Admission of negligence
Discussion
Oso said:
Regarding the cause, if the geo wasn't touched when the tyres were changed, you'd either have noticed similar wear on the old tyres, or you've had a suspension failure in the meantime. It is possible (maybe even likely) that the dealer did do the geo but made an a**e of it - that tyre wear is consistent with having way too much negative camber.
I purchased the car last July. And the car has run fine. Tyres needed changing in May this year so did all 4. I can't say I noticed anything handling wise.Service was done in May too and passed fine.
Also car had warranty put back on after 111 point check in Feb I think.
RyanTank said:
got to be honest here OP. Not sure what your looking for from Porsche?
They are already covering costs of the repairs, also not entirely sure what is in it for solicitors to chase this up, so many different factors could have affected the car since the wheels were fitted. As someone else said, they could pull you up on not checking the road worthiness of your car before each journey, but honestly who does?
Given the state on the inner tyre edge I'd have thought they would have been rubbing on something to have worn out so fast, maybe you'd have heard it and thought it as nothing, or even smelt the burning of the rubber if it was actually rubbing against something.
Bear in mind also the fact that Porsche UK will have an amazing legal team should you decide to push on with whatever it is your seeking legally. and unless you have that level of legal representation prepare to lose.
Finally taking the word of a recovery guy also means diddily. My mates a recovery man and he knows nothing about cars mechanically, aside from the best way to load one on the back of his truck, and even then its a bit ropey at times! (not saying they are all like that however)
Part of my reason for posting is I don't know is the honest answer what Im expected.They are already covering costs of the repairs, also not entirely sure what is in it for solicitors to chase this up, so many different factors could have affected the car since the wheels were fitted. As someone else said, they could pull you up on not checking the road worthiness of your car before each journey, but honestly who does?
Given the state on the inner tyre edge I'd have thought they would have been rubbing on something to have worn out so fast, maybe you'd have heard it and thought it as nothing, or even smelt the burning of the rubber if it was actually rubbing against something.
Bear in mind also the fact that Porsche UK will have an amazing legal team should you decide to push on with whatever it is your seeking legally. and unless you have that level of legal representation prepare to lose.
Finally taking the word of a recovery guy also means diddily. My mates a recovery man and he knows nothing about cars mechanically, aside from the best way to load one on the back of his truck, and even then its a bit ropey at times! (not saying they are all like that however)
Im a professional MMA fighter but am big enough, and ugly enough, to admit I was slightly shaken up at the thought of the potential carnage that could have occurred.
Im also bright enough to know that the AA guy isn't an "expert" nor that Porsche wouldn't have a s
t hot legal team.But them admitting a level of liability. Ill add in that I have had a fair few issues with the particular dealer. Just seems negligent.
If all I get is costs covered a full check to make sure there is nothing underlying I will take that. But if there is a wider legal case / compensation to be had, clearly ill pursue.
I work for a large finance company who have hooked me up with a firm who specialise in this sort of thing. If they say exactly what you guys are - then ill post here so people can see that should this issue happen to them this is the likely outcome!!!!!!
Ozzie Osmond said:
So to repeat a question that was asked earlier in the thread, what was the condition of the previous set of tyres which were taken off?
And how long had they been on the car?
I don't think the garage have "admitted" anything, let alone negligence.
They had normal wear and were replaced as they had reached their normal end of life. They were on, I believe, for circa 15,000 miles.And how long had they been on the car?
I don't think the garage have "admitted" anything, let alone negligence.
And them apologising and putting in writing the tracking/geometry was not done properly when the tyres were replaced isn't an admission of anything?
I take the point from other lads post about ending my relationship with Porsche by setting lawyers on them. Im only taking advice (as I'm taking here) and await porsche head office calling me and letting me know what they think of it all.
But I wont be using that centre again as this is the third instance of poor work.
mollytherocker said:
You said that the tyres had only been on a month and then later said they were fitted in May?
Which is it?
Ok to be 100% precise...... sorry!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!Which is it?
They were fitted May 27th.....
I then went on holiday for a month to Mexico (to not miss any crucial details haha).
By my calculations thats probably about 6 weeks of use...... my apologies.
Does that change anything?
sidicks said:
Does your car have TPMS and if so, did you not notice the pressures increasing significantly on a long drive (which I would assume they must have, given the wear on the insides)?
The only thing that happened of note was on the journey where it blew a few minutes before the PSM warning light went on on the dash.... I was thinking to myself is that important because you can manually switch it off. But before I could even get into any other thoughts the steering wheel was vibrating haha and so I was off on hard shoulder!!Ill add in.... the journey i was doing was a long one that I only do to west wales to see my parents a few times a year. So had.... a few days before..... checked all the tyre pressures and no huge issues.
Trev450 said:
Absolutely somewhat of a conundrum.
Once I have the full engineers report and spoken to Porsche Head Office Ill be sure to update this for anyone interested.I have LOADS less knowledge/experience in these matters than even the posters here. So just trying to gauge opinion.
Could be useful for others seeing the conclusion to this.... future incidents etc.
Boxstercol said:
Agreed, these tyres look toast. Maybe it's just the picture but the 'unworn' tread of the tyre looks like it's almost on the tread wear indicators.
OP do us a favour & put us all out of our misery & take a picture of the tyre with a tread depth gauge to show how much tread was left on the 'good' side of the tyre.
Did anyone have access to your keys while you were in Mexico? Maybe someone else has been doing burn outs in it.
Scary experience for sure but I doubt you'll get far taking legal action against Porsche for this, too many unknowns between having the tyres replaced & the blow out. I don't think there is a cast iron case here...
As Ive said a few times the vehicle is in with the dealer getting sorted. OP do us a favour & put us all out of our misery & take a picture of the tyre with a tread depth gauge to show how much tread was left on the 'good' side of the tyre.
Did anyone have access to your keys while you were in Mexico? Maybe someone else has been doing burn outs in it.
Scary experience for sure but I doubt you'll get far taking legal action against Porsche for this, too many unknowns between having the tyres replaced & the blow out. I don't think there is a cast iron case here...
The second set of pictures show the tyres in good light, clean and on a jig at the dealer. Clearly inside is worn to wire and outside has plenty of tread. So I disagree on that point.
And haha - imagine if people were doing burn outs. Id punch them up and down the street so they looked like the tyre blown out!
davek_964 said:
The very bottom of the picture of the tyres does show the groove nearer the outside has reasonable tread.
However, it is a fact that it shouldn't be necessary to do the alignment just because the tyres are being replaced especially if the previous set wore normally. Something else must have been done - incorrectly - when (or since) the tyres were fitted and apparently to both sides.
Even so, it amazes me that you could drive a car that had a problem severe enough to cause that kind of wear in such a short mileage and not notice something was wrong. It amazes me even more that Porsche would immediately admit liability - companies don't usually do that and Porsche hardly have a reputation for admitting liability these days.
The whole thing is very odd.
Odd?However, it is a fact that it shouldn't be necessary to do the alignment just because the tyres are being replaced especially if the previous set wore normally. Something else must have been done - incorrectly - when (or since) the tyres were fitted and apparently to both sides.
Even so, it amazes me that you could drive a car that had a problem severe enough to cause that kind of wear in such a short mileage and not notice something was wrong. It amazes me even more that Porsche would immediately admit liability - companies don't usually do that and Porsche hardly have a reputation for admitting liability these days.
The whole thing is very odd.
Is it beyond reason.... that the OPC changed the tyres as normal and cocked something up?
Over the course of 6 weeks.... due to the wheels/tyres pulling inwards they suffered additional wear and tear with no horrific symptoms for a driver to notice.... and then one just went pop?
And the admission of fault is an odd one. I was simply expecting the party line of "The wheel tracking is out... we don't know why.... but as a gesture of good faith we will cover costs." = happy customer.
Instead they have admitted it was their fault and are very sorry.
As I said - I will in interested to hear what the head office call says!
BertBert said:
Surely that's why they admitted the problem. I'd certainly not want a confrontation with @MMAShane 
By the way doesn't all that getting hit hurt? Sorry to go OT.
Interested to see the tech report on the tyres too!
Haha did I post my twitter handle before? By the way doesn't all that getting hit hurt? Sorry to go OT.Interested to see the tech report on the tyres too!
And yes me too..... I will be sure to share this saga to a conclusion.
Martin4x4 said:
I wonder if this could be an explanation, if it has been faulty and braking both wheels slightly, or either excessively when cornering.
Has the tread actually been measured the on the outside? because I agree they look excessively worn over all and just a lot worse on the inside. How do they compare with the fronts?
As an asside, a regularly visually check of tyres is wise habit to form.
It's not delamination.
The PSM warning light only came on minutes before the blow out.....Has the tread actually been measured the on the outside? because I agree they look excessively worn over all and just a lot worse on the inside. How do they compare with the fronts?
As an asside, a regularly visually check of tyres is wise habit to form.
It's not delamination.
darreni said:
Op, when did you last pay for a full alignment?
It's not usually done when changing tyres or as part of a service ( unless you ask & pay).
I paid for full geometry check when tyres changed in May as I said before.It's not usually done when changing tyres or as part of a service ( unless you ask & pay).
And I believe this is the reason for Porsche saying to me today it was their fault and covering costs.
YoungMD said:
Well I commend the author of this treat for repeating 100+ times what he said in the first post, boy there are some dum arse replies.
I think the point is Porsvhe charge a premium, we all know they charge over the odds (that's why they have nice coffee) thats fine but in return they have to deliver a premium product, simple.
I would be pissed too if they changed my tyres and either didn't check the old tyre wear or f'ed up the alignment. I'd expect kwik fit to do that but I'd be paying them half, checking there work, and knowing I was gambling.
To offer some useful feedback though, legally apart from getting them to check/ sort out the car theres not a lot more you could do, UK law kind of works on the principle that damages/compensation is only really paid when actual loss/ suffering can be proven, now if it happened in the US you could be driving a GT3 in a few months..........
Haha I don't want to hate on the people who have bothered to respond. But it has been fairly frustrating. I think the point is Porsvhe charge a premium, we all know they charge over the odds (that's why they have nice coffee) thats fine but in return they have to deliver a premium product, simple.
I would be pissed too if they changed my tyres and either didn't check the old tyre wear or f'ed up the alignment. I'd expect kwik fit to do that but I'd be paying them half, checking there work, and knowing I was gambling.
To offer some useful feedback though, legally apart from getting them to check/ sort out the car theres not a lot more you could do, UK law kind of works on the principle that damages/compensation is only really paid when actual loss/ suffering can be proven, now if it happened in the US you could be driving a GT3 in a few months..........
The irony being the guy at OPC when he changed my tyres was waxing lyrical about how you would NEVER go to a kwik fit with a car of this spec etc etc how the F would they align the wheels, check suspension etc etc.
Then 2 months and a a few hundred miles later the tyres are exploding haha!
BertBert said:
But the old alignment couldn't be that far out else the old tyres would blow out. Also we know they need to replace alignment (or some such term) bolts.
So perhaps we can conclude they did do the premium service, checked the alignment and got it wrong (by not doing up the lock nuts if there are any perhaps).
They can't really be sued for negligence as they have put the OP back in new tyres and fixed suspension. So not a huge risk in admitting fault.
Bert
So by this logic unless someone dies we don't do anything or punish?So perhaps we can conclude they did do the premium service, checked the alignment and got it wrong (by not doing up the lock nuts if there are any perhaps).
They can't really be sued for negligence as they have put the OP back in new tyres and fixed suspension. So not a huge risk in admitting fault.
Bert
Just sweep under carpet.
davek_964 said:
You didn't say that. You said you had 4 new tyres and no other work.
Now, I think it makes sense. They clearly did forget to tighten something up, which I suspect they found very quickly when they inspected the car after the blow out.
I didn't realise it was considered work. Apologies.Now, I think it makes sense. They clearly did forget to tighten something up, which I suspect they found very quickly when they inspected the car after the blow out.
I had the extra bits done as made sense.
Im guessing this is why there has been some sort of admission as it will be noted on the OPC systems!
fredt said:
You'd have to be right cock to go suing a company who made a mistake, owned up to and fixed it at no cost to you.
Jeez
Having been pleased reading through the comments I get to this moron......Jeez
WTF are you talking about?
So as long as the "mistake" doesn't kill anyone you sweep it under the carpet?
Ill be honest my original post was just to see if any similar experiences and my omission of the geometry check shows what a beginner I am in this field.
I am not trying to screw a company and as I said if all that needs doing here is putting me back in previous position so be it.
BUT - having had legal advice from what i would deem an expert today and being told I have a case. AND now having Porsche head office call me saying there is a full investigation underway. I would think Im not THAT much of a "cock" for raising it.
And MMA for a previous post = mixed martial arts. And I would hope that wasn't what made them admit fault haha ;-)
YoungMD said:
Very funny !! i agree the guy has suffered clear cut slander... I know this could have been very serious and we shouldnt laugh but it wasnt so maybe we can and this tread is very funny.
haha its okay matey I think missing some details didn't help. I can see how the sums didn't add up.Are there really morons who do burnouts or smash there car and then post on here for sympathy and compo?
SFO said:
a case to claim what (in addition new tyres, alignment and recovery costs and some thing for your time)?
To quote the lawyer:-"With the evidence from the AA coupled with written admission from the OPC this is something worth pursuing if they don't play ball....... If they come with their usual nonsense advise them that give your previous dealings with them you have sought legal advice and have been informed that you have a strong claim against them for negligence."
The advised outcome being remedying the defects (which is being done and my car comes back tomorrow) and an element of compensation - because of how serious this could have been and this solely down to their negligence.
Moderator edit: no naming & shaming please.
Edited by jeremyc on Wednesday 19th August 20:26
davek_964 said:
No zillion dollar an hour Porsche lawyer would be suckered in by the term 'solely'. The fault that caused this excessive wear to occur appears to be due to their negligence. The reason it got so serious that a tyre exploded before you noticed it is - solely - due to the fact that you have not been checking your car is roadworthy before each journey.
I will wait to see how it all unfolds. But yes - I don't expect anything much to happen.Doesn't matter how much a lawyer is paid per se if its clear that a law has been broken .....
Gassing Station | Boxster/Cayman | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff