and thus the recovery Porsche will have to pay out.
The lawyer has every interest in making the lawsuit as simple as possible because he wants his cut of the settlement with as little expense and delay as possible.
So, in some sense, their interests coincide.
If the judge thinks the settlement is wildly unbalanced, in theory he can object.

You can opt out.

Any time someone else wants to define a new class and fund the effort to bring a lawsuit, they can.

All of this is true, of course. Likewise there's no harm in whining about how now that there is a suit some of us may have been screwed. I may have been, for all I know at this point.

Neverthless. I was out several thousand dollars for an engine replacement (and I not only got a bargain, but got an engine replacement that so far has worked well) and assumed I'd never see any of it again. The prospect of getting 40 percent of it back is a pleasant one, regardless of the fact that I may not get anything back in the end or that I really think I should get all of it back.

2001 Base, purchased in 2004, replaced engine at 130K+, RIP 2017

If I were affected, I'd wander over to the 996 forum on rennlist as that is where the details will be posted. I'd normally be able to post a link since I follow there but I'll be out of the country for a few weeks and time is critical to getting your claim in.

Search "settlement"

I have been speaking with the attorneys who are handling this class action for the plaintiff class about why the VIN range is so restricted, particularly with respect to the 2001 model year. At first they told me that they are settling claims for the VIN ranges that had a 4-10% failure rate, based on data provided to them by Porsche. I suggested to them that the failure rates are based on what was actually reported to Porsche, and may be artificially low, and I asked them for more information. Here is a copy of part of their response:

"Based on the information provided to us by Porsche, the failure rate of vehicles with our version of the IMS, from 2001 to 2005, was in the range of 4 to 10%. In contrast, the type of IMS in models of the Porsche vehicles before and after the production runs using our version of the IMS, exclusively was far less than 1%. As to the 2001 vehicles, Porsche began to exclusively use the version of the IMS subject to the higher failure rate as part of its production runs as of May 4, 2001. That is the reason why some 2001’s are included and some are not.

There are no issues pending that would broaden the scope of the terms of this settlement in include model years prior to May 4, 2001."

This is news to me. Was anyone else aware that Porsche used different types of IMS bearings in a given model year or years?

Go to the September 22 Tool Pants post, second paragraph.
[www.renntech.org]

Grant

gee-lenahan-at-gee-mail-dot-com

Grant

gee-lenahan-at-gee-mail-dot-com

Laz and Grant: Thank you very much.

Getready: I suggest that you contact the law firm that is handling the matter. They are very helpul and responsive. Here is a link to the site they set up:


IMS class action settlement website

I have a USA boxster that failed but I am a Canuck. Am I able to get in on a claim?