IMS class action update

[stealthn]

IMS Porsche Settlement Class Action Lawsuit Information Center | Knapp Petersen & Clarke

Good luck

[Super 90]

The first sentence on the law firm's web page disturbs me: "Plaintiffs assert that the Intermediate Shaft (“IMS”) in the engine of the Porsche Boxter and Porsche 911, model years 2001 through 2005, is defective."

If they can't spell "Boxster"... well, I don't know...

[mikefocke]

They knew enough to get Porsche to admit to failure statistics and to agree to pay the lawyers a bundle and even some to the few folks whose cars had the problem.

Took a lot of investment of time and money on their part. Yes, now they will get paid a bundle. But I didn't see anyone else doing it despite trying to get several law firms interested.

[Rod Schneider]

Originally Posted by Super 90

The first sentence on the law firm's web page disturbs me: "Plaintiffs assert that the Intermediate Shaft (“IMS”) in the engine of the Porsche Boxter and Porsche 911, model years 2001 through 2005, is defective."

If they can't spell "Boxster"... well, I don't know...

I just looked at the website and don't see this misspelling........

[Super 90]

They corrected it in between the time I posted and you read it... what I put in the post was copied and pasted, so I know it was misspelled originally.

[Alphaboy1]

I just received the above mentioned lawsuit information in the mail today. I did not request it. It states 2001 thru 2005 Boxster and 911s.

[stevedollar]

It is important to note that, although 2001-2005 models are covered by the proposed settlement, those with cars that have been in service over 10 years, or that have over 130,000 miles (whichever comes first) receive NO benefits. If owners of 2001-2003 models do not OPT OUT, they will lose their current right to sue Porsche to recover damages for IMS failure. This settlement only benefits the class action lawyers and those who have 2004-2005 model Porsches (or those with 2003 models that were placed in service after July 2003).

The catch is that you cannot object to the settlement as being unfair if you want to opt out, and you cannot opt out if you object. Although this makes sense from a legal standpoint (those who opt out will not be affected by the settlement and therefore have no standing to object) it serves to really limit the number of people who will object to the settlement. Only those willing to sacrifice their potential claims against Porsche in the future will step up and selflessly object to the settlement. I hope I am not the only one.

It seems to me that if the benefits are limited to those whose cars have been in service for less than 10 years, the class should be limited to the same extent, so that people are not caught in a trap where they lose rights unless they opt out.