Law Suit for headlight theft
05-20-2004, 04:26 PM
#41
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 458
Originally Posted by 6spmax
The Data Dot point you make is also useless. There is absolutely no admission of a design failure by them issuing the Data Dot fix-Nissan wouldn't be that stupid. Nissan was only trying to slow the rate of theft of the HIDs and (from a political point of view), show that they 'cared' enough to address the problem. There is no case here and even if there is, the lawyers will be the only winners. How was Nissan supposed to know that the HIDs would be such a high theft item?
Again Honda and their customers(past, present, and future) have known for years the Accord was a high theft item and probably will continue to be a high theft item, yet people continue to buy them in droves knowing this, and I have yet to hear of class-action lawsuit addressing this problem. A problem, by the way, that ends up costing all of us FAR MORE than the HID theft on 02-03 Maximas will ever cost us.
The ones to blame are the HID THIEVES! And since law enforcement is too incompetent to catch them, the state officials, in an attempt to justify their paychecks, are going after a much bigger target-Nissan.
Again Honda and their customers(past, present, and future) have known for years the Accord was a high theft item and probably will continue to be a high theft item, yet people continue to buy them in droves knowing this, and I have yet to hear of class-action lawsuit addressing this problem. A problem, by the way, that ends up costing all of us FAR MORE than the HID theft on 02-03 Maximas will ever cost us.
The ones to blame are the HID THIEVES! And since law enforcement is too incompetent to catch them, the state officials, in an attempt to justify their paychecks, are going after a much bigger target-Nissan.
Recalls have been used in the past against manufacturers to show that their original designs were flawed. It's been done many times. It's been done to drug manufacturers when they've pulled meds off the market. I don't get your argument that the Data Dot recall is useless in the case. I'm sure it will come up in the trial or arbitration or whatever it comes to.
On the Honda issue: You're still missing the point about what defines negligence. Just because more Hondas get stolen doesn't mean Honda was negligent in the design to secure them. Comparing Honda car theft to Max HID theft is like comparing apples to oranges.
05-20-2004, 04:27 PM
#42
Originally Posted by 6spmax
Maybe we could sue Nissan because the brake rotors are constantly warping and MAFs keep going out. They've certainly known about those things for a long time.
05-20-2004, 04:39 PM
#43
Originally Posted by itdood
Recalls have been used in the past against manufacturers to show that their original designs were flawed. It's been done many times. It's been done to drug manufacturers when they've pulled meds off the market. I don't get your argument that the Data Dot recall is useless in the case. I'm sure it will come up in the trial or arbitration or whatever it comes to.
On the Honda issue: You're still missing the point about what defines negligence. Just because more Hondas get stolen doesn't mean Honda was negligent in the design to secure them. Comparing Honda car theft to Max HID theft is like comparing apples to oranges.
On the Honda issue: You're still missing the point about what defines negligence. Just because more Hondas get stolen doesn't mean Honda was negligent in the design to secure them. Comparing Honda car theft to Max HID theft is like comparing apples to oranges.
According to the National Highway Transportation Safety Administration (NHTSA), automakers must refer to all "safety improvement campaigns" as "recalls". They pay for fix.
Automakers issue "maintenance bulletins" for problems in auto operation that are not deemed to be safety-related. You pay for fix.
btw, HID left is not either
05-20-2004, 04:47 PM
#44
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 365
All this bad publicity just mean a lower trade in value/resale value....Sure you MAY get, say $15 from a class action law suit, then try to sell your max...Nobody will want it....
At the end of the day what do we really win? I mean REALLY win?
At the end of the day what do we really win? I mean REALLY win?
05-20-2004, 04:59 PM
#45
Originally Posted by NizanDrivn
All this bad publicity just mean a lower trade in value/resale value....Sure you MAY get, say $15 from a class action law suit, then try to sell your max...Nobody will want it....
At the end of the day what do we really win? I mean REALLY win?
At the end of the day what do we really win? I mean REALLY win?
what would the lawyers win? millions!!!
but since nissan had to pay millions for something that wasnt their fault, we will all pay more for parts, service, and the 2008 maxima (as long as doesnt look like the ugly 6th gen)
interesting info
Class action lawsuit
The legal equivalent of lawyers winning the lottery; it is an often misapplied machination wherein lawyers work to group together as many people as possible having comparable claims thereby allowing the lawyers to extort huge sums of money for themselves from the defendants while tossing their clients a bone for their trouble.
http://www.power-of-attorneys.com/la...e_lawsuits.htm
05-20-2004, 05:38 PM
#46
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 419
Originally Posted by itdood
Recalls have been used in the past against manufacturers to show that their original designs were flawed. It's been done many times. It's been done to drug manufacturers when they've pulled meds off the market. I don't get your argument that the Data Dot recall is useless in the case. I'm sure it will come up in the trial or arbitration or whatever it comes to.
On the Honda issue: You're still missing the point about what defines negligence. Just because more Hondas get stolen doesn't mean Honda was negligent in the design to secure them. Comparing Honda car theft to Max HID theft is like comparing apples to oranges.
On the Honda issue: You're still missing the point about what defines negligence. Just because more Hondas get stolen doesn't mean Honda was negligent in the design to secure them. Comparing Honda car theft to Max HID theft is like comparing apples to oranges.
A theft is a theft and neither Nissan nor Honda can be held responsible for those thefts or predicting when or how many of those thefts are going to occur when designing a car.
Blaming Nissan for the ACTIONS of thieves is moronic.
Simple as that.
05-21-2004, 03:36 AM
#47
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 458
Originally Posted by 6spmax
Like someone above said, this is NOT a recall, therefore, Nissan is admitting nothing accept a high theft rate on Maxima HIDs which they are attempting to address with Data Dots. Therefore, there is virtually no difference between the theft of HIDS or a Honda Accord. Your argument supporting Honda and not Nissan makes no sense at all. By your logic, if Accords are getting stolen at a higher rate than other cars, then Honda should be doing something about it(MORE than other car companies) and be held responsible, but they don't put any more protection on their cars than we have on ours. In fact, I think Hondas have less protection.
A theft is a theft and neither Nissan nor Honda can be held responsible for those thefts or predicting when or how many of those thefts are going to occur when designing a car.
Blaming Nissan for the ACTIONS of thieves is moronic.
Simple as that.
A theft is a theft and neither Nissan nor Honda can be held responsible for those thefts or predicting when or how many of those thefts are going to occur when designing a car.
Blaming Nissan for the ACTIONS of thieves is moronic.
Simple as that.
I'm saying Nissan is negligent because they didn't didn't apply any common sense to their headlight mount. simple as that. I trhink you are focusing too much on this % thing. The rate thing is just 1 small piece of the puzzle. I'm actually sorry I brought it up
The data dots thingie will only help prove that but isn't the whole case.
05-21-2004, 07:51 AM
#49
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 419
Originally Posted by itdood
6spmax, I think you're not getting my points, I never said or implied Honda should do something about theft if they are getting stolen at a higher rate. They aren't negligent for the thefts because they use commonly applied methods to secure the vehicle.
I'm saying Nissan is negligent because they didn't didn't apply any common sense to their headlight mount. simple as that. I trhink you are focusing too much on this % thing. The rate thing is just 1 small piece of the puzzle. I'm actually sorry I brought it up The data dots thingie will only help prove that but isn't the whole case.
I'm saying Nissan is negligent because they didn't didn't apply any common sense to their headlight mount. simple as that. I trhink you are focusing too much on this % thing. The rate thing is just 1 small piece of the puzzle. I'm actually sorry I brought it up
The data dots thingie will only help prove that but isn't the whole case.Since that has never been an issue, that means, at least in your words, that Nissan should have known BEFOREHAND that the HIDs would be a high-theft item. What I'm saying is that Nissan couldn't know this when the designed the car anymore than they could have known the standard alloy wheels would be a high theft item(which I don't think they are) or the larger Nissan emblem in the grill. A case based on Nissan PREDICTING what will be stolen off the car is unwinnable and frankly ridiculous.
The 'percent' statistic you use as evidence to support your point couldn't be known until AFTER the car had been on the market for some time and therefore is not valid in this case.
05-21-2004, 09:45 AM
#50
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 458
Originally Posted by 6spmax
Since that has never been an issue, that means, at least in your words, that Nissan should have known BEFOREHAND that the HIDs would be a high-theft item. What I'm saying is that Nissan couldn't know this when the designed the car anymore than they could have known the standard alloy wheels would be a high theft item(which I don't think they are) or the larger Nissan emblem in the grill. A case based on Nissan PREDICTING what will be stolen off the car is unwinnable and frankly ridiculous.
The 'percent' statistic you use as evidence to support your point couldn't be known until AFTER the car had been on the market for some time and therefore is not valid in this case.
That's why they put locks on higher-end alloy wheels, right?
Anyways, we both disagree on that issue. That's what the sharks (lawyers) and judges are for
05-21-2004, 10:16 AM
#51
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 419
Originally Posted by itdood
Yep, that's a big issue, whether they could have or should have known HID theft would become a problem. In my humble opinion, I think they should have known because it's been going on for years with other cars.
That's why they put locks on higher-end alloy wheels, right?
That's why they put locks on higher-end alloy wheels, right?
05-21-2004, 10:51 AM
#52
Maxima Pilot
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Beaverton, Oregon
Posts: 1,467
Originally Posted by itdood
Yep, that's a big issue, whether they could have or should have known HID theft would become a problem. In my humble opinion, I think they should have known because it's been going on for years with other cars.
Contrast that to their performance when they had the front A-arm recall last early last year (I forget what the hell it's called, the **^%$ thing on the front suspension that was breaking) where they did the recall after just nine incidents.....you get the picture.
05-21-2004, 02:33 PM
#53
Originally Posted by Galo
In my humble and un-educated opinion, the one thing that Nissan does have against it is that they waited a long, looooooong time to advise all about the problem, prefering instead to make a hundreds of thousands of $$$$$ on replacement headlights while they devised the data dot 'solution'.
Contrast that to their performance when they had the front A-arm recall last early last year (I forget what the hell it's called, the **^%$ thing on the front suspension that was breaking) where they did the recall after just nine incidents.....you get the picture.
Contrast that to their performance when they had the front A-arm recall last early last year (I forget what the hell it's called, the **^%$ thing on the front suspension that was breaking) where they did the recall after just nine incidents.....you get the picture.
and you know how that thief knew about stealing them??? all the publicity from lawyers trying to sue nissan.
05-21-2004, 05:23 PM
#55
Originally Posted by soonerfan
no, i just HATE stupid lawsuits that attempt to place the blame on the wrong person. if you spill coffee in your lap that is YOUR fault
before you bring up "simple stats", give me the total number of stolen HIDs. do you have them? pretty sure you dont so that argument is stupid.
and ever if highest % of stolen HIDs are from maxima, stats can always be bent a certain way. nissan covers their butts with good lawyers for stupid lawsuits like this. and they can turn it right back around.
what nissan could say -
highest % of HID theft was from maxima for these reasons
- there were simply more maximas in the area in which they were stolen
- our HIDs are superior which increases the demand
both are perfectly probable and NONE shows nissans negligence
before you bring up "simple stats", give me the total number of stolen HIDs. do you have them? pretty sure you dont so that argument is stupid.
and ever if highest % of stolen HIDs are from maxima, stats can always be bent a certain way. nissan covers their butts with good lawyers for stupid lawsuits like this. and they can turn it right back around.
what nissan could say -
highest % of HID theft was from maxima for these reasons
- there were simply more maximas in the area in which they were stolen
- our HIDs are superior which increases the demand
both are perfectly probable and NONE shows nissans negligence
insurance companies keep track of everything, they have actuaries that figure out probability of theft/damage from the number of claims made, drivers statistics etc.. that determines your rates.. yes, Nissan Maximas 2002/03 years are more prone to headlight theft than likely any vehicle out there.. so it would make sense for companies to jack up rates on them, just like it costs an arm and a leg to insure a car that is prone to theft, or expensive to repair in an event of an accident. How hard would it be to get some statistics??? please...
2....... design of the HID.. superior? please.. they use an Osram bulb if i'm not mistaken; it's not rocket science, HIDs are a simple thing.. most HID systems work the same exact way. They are made of the same exact components. How are maxima HIDs superior? the difference that is usually seen in HIDs is determined by the lens or housing of the headlight.. the design of the headlight may be different, like auto leveling projectors in Audis... but on Maximas? no way... very poor argument that would be very easy to shut down.
In Law, Negligence is defined as follows:
Failure to exercise the degree of care considered reasonable under the circumstances, resulting in an unintended injury to another party.
what do you think?
It's been a while since I read up on this and i am not digging out my business law textbook now, but i do remember that as a manufacturer or a merchant; someone involved in the business of selling cars.. you are held to a higher standard than the common person in sales/business transactions. A reasonable person would probably agree that a company of this magnitude should know about this issue and should take the proper precautions to prevent this from happening to their vehicles.
Especially since this is not the 1st time this issue popped up. Acura TL HID's from 98-00? models were very prone to theft aswell, Nissan should have taken this as an example and I am SURE they heard about it but yet, they did nothing to secure their headlights.
They should have known... point blank.. they were negligent.
05-21-2004, 08:19 PM
#56
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 419
Originally Posted by NYCe MaXiMa
1.......Some simple research would give you enough statistics and info to shut down both of those arguments..
insurance companies keep track of everything, they have actuaries that figure out probability of theft/damage from the number of claims made, drivers statistics etc.. that determines your rates.. yes, Nissan Maximas 2002/03 years are more prone to headlight theft than likely any vehicle out there.. so it would make sense for companies to jack up rates on them, just like it costs an arm and a leg to insure a car that is prone to theft, or expensive to repair in an event of an accident. How hard would it be to get some statistics??? please...
2....... design of the HID.. superior? please.. they use an Osram bulb if i'm not mistaken; it's not rocket science, HIDs are a simple thing.. most HID systems work the same exact way. They are made of the same exact components. How are maxima HIDs superior? the difference that is usually seen in HIDs is determined by the lens or housing of the headlight.. the design of the headlight may be different, like auto leveling projectors in Audis... but on Maximas? no way... very poor argument that would be very easy to shut down.
In Law, Negligence is defined as follows:
Failure to exercise the degree of care considered reasonable under the circumstances, resulting in an unintended injury to another party.
what do you think?
It's been a while since I read up on this and i am not digging out my business law textbook now, but i do remember that as a manufacturer or a merchant; someone involved in the business of selling cars.. you are held to a higher standard than the common person in sales/business transactions. A reasonable person would probably agree that a company of this magnitude should know about this issue and should take the proper precautions to prevent this from happening to their vehicles.
Especially since this is not the 1st time this issue popped up. Acura TL HID's from 98-00? models were very prone to theft aswell, Nissan should have taken this as an example and I am SURE they heard about it but yet, they did nothing to secure their headlights.
They should have known... point blank.. they were negligent.
insurance companies keep track of everything, they have actuaries that figure out probability of theft/damage from the number of claims made, drivers statistics etc.. that determines your rates.. yes, Nissan Maximas 2002/03 years are more prone to headlight theft than likely any vehicle out there.. so it would make sense for companies to jack up rates on them, just like it costs an arm and a leg to insure a car that is prone to theft, or expensive to repair in an event of an accident. How hard would it be to get some statistics??? please...
2....... design of the HID.. superior? please.. they use an Osram bulb if i'm not mistaken; it's not rocket science, HIDs are a simple thing.. most HID systems work the same exact way. They are made of the same exact components. How are maxima HIDs superior? the difference that is usually seen in HIDs is determined by the lens or housing of the headlight.. the design of the headlight may be different, like auto leveling projectors in Audis... but on Maximas? no way... very poor argument that would be very easy to shut down.
In Law, Negligence is defined as follows:
Failure to exercise the degree of care considered reasonable under the circumstances, resulting in an unintended injury to another party.
what do you think?
It's been a while since I read up on this and i am not digging out my business law textbook now, but i do remember that as a manufacturer or a merchant; someone involved in the business of selling cars.. you are held to a higher standard than the common person in sales/business transactions. A reasonable person would probably agree that a company of this magnitude should know about this issue and should take the proper precautions to prevent this from happening to their vehicles.
Especially since this is not the 1st time this issue popped up. Acura TL HID's from 98-00? models were very prone to theft aswell, Nissan should have taken this as an example and I am SURE they heard about it but yet, they did nothing to secure their headlights.
They should have known... point blank.. they were negligent.
Second, the HID theft problem with Maximas so far has only been dealt with and 'officially' identified as a problem in New York and New Jersey. And I CAN back that up with real information. I have the letter from Nissan in front of me regarding the Data Dots and it is clearly stated there.
Third, Nissan is negligent because they should have known HIDs would have been stolen? That's a laugh. You're trying to validate that point by citing the Acura theft problem from SIX YEARS AGO! You've got to be kidding! How about the 2-3 years in between? Do you have any statistics or proof to show that they've been a high theft item on any other particular model of car that would show a continual pattern of high theft rates in the interim years between the 98 TL and the 02 Maxima? I don't think you do which makes you and the class action lawyers SOL.
05-21-2004, 09:23 PM
#57
Originally Posted by 6spmax
First, if you're going to quote statistics, give a source, don't speculate because that throws your argument out the window just the way you're throwing other's arguments out.
Second, the HID theft problem with Maximas so far has only been dealt with and 'officially' identified as a problem in New York and New Jersey. And I CAN back that up with real information. I have the letter from Nissan in front of me regarding the Data Dots and it is clearly stated there.
Third, Nissan is negligent because they should have known HIDs would have been stolen? That's a laugh. You're trying to validate that point by citing the Acura theft problem from SIX YEARS AGO! You've got to be kidding! How about the 2-3 years in between? Do you have any statistics or proof to show that they've been a high theft item on any other particular model of car that would show a continual pattern of high theft rates in the interim years between the 98 TL and the 02 Maxima? I don't think you do which makes you and the class action lawyers SOL.
Second, the HID theft problem with Maximas so far has only been dealt with and 'officially' identified as a problem in New York and New Jersey. And I CAN back that up with real information. I have the letter from Nissan in front of me regarding the Data Dots and it is clearly stated there.
Third, Nissan is negligent because they should have known HIDs would have been stolen? That's a laugh. You're trying to validate that point by citing the Acura theft problem from SIX YEARS AGO! You've got to be kidding! How about the 2-3 years in between? Do you have any statistics or proof to show that they've been a high theft item on any other particular model of car that would show a continual pattern of high theft rates in the interim years between the 98 TL and the 02 Maxima? I don't think you do which makes you and the class action lawyers SOL.
What do you mean 6 years ago?
It's relative... 2002 Maximas came out in 2001, 2000 Acura TLs still had the problem of HID theft, i think 01 too... So these cars had issues just a 1-2 years before... that is not a 6 year difference. Back in 2001 when the 02 maximas were being conceived, they should have known it's a hot item. Other cars have had problems before. Little ol' Nissan is not that innocent and dumb, you're telling me they had no freaking idea that Acura TLs had their HID snatched aswell? please... I, the nobody knew this... Anyone working in a body shop or person employed at local insurance companies will probably tell you how there were Acura TLs with missing HID left and right, almost as bad as 2k2/2k3s are now and been shortly after they came out.
And I am not part of this lawsuit, you really missed the point of my post. I said that people arguing the case wouldn't have such a hard time pulling up some statistics, numbers of police reports filed, number of insurance claims, amount of 02/03 HID headlights being sold in the region... I think it's reasonable for me to speculate on the existance and availability of this information. Lawyers have pulled up facts that are a lot harder to get their hands on.
Originally Posted by 6spmax
First, if you're going to quote statistics, give a source, don't speculate because that throws your argument out the window just the way you're throwing other's arguments out.
Yes, it is obvious if i was arguing the case in front of a judge i would have to have a source... this is not information that is that hard to obtain and gather.. people have won cases based on a lot less... You are saying that as if I'm making up the whole idea of these HIDs being prone to theft.. which is the main issue at hand.. you're making it sound as if it's total BS.. it's not, and it can be proven, easily. I'm sure it's been thought about already. You're doing more speculation than I am, and you seem to be in more denial about this whole issue..
How am I throwing my argument out the window, along with my other arguments? I was simply pointing out flaws in the 2 cases that he provided for defense.. how easy it would be to prove him wrong.. If anything, I'm throwing soonerfan's arguments out the window. I'm simply stating that the problem obviously exists and Nissan should have thought about this. Thus they have partial responsibility for making a theft prone product that they are making a lot of money on now.. and the consumer is the one left paying expensive insurance, hassle of repairs, suffering from bad resale, fear of the theft happening again etc..
The point is that statistics and information to back this up exist. Insurance companies and police department will give you enough information to show how bad this problem is.
You just can't argue that these headlights are about as hard to remove as the next car. They are not. That's all that matters.. then you have the fact that they cost and arm and a leg and how Nissan marks up the part and makes a KILLING off it because people get robbed left and right and insurance companies pay for the damn headlight replacements, time after time... so they are cashing in lovely.
Whether or not the lawsuit will be successful, I don't care.. it won't fix anything now. They f-cked up already so it's not going to do any good. But the mere threat will hopefully slap some sense into Nissan and other manufacturers to never screw up like this again.
05-21-2004, 09:56 PM
#59
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 419
Originally Posted by NYCe MaXiMa
What do you mean 6 years ago?
It's relative... 2002 Maximas came out in 2001, 2000 Acura TLs still had the problem of HID theft, i think 01 too... So these cars had issues just a 1-2 years before... that is not a 6 year difference. Back in 2001 when the 02 maximas were being conceived, they should have known it's a hot item. Other cars have had problems before. Little ol' Nissan is not that innocent and dumb, you're telling me they had no freaking idea that Acura TLs had their HID snatched aswell? please... I, the nobody knew this... Anyone working in a body shop or person employed at local insurance companies will probably tell you how there were Acura TLs with missing HID left and right, almost as bad as 2k2/2k3s are now and been shortly after they came out.
And I am not part of this lawsuit, you really missed the point of my post. I said that people arguing the case wouldn't have such a hard time pulling up some statistics, numbers of police reports filed, number of insurance claims, amount of 02/03 HID headlights being sold in the region... I think it's reasonable for me to speculate on the existance and availability of this information. Lawyers have pulled up facts that are a lot harder to get their hands on.
Where do you see me quoting any statistics in my post?!?! lol... where are you getting this from?
Yes, it is obvious if i was arguing the case in front of a judge i would have to have a source... this is not information that is that hard to obtain and gather.. people have won cases based on a lot less... You are saying that as if I'm making up the whole idea of these HIDs being prone to theft.. which is the main issue at hand.. you're making it sound as if it's total BS.. it's not, and it can be proven, easily. I'm sure it's been thought about already. You're doing more speculation than I am, and you seem to be in more denial about this whole issue..
How am I throwing my argument out the window, along with my other arguments? I was simply pointing out flaws in the 2 cases that he provided for defense.. how easy it would be to prove him wrong..
The point is that statistics and information to back this up exist. Insurance companies and police department will give you enough information to show how bad this problem is.
You just can't argue that these headlights are about as hard to remove as the next car. They are not. That's all that matters.. then you have the fact that they cost and arm and a leg and how Nissan marks up the part and makes a KILLING off it because people get robbed left and right and insurance companies pay for the damn headlight replacements, time after time... so they are cashing in lovely.
It's relative... 2002 Maximas came out in 2001, 2000 Acura TLs still had the problem of HID theft, i think 01 too... So these cars had issues just a 1-2 years before... that is not a 6 year difference. Back in 2001 when the 02 maximas were being conceived, they should have known it's a hot item. Other cars have had problems before. Little ol' Nissan is not that innocent and dumb, you're telling me they had no freaking idea that Acura TLs had their HID snatched aswell? please... I, the nobody knew this... Anyone working in a body shop or person employed at local insurance companies will probably tell you how there were Acura TLs with missing HID left and right, almost as bad as 2k2/2k3s are now and been shortly after they came out.
And I am not part of this lawsuit, you really missed the point of my post. I said that people arguing the case wouldn't have such a hard time pulling up some statistics, numbers of police reports filed, number of insurance claims, amount of 02/03 HID headlights being sold in the region... I think it's reasonable for me to speculate on the existance and availability of this information. Lawyers have pulled up facts that are a lot harder to get their hands on.
Where do you see me quoting any statistics in my post?!?! lol... where are you getting this from?
Yes, it is obvious if i was arguing the case in front of a judge i would have to have a source... this is not information that is that hard to obtain and gather.. people have won cases based on a lot less... You are saying that as if I'm making up the whole idea of these HIDs being prone to theft.. which is the main issue at hand.. you're making it sound as if it's total BS.. it's not, and it can be proven, easily. I'm sure it's been thought about already. You're doing more speculation than I am, and you seem to be in more denial about this whole issue..
How am I throwing my argument out the window, along with my other arguments? I was simply pointing out flaws in the 2 cases that he provided for defense.. how easy it would be to prove him wrong..
The point is that statistics and information to back this up exist. Insurance companies and police department will give you enough information to show how bad this problem is.
You just can't argue that these headlights are about as hard to remove as the next car. They are not. That's all that matters.. then you have the fact that they cost and arm and a leg and how Nissan marks up the part and makes a KILLING off it because people get robbed left and right and insurance companies pay for the damn headlight replacements, time after time... so they are cashing in lovely.
The heart of this case is if Nissan should've been able to FORSEE a MAJOR theft problem with HIDs or any other part of the car and that's the point you don't seem to understand. I don't think anyone should be expected to predict the future and that fact alone will clear them. Should they have expected SOME degree of theft with the lights and other parts in the Max? Of course. Should they have forseen or assumed the EPIDEMIC of HID theft that ended up being the scenario? I don't think so.
05-21-2004, 10:58 PM
#60
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 338
If I'm correct, the price on the hids went up around 40% during all this matter.
Nissan's engineers should have seen this coming. Don't they run all kinds of tests on their vehicals? Where's the brains in that? We are talking about a well known, highly respected world-wide auto company. Come someone say negligence??? I thnk so...
Nissan's engineers should have seen this coming. Don't they run all kinds of tests on their vehicals? Where's the brains in that? We are talking about a well known, highly respected world-wide auto company. Come someone say negligence??? I thnk so...
05-22-2004, 04:16 AM
#61
Originally Posted by skandalouz
the lady who spilled coffee on herself sued mcdonalds........... and WON.... spilling the coffee was her fault, but the fact that mcdonalds coffee was too hot was their fault, and they ended up paying millions............
now im not saying this Nissan suit can be won, but i dont believe that it is a lost cause completely.... and i don't see why people who arent even part of the lawsuit are being so pessimistic about it.......... if it's not gonna cost the parties anything, then why not try it....
now im not saying this Nissan suit can be won, but i dont believe that it is a lost cause completely.... and i don't see why people who arent even part of the lawsuit are being so pessimistic about it.......... if it's not gonna cost the parties anything, then why not try it....
Did you know that mcdonalds purposely raised the temp on the coffee so that it would serve less FREE refills. By raising the temp, it took more time to consume a cup and would lead to less refills which is more money for mcdonalds. The lady won so much money due to punitive damages, it was more of a punishment to mcdonalds.... anyways, i think the lawsuit can be won since some statistics will show the case, but i think there would be a much better chance if each and every owner of the stolen headlights sued nissan.
05-22-2004, 04:44 PM
#62
Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 95
Originally Posted by soonerfan
- our HIDs are superior which increases the demand
- our HIDs are superior which increases the demand
Anyway, its kinda off topic, but the HID's are really not superior. In fact, they are the crappiest HID's I've ever driven behind. Of course Audi and Ford makes worse ones, but I've never driven an audi with HID.
It is this myth which I think helps perpetuate the theft. That by having HID you are automatically getting superior lighting. This is far from the truth. HID does have superior luminosity which means the bulbs are throwing more light, but unless it is encapsulated in a proper projector or reflector the light won't go where you want it. It needs to be controlled.
The reflector design in the 02-03 maximas, while only slightly better than that in the halogens, is not far superior. It is marginal. I've shown the beam pattern in another thread and it has slightly more range in only certain areas.
Of course another perpetuation of the theft is that they look better. This, they do.
Seth
05-22-2004, 09:37 PM
#63
Newbie - Just Registered
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 10
"A class action lawsuit has been filed against Nissan on behalf of 2002 and 2003 Maxima owners. The suit alleges that the company hid the fact that the headlights on the cars were easy to steal and could be removed in under a minute using an ordinary screwdriver."
See link below...
http://www.bigclassaction.com/class_action/nissan.html
See link below...
http://www.bigclassaction.com/class_action/nissan.html
05-22-2004, 10:38 PM
#64
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 419
Originally Posted by under pressure
"A class action lawsuit has been filed against Nissan on behalf of 2002 and 2003 Maxima owners. The suit alleges that the company hid the fact that the headlights on the cars were easy to steal and could be removed in under a minute using an ordinary screwdriver."
See link below...
http://www.bigclassaction.com/class_action/nissan.html
See link below...
http://www.bigclassaction.com/class_action/nissan.html
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
doctorpullit
8th Generation Maxima (2016-)
21
10-28-2019 10:58 PM
trsandrew
7th Generation Maxima (2009-2015)
17
04-08-2016 06:45 PM
CAN-Toronto FS: Basement cleaning
knight_yyz
5th Generation Classifieds (2000-2003)
12
11-01-2015 01:34 PM
trsandrew
Group Deals / Sponsors Forum
2
10-25-2015 02:47 PM