[chrisny]

One is a horrific tragedy, one is an unfortunate loss of a piece of machinery easily replaced by taking the thousands of dollars his insurance company gave him and going to the next dealership he sees and buying another automobile. If you really don't understand the difference, there is nothing I can do to help you.

[wins76]

Originally Posted by jdong

Umm, no, if he were injured or dead, then accidental death insurance or the bodily injury part of his car insurance would have kicked in, and he would've been compensated with more than enough money to buy a parking lot full of BMW's in his afterlife ;-)

Don't foget we are in America, people get more in compensation when they are alive than death.

[wins76]

Originally Posted by chrisny

One is a horrific tragedy, one is an unfortunate loss of a piece of machinery easily replaced by taking the thousands of dollars his insurance company gave him and going to the next dealership he sees and buying another automobile. If you really don't understand the difference, there is nothing I can do to help you.

A faulty machine that might casue death is more likely. BTW did I ask for your help???

[Tsuyoi]

Originally Posted by wins76

I think I know how the OP feels. He spend 50k plus to buy a car and planned to use it till the end of life (let say 15 years). But with the fire of unkown cause(s), it destroyed his car. Futhermore, to add more to the wound; the insurance money plus BMW goodwill were not enough to get him a new one. So, if OP buys a new car to cover 11 years of the orginal planned life of the 1st car, his total cost would be (100,000 minus 17k minus 7500) = 75k. 25k down the hole again. Here my advice "HIRE A LAWYER".

When someone say "Shit happend, It suck, life goes on" I totally disagree, I wish I can say that to the families of those 20 kids that got killed. If its an act of God so be it but if it an act of human, let find out why it happend (study it) and how to prevent it, so we can make this world more safer for all of us.

Your math is as bad as your analogy. A) the insurance company DID PAY HIM ENOUGH TO BUY A COMPARABLE VEHICLE. There is no reason ANYONE should pay him for a NEW car, since he didn't lose a new car. Since you like bad analogies, that's like saying oh no, you lost your wallet, now you're entitled to a free new house.

B) If he buys a COMPARABLE vehicle with the money from insurance, it'll still last the remaining 11 years he planned, with NO OUT OF POCKET costs.

C) Let's say he wanted to get a new car. Where the hell are you getting 100,000 from?! It's not like he's replacing it with a decked out M5. A new 3 series starts at 37k. Lets say you add some features, its 43k. Then BMW offers invoice price, so now its like 39k. Then ANOTHER 7.5K on top. He's getting a BRAND NEW EQUIPPED 3 SERIES FOR 32K. The insurance payout covers say 20k. He's ONLY PAYING 12K out of pocket, not the ridiculous 75k you quoted.

D) A lawyer can't help him in any way. Insurance paid him already for the car. If he wanted legal recourse, he'd have to return that money first to the insurance, which means he'd have nothing left, other than the HOPE the lawyer will make a successful case (And if TWO INDEPENDENT investigations BOTH couldn't lay fault on BMW, I doubt a lawyer would be able to). It'd just end up in him having a) lost the insurance payoff and b) having spend thousands more on a lawyer.

[gthal]

Originally Posted by wins76

I think I know how the OP feels. He spend 50k plus to buy a car and planned to use it till the end of life (let say 15 years). But with the fire of unkown cause(s), it destroyed his car. Futhermore, to add more to the wound; the insurance money plus BMW goodwill were not enough to get him a new one. So, if OP buys a new car to cover 11 years of the orginal planned life of the 1st car, his total cost would be (100,000 minus 17k minus 7500) = 75k. 25k down the hole again. Here my advice "HIRE A LAWYER".

When someone say "Shit happend, It suck, life goes on" I totally disagree, I wish I can say that to the families of those 20 kids that got killed. If its an act of God so be it but if it an act of human, let find out why it happend (study it) and how to prevent it, so we can make this world more safer for all of us.

If insurance replaces a 4 year old car with a similar car, he is in the exact same position. That is why insurance is there to put you back to even... NOT to make a profit. Getting a new car without compensation is, in effect, profiting from the incident. Your argument and analogy doesn't make a lot of sense.

[wins76]

Originally Posted by Tsuyoi

Your math is as bad as your analogy. A) the insurance company DID PAY HIM ENOUGH TO BUY A COMPARABLE VEHICLE. There is no reason ANYONE should pay him for a NEW car, since he didn't lose a new car. Since you like bad analogies, that's like saying oh no, you lost your wallet, now you're entitled to a free new house.


C) Let's say he wanted to get a new car. Where the hell are you getting 100,000 from?! It's not like he's replacing it with a decked out M5. A new 3 series starts at 37k. Lets say you add some features, its 43k. Then BMW offers invoice price, so now its like 39k. Then ANOTHER 7.5K on top. He's getting a BRAND NEW EQUIPPED 3 SERIES FOR 32K. The insurance payout covers say 20k. He's ONLY PAYING 12K out of pocket, not the ridiculous 75k you quoted.
.

He bought a new 335d that cost him 50k on 2009.
b/c a fire he bought again a new 2012 335d at 50k. Total cost 100k minus BMW goodwill and insurance. How hard is that to understand?? if you say I have a bad math, I guess you have bad reading!

[gthal]

Originally Posted by Tsuyoi

Your math is as bad as your analogy. A) the insurance company DID PAY HIM ENOUGH TO BUY A COMPARABLE VEHICLE. There is no reason ANYONE should pay him for a NEW car, since he didn't lose a new car. Since you like bad analogies, that's like saying oh no, you lost your wallet, now you're entitled to a free new house.

B) If he buys a COMPARABLE vehicle with the money from insurance, it'll still last the remaining 11 years he planned, with NO OUT OF POCKET costs.

C) Let's say he wanted to get a new car. Where the hell are you getting 100,000 from?! It's not like he's replacing it with a decked out M5. A new 3 series starts at 37k. Lets say you add some features, its 43k. Then BMW offers invoice price, so now its like 39k. Then ANOTHER 7.5K on top. He's getting a BRAND NEW EQUIPPED 3 SERIES FOR 32K. The insurance payout covers say 20k. He's ONLY PAYING 12K out of pocket, not the ridiculous 75k you quoted.

D) A lawyer can't help him in any way. Insurance paid him already for the car. If he wanted legal recourse, he'd have to return that money first to the insurance, which means he'd have nothing left, other than the HOPE the lawyer will make a successful case (And if TWO INDEPENDENT investigations BOTH couldn't lay fault on BMW, I doubt a lawyer would be able to). It'd just end up in him having a) lost the insurance payoff and b) having spend thousands more on a lawyer.

+1... the whole "get a lawyer" argument is silly (although I'm from Canada and we are FAR less litigious). He was compensated by insurance for his car at its value. Assuming they got the value correct (which is debatable and something he could fight), he is not out anything financially so what would the claim be? Emotional suffering from watching his car burn?

[Tsuyoi]

Originally Posted by wins76

He bought a new 335d that cost him 50k on 2009.
b/c a fire he bought again a new 2012 335d at 50k. Total cost 100k minus BMW goodwill and insurance. How hard is that to understand?? if you say I have a bad math, I guess you have bad reading!

And you have terrible logic.

How is getting a brand new car the same as a 4 year old car? 4 year old car would have 11 year remaining lifespan. Brand new car HAS LONGER LIFESPAN, AND NEW WARRANTY. So he's paying for EXTENDED LIFESPAN AND WARRANTY, and NEWER STYLING AND FEATURES. No matter how you try to spin it, your analogy and reasoning falls apart.

[gthal]

Originally Posted by wins76

He bought a new 335d that cost him 50k on 2009.
b/c a fire he bought again a new 2012 335d at 50k. Total cost 100k minus BMW goodwill and insurance. How hard is that to understand?? if you say I have a bad math, I guess you have bad reading!

You are missing the point. He didn't have to buy another new car. He could have taken the insurance money and replaced his 4 year old car with another 4 year old car. He is now even. If he chooses to go buy another new car, that is his choice and his expense. This is getting painful... it isn't difficult. Getting a new car is an UPGRADE from what he HAD... why would anyone be liable to pay for the upgrade other than him?

[chrisny]

Originally Posted by wins76

BTW did I ask for your help???

No, but you clearly need some. You're fighting a losing argument and the only thing you've proven is your poor judgment and poor taste. You compare a guy losing his car to 28 people senselessly losing their lives. Take a second to think about what you said before you continue your rants. I'm not even commenting on how flawed your logic is related to the car.

[ric124]

Ok my view will be different than most above.

car is under warranty!!! If engine blew under regular driving conditions BMW replaces it! correct?

I would have had that car towed straight to the dealership and said here its under warranty fix it! I would use the free BMW roadside too.

Insurance should not be factored in here because it was not a drivers error. issue seemed to be most likely electrical which is covered under warranty.

according to KBB a basic 335d trade in value is $25,000. So I think its fair if they had offer a $25,000 credit towards a new one.

really guys why would the insurance company need to be involved with a product thats under warranty????

lets use the TV example again!

Sony TV shows a line across the screen - you call Sony
Sony TV catches on fire - you call Sony
Sony TV get knocked over by drunk friends - You call insurance
Sony TV gets Wii controller in the screen - You call insurance

its really simple thats how warranty works. If OP is telling the truth I think he has a case

[chrisny]

Originally Posted by ric124

. issue seemed to be most likely electrical which is covered under warranty.

No. Your "most likely" doesn't mean anything. Insurance wouldn't pay if they thought BMW was at fault, and two studies already done could not find BMW at fault.

[wins76]

Originally Posted by gthal

+1... the whole "get a lawyer" argument is silly (although I'm from Canada and we are FAR less litigious). He was compensated by insurance for his car at its value. Assuming they got the value correct (which is debatable and something he could fight), he is not out anything financially so what would the claim be? Emotional suffering from watching his car burn?

http://www.schmidtandclark.com/ford-cruise-control-switch#{height:451,id:43778}

ford vs Iowa family.

[gthal]

Originally Posted by ric124

Ok my view will be different than most above.

car is under warranty!!! If engine blew under regular driving conditions BMW replaces it! correct?

I would have had that car towed straight to the dealership and said here its under warranty fix it! I would use the free BMW roadside too.

Insurance should not be factored in here because it was not a drivers error. issue seemed to be most likely electrical which is covered under warranty.

according to KBB a basic 335d trade in value is $25,000. So I think its fair if they had offer a $25,000 credit towards a new one.

really guys why would the insurance company need to be involved with a product thats under warranty????

lets use the TV example again!

Sony TV shows a line across the screen - you call Sony
Sony TV catches on fire - you call Sony
Sony TV get knocked over by drunk friends - You call insurance
Sony TV gets Wii controller in the screen - You call insurance

its really simple thats how warranty works. If OP is telling the truth I think he has a case

I don't necessarily disagree EXCEPT no one has proven or shown it was a manufacturing defect that caused the fire. Therefore, we don't know that it would be a warranty issue. As others have said, there are lots of things that could have caused this that would have nothing to do we BMW. Second, as I said before, the insurance company would have LOVED to pin this on BMW and avoid the payout. If they had proof it was an issue that was a manufacturers defect, I would bet they would have fought BMW on it. The fact that they didn't doesn't prove it wasn't a manufacturers issue but it suggests to me they couldn't prove it was either.

[wins76]

Originally Posted by chrisny

No, but you clearly need some. You're fighting a losing argument and the only thing you've proven is your poor judgment and poor taste. You compare a guy losing his car to 28 people senselessly losing their lives. Take a second to think about what you said before you continue your rants. I'm not even commenting on how flawed your logic is related to the car.

So if people have different opinion than yours, you call them poor judgment and poor taste? ha...you are funny.

[ric124]

Originally Posted by gthal

I don't necessarily disagree EXCEPT no one has proven or shown it was a manufacturing defect that caused the fire. Therefore, we don't know that it would be a warranty issue. As others have said, there are lots of things that could have caused this that would have nothing to do we BMW. Second, as I said before, the insurance company would have LOVED to pin this on BMW and avoid the payout. If they had proof it was an issue that was a manufacturers defect, I would bet they would have fought BMW on it. The fact that they didn't doesn't prove it wasn't a manufacturers issue but it suggests to me they couldn't prove it was either.

Since both the insurance and BMW investigated then the Lawyer needs to contact them and find out what they found then from there he will know what is possible.

[gthal]

Originally Posted by wins76

http://www.schmidtandclark.com/ford-cruise-control-switch#{height:451,id:43778}

ford vs Iowa family.

Read what the lawyers say relative to filing a claim on the issue you reference...

If you own a vehicle manufactured by Ford (on the recall list below) that has caught on fire and suffered (i) severe personal injury, (ii) wrongful death, or (iii) substantial property damage/loss, you should contact us immediately. You may be entitled to compensation and we can help.

Seems to me he didn't (i) suffer personal injury, (ii) wrongful death and (iii) the loss of the car was paid for by insurance. So, tell me again, why is he suing BMW?

[Tsuyoi]

Originally Posted by ric124

Ok my view will be different than most above.

car is under warranty!!! If engine blew under regular driving conditions BMW replaces it! correct?

I would have had that car towed straight to the dealership and said here its under warranty fix it! I would use the free BMW roadside too.

Insurance should not be factored in here because it was not a drivers error. issue seemed to be most likely electrical which is covered under warranty.

according to KBB a basic 335d trade in value is $25,000. So I think its fair if they had offer a $25,000 credit towards a new one.

really guys why would the insurance company need to be involved with a product thats under warranty????

lets use the TV example again!

Sony TV shows a line across the screen - you call Sony
Sony TV catches on fire - you call Sony
Sony TV get knocked over by drunk friends - You call insurance
Sony TV gets Wii controller in the screen - You call insurance

its really simple thats how warranty works. If OP is telling the truth I think he has a case

This would have more validity if insurance had said "this was a manufacturer defect, we're not paying". But insurance DID pay, so there's no reason for BMW to. In fact, in situation like this it's ILLEGAL to collect twice on the same claim from two diff companies.

Summary of situation:

OP driving 4 year old BMW on road, suddenly loses power, pulls over, fire starts under the hood.

Both insurance company and BMW launch investigations. In the meantime, both companies offer to pay for rental vehicle.

After a month of investigation, neither company can find conclusively cause of the fire. This doesn't mean it definitely was not a defect, but it DOES mean neither company could prove it WAS BMW's fault.

Insurance company at this point says "okay, here's cash for how much your car's worth now. You can either take it and buy a comparable car, or not, up to you."

OP says "I'm no longer satisfied with a car the same as mine, I want a new, better one with a new warranty".

BMW says "okay, well insurance already paid you, but we want to be nice, so we'll offer you 7.5k plus invoice price on a new car. But since we're being nice, we'd like it if you didn't then go off and badmouth us to the press."

OP says "I love the 7.5k and invoice price (notice how OP WAS WILLING TO EVEN TAKE 5K, SO IT'S NOT THAT HE THINKS THEY'RE NOT GIVING HIM ENOUGH), but I still want to go off and complain about your company/car to the press. So either you let me complain and say how shitty you are, but STILL GIVE ME 5K FOR NO REASON, or you have to BRIBE ME WITH ANOTHER 10K ON TOP FOR ME TO KEEP MY SILENCE.

BMW says "we're sorry, but that's ridiculous."

OP comes on this board with a huge rant expecting sympathy.

[DerekS]

Originally Posted by Tsuyoi

Summary of situation:

OP driving 4 year old BMW on road, suddenly loses power, pulls over, fire starts under the hood.

Both insurance company and BMW launch investigations. In the meantime, both companies offer to pay for rental vehicle.

After a month of investigation, neither company can find conclusively cause of the fire. This doesn't mean it definitely was not a defect, but it DOES mean neither company could prove it WAS BMW's fault.

Insurance company at this point says "okay, here's cash for how much your car's worth now. You can either take it and buy a comparable car, or not, up to you."

OP says "I'm no longer satisfied with a car the same as mine, I want a new, better one with a new warranty".

BMW says "okay, well insurance already paid you, but we want to be nice, so we'll offer you 7.5k plus invoice price on a new car. But since we're being nice, we'd like it if you didn't then go off and badmouth us to the press."

OP says "I love the 7.5k and invoice price (notice how OP WAS WILLING TO EVEN TAKE 5K, SO IT'S NOT THAT HE THINKS THEY'RE NOT GIVING HIM ENOUGH), but I still want to go off and complain about your company/car to the press. So either you let me complain and say how shitty you are, but STILL GIVE ME 5K FOR NO REASON, or you have to BRIBE ME WITH ANOTHER 10K ON TOP FOR ME TO KEEP MY SILENCE.

BMW says "we're sorry, but that's ridiculous."

OP comes on this board with a huge rant expecting sympathy.

Well written summary !

[gthal]

Originally Posted by Tsuyoi

This would have more validity if insurance had said "this was a manufacturer defect, we're not paying". But insurance DID pay, so there's no reason for BMW to. In fact, in situation like this it's ILLEGAL to collect twice on the same claim from two diff companies.

Summary of situation:

OP driving 4 year old BMW on road, suddenly loses power, pulls over, fire starts under the hood.

Both insurance company and BMW launch investigations. In the meantime, both companies offer to pay for rental vehicle.

After a month of investigation, neither company can find conclusively cause of the fire. This doesn't mean it definitely was not a defect, but it DOES mean neither company could prove it WAS BMW's fault.

Insurance company at this point says "okay, here's cash for how much your car's worth now. You can either take it and buy a comparable car, or not, up to you."

OP says "I'm no longer satisfied with a car the same as mine, I want a new, better one with a new warranty".

BMW says "okay, well insurance already paid you, but we want to be nice, so we'll offer you 7.5k plus invoice price on a new car. But since we're being nice, we'd like it if you didn't then go off and badmouth us to the press."

OP says "I love the 7.5k and invoice price (notice how OP WAS WILLING TO EVEN TAKE 5K, SO IT'S NOT THAT HE THINKS THEY'RE NOT GIVING HIM ENOUGH), but I still want to go off and complain about your company/car to the press. So either you let me complain and say how shitty you are, but STILL GIVE ME 5K FOR NO REASON, or you have to BRIBE ME WITH ANOTHER 10K ON TOP FOR ME TO KEEP MY SILENCE.

BMW says "we're sorry, but that's ridiculous."

OP comes on this board with a huge rant expecting sympathy.

[ric124]

Originally Posted by Tsuyoi

This would have more validity if insurance had said "this was a manufacturer defect, we're not paying". But insurance DID pay, so there's no reason for BMW to. In fact, in situation like this it's ILLEGAL to collect twice on the same claim from two diff companies.

Summary of situation:

OP driving 4 year old BMW on road, suddenly loses power, pulls over, fire starts under the hood.

Both insurance company and BMW launch investigations. In the meantime, both companies offer to pay for rental vehicle.

After a month of investigation, neither company can find conclusively cause of the fire. This doesn't mean it definitely was not a defect, but it DOES mean neither company could prove it WAS BMW's fault.

Insurance company at this point says "okay, here's cash for how much your car's worth now. You can either take it and buy a comparable car, or not, up to you."

OP says "I'm no longer satisfied with a car the same as mine, I want a new, better one with a new warranty".

BMW says "okay, well insurance already paid you, but we want to be nice, so we'll offer you 7.5k plus invoice price on a new car. But since we're being nice, we'd like it if you didn't then go off and badmouth us to the press."

OP says "I love the 7.5k and invoice price (notice how OP WAS WILLING TO EVEN TAKE 5K, SO IT'S NOT THAT HE THINKS THEY'RE NOT GIVING HIM ENOUGH), but I still want to go off and complain about your company/car to the press. So either you let me complain and say how shitty you are, but STILL GIVE ME 5K FOR NO REASON, or you have to BRIBE ME WITH ANOTHER 10K ON TOP FOR ME TO KEEP MY SILENCE.

BMW says "we're sorry, but that's ridiculous."

OP comes on this board with a huge rant expecting sympathy.

Nice summary! OP should have dealt with BMW alone and not get insurance involved but since he already got payout from insurance for value of car which is roughly $25k plus could have gotten $7.5k from BMW = 32.5k this sounds fair. Bad move on OP for getting insurance involved tho. $20k for a brand new BMW is not bad

[gthal]

Originally Posted by ric124

Nice summary! OP should have dealt with BMW alone and not get insurance involved but since he already got payout from insurance for value of car which is roughly $25k plus could have gotten $7.5k from BMW = 32.5k this sounds fair. Bad move on OP for getting insurance involved tho. $20k for a brand new BMW is not bad

I think you are more optimistic that BMW would have done anything other than referring him to his insurance company than I am. Maybe I'm wrong but my money is they would have told him to pound sand and go to insurance