Quote:
Originally Posted by EnerJi
All true, and there's always two sides to every story. However, all the information we have is from the OP, and he stated the car was being driven normally and had been maintained normally. He could be lying or leaving important details out, but he could just as easily be telling the truth.
Keep in mind, just because there isn't a rash of BMW vehicle fires does not mean that they might not be responsible. Engine parts and engines are built to certain specifications and tolerances, with a 1 in however many million hours chance of a catastrophic failure. With the millions of BMWs on the road, every so often one is going to experience a catastrophic failure despite being driven within normal operating limits. This particular catastrophic failure caused a fire that resulted in his car being totaled.
If this had been your car and you know you had driven and maintained the vehicle properly, wouldn't you want BMW to make it right?
|
In the real world, decisions in the matters of fault aren't made based on "might". It either is or isn't. Period. It definitely could have been a manufacturing defect. But we'll never know. As I said before, insurance companies do all they possibly can to hold onto their money. If there was any shred of evidence that they could definitively pin this on BMW they would have found it and denied the claim - or paid and then went after BMW.
You really need to reconsider what you're suggesting here. Do you really think it makes any sense whatsoever for a manufacturer to take the blame for something that has happened regardless of whom is at fault? This is not based on sound logic.
No one can say what happened to the OP's car. No one. Who's to say there wasn't a more minor issue that he didn't notice (or even ignored) that escalated as he continued to drive the car? It's certainly plausible that had he stopped sooner he might have avoided this whole catastrophe. But we'll never know. If he had a tire go down, but failed to stop, then suffered a catastrophic failure resulting in a horrific crash would you suggest that the tire manufacturer take the blame - just because it was their tire?
I hate to say it, but I think this sort of logic based on entitlement and the need to blame somebody is really why our society is in the shape it's in. I'm reminded of this idiocy every day when I drink coffee from a cup that warns me my coffee is hot. No shit my coffee is hot. It's coffee.
Bad things happen all the time. Sometimes it's obvious why. Sometimes it isn't. There are mechanisms in place to make things right (insurance) and it appears everything worked as it was designed to in this regard. He suffered a loss and his carrier paid the claim. Just because you've been inconvenienced doesn't mean you're automatically ENTITLED to compensation for it - regardless of what your attorney says...
