# Lawsuit against BMW



## Alex Baumann (Dec 19, 2001)

Plaz said:


> My apologies. I've already edited out the more pointed items from my previous response. Dude just pushed my buttons.


Thanks for your understanding and cooperation. We would expect the same from Plaintiff too.

I love you all


----------



## mallards (Oct 30, 2003)

comparing a radio problem in our bmws to ford pintos is retarded ...

and class action lawsuits are only good for 2 reasons:

1) making money for the lawyer
2) raising the price of products

Ben


----------



## Nick325xiT 5spd (Dec 24, 2001)

So, given the public nature of boards, and the ease with which people can pretend something happened for their own purposes, I'd like to see this:

The name of the firm which has been retained, and the name of a person in that firm who can verify that "Named Plaintiff" does indeed intend to run a case against BMW.

After all, there are lots of trolls out there with axes to grind. If "Named Plaintiff" refuses to divulge this very reasonable request for information, I suggest that the thread be deleted.


----------



## Bavarian (Jun 15, 2002)

1) I listen to a CD about 75% of the time.
2) I don't have this problem (now have heard of any friends having it)
3) You're just a greedy S. O. B. trying to syphon money from BMW. If you're so disgusted with them, you can boycot them by purchasing an Infiniti. As far as service is concerned, in my area, they offer perhaps the best experience.


----------



## Named Plaintiff (Jan 6, 2004)

Alex Baumann said:


> Dear Members,
> 
> I understand how a discussion can get heated. But on this thread we have already seen some 'heavy' wording.
> 
> ...


Dear Alex:

Understood. My purpose in posting was not to inflame but to inform. There are similarly situated people like myself (I have identified about a dozen previous posters to this board with this same problem) who should know about what is about to happen.

Unfortunately, this type of post does get up the hackles of what I call the BMW Blind. The people whose ego's are way too tied up in their ride.

I will endeavor to keep out the name calling from future posts.

Thank you for your understanding


----------



## Named Plaintiff (Jan 6, 2004)

Nick325xiT 5spd said:


> So, given the public nature of boards, and the ease with which people can pretend something happened for their own purposes, I'd like to see this:
> 
> The name of the firm which has been retained, and the name of a person in that firm who can verify that "Named Plaintiff" does indeed intend to run a case against BMW.
> 
> After all, there are lots of trolls out there with axes to grind. If "Named Plaintiff" refuses to divulge this very reasonable request for information, I suggest that the thread be deleted.


Nick:

I do not believe that information is appropriate for a public board. It is why I set up a special email address to field inquiries. I assure you that this is not trollish in its origin.

Do a search on "fading audio" and "mono" on this board and you will see the previous discussions about this issue. This problem dates back almost 3 years now. I have tried every other way to resolve this. Because of the integrated electronics package of a car equipped with nav, there is no aftermarket solution. It is a problem embedded within the electronic cluster in the car. It is almost unimaginable that BMW has not fixed this problem in the 3 years it has existed.

My dealership was ready to order me a new car when BMWNA informed them that it is likely that an 04 equipped with nav would have the same problem. I asked BMW to do one of three things 1) fix the car (they couldn't do it) 2) give me a new car without this problem (they could not guarantee me that the new car would not have the same problem) 3) buy the car back from me (they told me no).

So I was left with the choice of either living with the problem or doing something about it. It is not my personality to take a screwing and not do something about it. Most people would not be able to bring to bear the resources I have available. BMW has gotten away with this long enough. They know about the problem: but they can't fix it or they refuse to fix it because it is too expensive to do so, yet they continue to sell the cars. If that doesn't cause consternation in the BMW community, some of you need to re-examine your priorities.


----------



## FireFly (May 2, 2002)

Plaz- you better watch what you say here- you may be called as a key witness by the defense team 

So you retained the leading firm specializing in CALS? If they are on retainer, then why are you posting messages on public forums seeking others to join you? The firm should be seeking plaintiffs, not you. How many people initially retained the firm in order for the firm to believe it is worthy of CA status?

What evidence do you have (other then 1/2 dozen posters on this site) to support your theory about the unit being defective? 1/2 dozen plaintiffs hardly sounds like a CA to me. Out of the X number of cars sold with Nav, what percentage of vehicles share the same problem as you?

Good luck with the suit but it sounds rather frivolus to me.


----------



## Named Plaintiff (Jan 6, 2004)

FireFly said:


> Plaz- you better watch what you say here- you may be called as a key witness by the defense team
> 
> So you retained the leading firm specializing in CALS? If they are on retainer, then why are you posting messages on public forums seeking others to join you? The firm should be seeking plaintiffs, not you. How many people initially retained the firm in order for the firm to believe it is worthy of CA status?
> 
> ...


At this point we have more than enough to certify the class. The amount of vehicles affected by this is a good question. Only a very very small percentage of car buyers use these forums. I located two more affected cars just by talking to other BMW owners in parking lots. It principally affects only cars with HK and Nav, although I have heard from one owner who has experienced the problem in a car without Nav.

And as to the reason I am posting, the more people that know about this better. It costs nothing to post on this board and we may find more people who are p.o'd enough to do something about it.

In fact, in the few hours that have elapsed since I first posted this, more than a dozen people have contacted me about joining.


----------



## FireFly (May 2, 2002)

Named Plaintiff said:


> At this point we have more than enough to certify the class. The amount of vehicles affected by this is a good question. Only a very very small percentage of car buyers use these forums. I located two more affected cars just by talking to other BMW owners in parking lots. It principally affects only cars with HK and Nav, although I have heard from one owner who has experienced the problem in a car without Nav.
> 
> And as to the reason I am posting, the more people that know about this better. It costs nothing to post on this board and we may find more people who are p.o'd enough to do something about it.
> 
> In fact, in the few hours that have elapsed since I first posted this, more than a dozen people have contacted me about joining.


If you have no idea how many people fall under the CA then how did a law firm verify your claim and deem it be a CA matter?

I can see you going into a firm, throwing down $1000 for a retainer and the firm indicating that it's not worth their time or your money to try and collect ($1800) money from BMW. And I doubt the firm would then think it would be worth their time by making this a CA issue.

You mentioned Ford Pinto in you earlier example. People died in that CALS. Insurance companies pay out large sums of $$ for wrongful death. Cases involving death always bring out the lawyers...

But good luck. Keep us up to date on your journey.


----------



## gray330 (Feb 21, 2002)

Hey, I'm an attorney, I don't have any problems with my radio, and I think using a class action lawsuit to resolve this, as is the case with a great many class action lawsuits, is a huge waste of time and resources.

Do you live in a state with a "lemon law"? In California, generally if the manufacturer or dealer cannot repair a serious warranty defect in your vehicle after a “reasonable” number of attempts, the manufacturer must either:
• Replace the vehicle; or
• Refund its purchase price
(Whichever you prefer)


----------



## uter (Jan 6, 2002)

Named Plaintiff said:


> ...
> 
> A radio may not be an exploding gas tank, but the concept behind it is the same. A corporation knowlingly selling a defective product to which there is no fix. It is called fraud, and if you think it is better to tolerate it, you are a moron.
> 
> If you are not affected by this problem, just mind your own friggin business. To those of us that have to put up with the BS of a car radio that is maddeningly defective and unfixable, someone (namely me) has taken an affirmative step to do something about it. It never would have come to this if BMW didn't just essentially laugh in my face and tell me "too damn bad".


I have HK and navigation in a 2002 e46 touring and have not experienced the problem you cite (nor with explosions). Without univerasality of the problem, a class action lawsuit seems an unweildy manner in which to address FM reception problems.

Could you provide evidence of this "known problem". Is there, for example, a TSB?


----------



## Named Plaintiff (Jan 6, 2004)

gray330 said:


> Hey, I'm an attorney, I don't have any problems with my radio, and I think using a class action lawsuit to resolve this, as is the case with a great many class action lawsuits, is a huge waste of time and resources.
> 
> Do you live in a state with a "lemon law"? In California, generally if the manufacturer or dealer cannot repair a serious warranty defect in your vehicle after a "reasonable" number of attempts, the manufacturer must either:
> • Replace the vehicle; or
> ...


I looked into that option first. Unfortunately, under the Lemon Law of my state, a radio defect would not be substantial enough to warrant a repurchase of the vehicle. My other legal remedy would be to bring just a plain old breach of warranty action against BMW. That would probably win, but would do nothing to get the bigger problem resolved (i.e., BMW's continued fraud).

I really went out of my way to be reasonable with BMW. I gave them 5 chances to fix this over a 4 month period. Slowly I realized that I am not alone with this problem, and that they went out of their way at every turn to deny a problem exists and to ridicule me for pursuing it. They pretty much dared me to do this.

This is not just about me. It is about corporate arrogance and consumer fraud. Somebody has to get p.o'd enough about stuff like this to hold them accountable. I am not likely to see much of anything out of this. I will likely have long been rid of the car by the time this is resolved. This is about principle. It is about fraud. It is about accountability. I would like everyone here who has posted an attack on me to think about that.


----------



## mquetel (Jan 30, 2003)

I've got an 04 E46 with HK and Nav and have experienced pretty noticable dropouts in my FM reception. Regular enough that I've sometimes wondered if it is a problem with the radio/antenna setup. I have not, however, brought this to a dealership's attention to diagnose. 

Frustration with radio reception in my locality is not unique to my BMW. I live in an area that is quite hilly and my previous vehicle, with both an OEM and an aftermarket deck, had FM reception issues. If it starts to bother me enough, I'll bring it up when I take my car in for service. At this point, though, I would not opt in to a class action lawsuit. That seems like overkill, likely would not benefit the consumer and simply does not appeal to me.


----------



## HW (Dec 24, 2001)

mquetel said:


> Frustration with radio reception in my locality is not unique to my BMW. I live in an area that is quite hilly and my previous vehicle, with both an OEM and an aftermarket deck, had FM reception issues. If it starts to bother me enough, I'll bring it up when I take my car in for service. At this point, though, I would not opt in to a class action lawsuit. That seems like overkill, likely would not benefit the consumer and simply does not appeal to me.


i agree. there are so many other issues re: e46 that are way more important that can be brought up.  door seals, control arms, clunks, rattles, the list goes on....


----------



## Parump (Dec 25, 2001)

Plaz,

Well written and I completely agree. Although Stuka's and Named Plaintiff problems are different, I think that only Stuka's problem warrants this type of attention - but clearly not a class action problem. Admittedly, the issue described by Named Plaintiff may be a defective product. However, in my opinion, a class action law suit is a disproportionate action. I believe that there are more constructive uses of time and money.

Just my opinion . . .


Plaz said:


> I am not an "idiot who get all a quiver anytime anyone criticizes anything BMW," your and Mojojojo's accusations notwithstanding. I simply do not see a defective product here, nor fraud.
> 
> I tried to give you some constructive feedback and some suggestions to address your issues, as well as expressing my disdain for your litigous approach to resolving a trivial problem.
> 
> ...


----------



## Named Plaintiff (Jan 6, 2004)

uter said:
 

> I have HK and navigation in a 2002 e46 touring and have not experienced the problem you cite (nor with explosions). Without univerasality of the problem, a class action lawsuit seems an unweildy manner in which to address FM reception problems.
> 
> Could you provide evidence of this "known problem". Is there, for example, a TSB?


The scope of the problem is something that we intend to uncover during the course of discovery. The thing about the TSB though is that they don't have a fix. They can't have a Technical Service Bulletin admitting an unresolveable problem because it would easily open them up for a lawsuit for fraud (i.e., selling a car that they knew to be irreparably defective).

I believe it is the main reason why I was completely stonewalled by everyone at BMW. It wasn't until I developed a relationship with some of the employees of the dealerships that I learned of the scope of the issue. I found out that, despite BMW's initial stance that they had never heard of this problem before, they knew all about it. They have been getting away with it because most people either don't think the problem is big enough to deal with, and/or were just willing to accept that the radio sucked their new vehicle. Of the dozen people I found here with the same complaint, almost half of them had never brought it in to the dealer.

The problem happens on all the area FM stations. I do not live in a poor reception area. My last car also had a window mounted diversity antenna. I never had any problem like this at all. This is not a case of a radio just not living up to unreasonable expectations of high fidelity. I am angry because the Harman Kardon Premium Audio System in my 2003 $42,000 luxury vehicle fails to achieve even the most basic radio function (i.e., the reception and amplification of an FM stereo signal). A technology perfected in the automobile nearly 40 years ago.

To everyone with the HK and the Nav who is so sure they don't have the problem, I urge you to listen again with a critical ear. It happens whether the HK dsp button is engaged or not, but it is most noticeable when that feature is on. It happens regardless of speed and it is not related to the GAL (speed sensistive volume) function.


----------



## 01silber (Jun 28, 2002)

Named Plaintiff said:


> Ever hear of the Ford Pinto? For the young ones out there, the Pinto was an "economy" car that Ford produced in the1970's. It had this peculiar little defect that caused the gas tank to explode when hit from behind (even at moderately low speeds). Allegedly, Ford engineers were aware of this problem, but management decided that it would be CHEAPER to just to pay off the injured and the families of the deceased rather than re-engineer the car. This little tidbit of information came out in the class action litigation that eventually forced Ford to face this issue.


I have always loved this, Let me strap into a hunk of metal filled with explosive fuel and then get blown to bits and blame the manufacture, I smoke and it really pisses me off when I hear of these little twats suing the tobacco companies due to lung cancer, or because at 60MPH and they hit something and die that it is the fault of the vehicle, my god people you are getting into a machine that is heavy as hell, full of fuel and your moving at 60mph and you don't understand that the shit can hurt you, Andy yes I know of the supposed pinto fires but they rank up there with the 80's chevy fuel tanks igniting but yet the complaint-ants were unable to reproduce it so they used a igniter for the cameras and had all the bleeding hearts on their side, either way it is still the same thing if i strap myself into a car filled with fuel I take the risk of dying simple as that, did any of those people get a card that stated "you will never be hurt by driving a vehicle" and we the manufacture promise that you will not get hurt


----------



## pony_trekker (May 26, 2003)

BradS said:


> You retained the leading law firm in the US that specializes in class action litigation? Which firm would that be?
> 
> The "top class action firms" specialize in de minimus violations of obscure laws, such as disclosure notices for credit card companies, and then they commence a class action suit on behalf of all those "wronged" clients, few if any of which suffered any injury at all. A huge settlement ensues, and the law firm takes a big cut and distributes a few cents to each plaintiff.


Hey don't knock it. Last week I got a Class Action Settlement check from Citibank for $1.38 CASH MONEY BABY!!

Without these cases, it would be crazy profitable for any company to just rip every customer off for a dime. Times a million customers, that's a lot of dough!


----------



## swchang (Oct 5, 2003)

Named Plaintiff said:


> To everyone with the HK and the Nav who is so sure they don't have the problem, I urge you to listen again with a critical ear. It happens whether the HK dsp button is engaged or not, but it is most noticeable when that feature is on. It happens regardless of speed and it is not related to the GAL (speed sensistive volume) function.


I thought the 3-series didn't have DSP.

I wonder what Ted (or any of the other BMW people here) thinks about this issue. If it's extensive enough, he/they should probably know something.


----------



## globemaster3 (Jul 31, 2003)

i guess i am the only one that has read this, that has the same problem, and has the guts to post on this one-sided thread.
i noticed it the day i picked up the car from the port at baltimore (i never listened to the radio much in germany, for the 2 weeks i drove it around there before shipping it).
it was SOOOO noticable that i thought someone screwed with my car in the shipment, and i went so far as to bring it to an audio place in northern dc (i was staying in southern md, before heading out on a cross country drive [1-way] to oklahoma). they could not duplicate the problem, and of course i sounded like a fool...

i thought i read something about this potential problem in the owner's manual.
that's the first time i felt that i wasn't losing my mind! 
oh, and there were no tall buildings in the way, when driving from baltimore south on 301, to interfere with the reception, and i certainly was not on the frige of any reception area.

i don't know what a class action suit would resolve, but yes, it is a problem, plantiff is not out of his mind.
peace.


----------



## andy_thomas (Oct 7, 2002)

swchang said:


> Okay, cool. Now what does "naff" mean? The half a week I spent in London this summer wasn't enough time for me to acquire the whole British vernacular. :angel:
> 
> The half a week I spent in Paris, however, was enough for me to want a smart car when it comes to the US. :thumbup:


Sorry, should probably stick to International English .

"Naff" is often used to describe bad dress sense, or cheesy modifications to a car; its basis is probably somewhere in fashion.

But naff can also mean poor, shoddy, iffy, or dodgy. In this instance the acoustic effect of the HK system, being designed for a relatively clean stereo signal, does not sound so good when fed with a mono signal. AIUI the effect of the stereo switching in and out of stereo - normally fairly benign as most radios fade out the stereo effect at the top end - is more noticeable with the HK switched "on".

Smart cars make sense in every city, including those in the US. You can park them (the ForTwo, anyway, not the ForFour or the Coupe) perpendicular to the kerb quite comfortably.


----------



## vern (Apr 19, 2002)

*Dealer*



FireFly said:


> I read on the net that mercury fillings will also weaken the reception of your FM radio- perhaps you should sue the entire dental community and include them as defendants.
> 
> While you are at it, maybe you should sue the radio stations in NYC for not producing a strong enough signal?
> 
> ...


Lighten up.The guy feels that he was ripped off and this is his way of taking care of it.Its the American way,you know? Good luck to you.

vern


----------



## GM (Aug 6, 2003)

Named Plaintiff said:


> . . .My purpose here was to contact other similarly situated people to see if they wanted to join in the action. . .


You don't need to do this; by definition, once a suit is certified as a class-action, everyone who is similarly situated is automatically a plaintiff, unless they affirmatively opt out.


----------



## xfactor (Nov 5, 2003)

GM said:


> You don't need to do this; by definition, once a suit is certified as a class-action, everyone who is similarly situated is automatically a plaintiff, unless they affirmatively opt out.


Of a course, a court would never certify this as a class action so it's a moot point. Named_Plaintiff is dreaming if he thinks this is an issue of intentional fraud. A judge would be offended to have his time wasted with such a ridiculous claim. If it truly is a problem for the plaintiff, and BMW won't help him, he should go to Small Claims Court. Those courts were created exactly for situations like this one, where a problem can be redressed without costly litigation.


----------



## paulg (Oct 5, 2003)

*regarding class action lawsuits*



Plaz said:


> Oh, and thanks heaps for doing your part to reduce choice, clog our courts, and make our cars more expensive.


It has always been my understanding that the major purpose of class
action lawsuits is not to recover any significant money damages for any
one of the many people in the "class" but rather to punish the company
sued for wrongs it has committed.

One reason why one can always opt out of the lawsuit prior to its
litigation in court is if one believes one has a good personal case
that might result in real financial compensation if one wins a personal
suit against the offender.

So, it isn't the few cents one member of the "class" gets but rather
the millions that have to be paid out by the bad actors who lose the
lawsuit.

As for the lawyers making millions, that is their job, to win in court
and make money doing it, or to lose and make nothing. I am sure we all
have opinions about professionals, such as lawyers, who we feel make
too much money and it is almost always those in professions other than
our own ;-)


----------



## Named Plaintiff (Jan 6, 2004)

paulg said:


> It has always been my understanding that the major purpose of class
> action lawsuits is not to recover any significant money damages for any
> one of the many people in the "class" but rather to punish the company
> sued for wrongs it has committed.
> ...


RIGHT ON PAUL!!

This is not about me making money from BMW. It is about being defrauded. Lot's of people on this board who have attacked me simply don't get it. BMW knows about this problem. But they keep producing cars and selling them to unsuspecting consumers.

"Why don't you just go back to the dealer and demand they fix it?" I keep being asked.

My answer is I have been back to the dealer 5 times (two different dealerships in fact). The regional factory rep was called in to look at. He had 3 shots at fixing the car (with my car laid up at the dealer for an average of 3 days per attempt).

THERE IS NO FIX FOR THIS PROBLEM. THERE IS NO FIX FOR THIS PROBLEM. Should I say it again? BMW has admitted this much to me.

I am not looking for the world's best radio. I don't expect super-audiofile sound reproduction. I just want the radio in my "luxury" car to simply work like it is supposed to (to work like every other car radio I have ever owned). To work like the radios in all of the cars of the people who are attacking me here. All BMW radios don't have this problem. Some do. The people who are affected are getting a royal screwing from BMW. I was fed the line that BMW view's this defect as an operational characteristic of the vehicle. I would be willing to accept that if this were the case with every radio in every e46 BMW. But that is not the case.

Again, I am not doing this to make money. I am doing this as a matter of principle. If I sued in small claims court, I would achieve NOTHING. Maybe I could get a couple of bucks out of it but it would not solve the underlying issue. I want BMW to own up to its disgraceful conduct and do something to rectify it. Without the big hammer of a class action suit hanging over them, that would never happen. Nothing in their conduct to date indicates that they have any regard for their customers who are affected. In fact, their conduct to dates indicates just the opposite, that they have made a concerted effort to cover this up and make it difficult for those who complain in the hopes it will just go away.

You would not believe the lies I was told. The inconsistent statements by various BMW representatives, who first acted like they had never heard of this problem. Played totally dumb like I was the first person who ever complained. I eventually discovered that was all an act. The dealerships know about it. BMWNA knows about it. The service technicians know about it. And they also know that they don't have a fix. That is why there is no TSB or recall. If there was a public paper trail showing they know about this problem that they can't fix, they would have been hit with this litigation a long time ago. I have to give them credit. This denial strategy of theirs has worked, till now. They have gotten away with this for 3 years, but now the jig is up.

The people who don't think this can be certified as a class really don't know what they are talking about. A defect is a defect. It does not have to be safety related. My radio is clearly defective. Anyone who sits in my car for 5 minutes will agree. The general manager and head of operations of the dealership who sold me the car both agreed. They tried to go to bat for me. They tried to "take it up the corporate ladder" at BMW NA to do something about this. They assured me that "BMW would not hang a customer out to dry on a matter like this." They too were appalled when BMWNA responded to them that nothing will be done.


----------



## JetBlack330i (Feb 8, 2002)

Named Plaintiff said:


> My answer is I have been back to the dealer 5 times (two different dealerships in fact). The regional factory rep was called in to look at. He had 3 shots at fixing the car (with my car laid up at the dealer for an average of 3 days per attempt).


Your car should qualify to be classified as a lemon after 3 unsuccessful attempts. Have they offered you that option?


----------



## xfactor (Nov 5, 2003)

Named Plaintiff said:


> Again, I am not doing this to make money. I am doing this as a matter of principle.


The first rule of being a lawyer: if a potential client comes to you and says they are fighting as a matter of principle, kick them the :nono::nono::nono::nono: out of your office.

I am glad to hear you are not doing this to make money, since there is a strong likelihood you will lose money if you decide such a ridiculous course of action. No self-respecting lawyer would ever take this case, and even a shitty attorney would require you to put down a huge amount of money. Attorneys aren't wild about investing their own money and time on shitty cases.

You really need to get it through your thick skull that this is not an issue of fraud.


----------



## xfactor (Nov 5, 2003)

TRANSCRIPT FROM A BMW BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING:

Richie Rich: I've got an idea. Let's make a really great car that lots of people will buy, and then put in a stereo that doesn't work properly with FM reception.

Mone Baggs: That's a great idea, Richie! All of these people will buy the car because it's got great performance numbers and good looking lines, and little will they know, the car can't even get solid FM reception.

Richie Rich: At least it will give them something to whine about on Internet chat boards.

Mone Baggs: This is going to be hilarious! I wish I had thought of this. All of those people will be paying $45,000 thinking they're getting great some great car; and we disabled the radio reception!


----------



## Plaz (Dec 19, 2001)

Named Plaintiff said:


> THERE IS NO FIX FOR THIS PROBLEM. THERE IS NO FIX FOR THIS PROBLEM. Should I say it again? BMW has admitted this much to me.
> 
> (snip)
> 
> All BMW radios don't have this problem. Some do.


Aren't those two statements contradictory?

Have you contacted BMWNA now that they have requested as much on Roadfly, and opened up a ticket? What did they say?


----------



## FireFly (May 2, 2002)

If you ever get in front of a judge I think it will boil down to this:

The judge will determine that you do indeed have a valid claim against BMW because your FM reception is poor. The judge will order BMW to replace the unit.

All units are manufactured the same yet only a small % seem to have this defect. So there is a fix because not everyone has this problem. If none of the units functioned properly then things would be different because you would be correct in saying "there is no fix" but this is not the case.

Get the problem fixed and be on your way. I do wish you luck in fixing the problem and I am sure many/all of us here feel bad that you got a crappy unit.


----------



## Named Plaintiff (Jan 6, 2004)

xfactor said:


> The first rule of being a lawyer: if a potential client comes to you and says they are fighting as a matter of principle, kick them the :nono::nono::nono::nono: out of your office.
> 
> I am glad to hear you are not doing this to make money, since there is a strong likelihood you will lose money if you decide such a ridiculous course of action. No self-respecting lawyer would ever take this case, and even a shitty attorney would require you to put down a huge amount of money. Attorneys aren't wild about investing their own money and time on shitty cases.
> 
> You really need to get it through your thick skull that this is not an issue of fraud.


I have really had it with xfactor calling me a liar.

Disagree with me all you want about what is and what is not fraud. But stop calling me a liar.

Get it through your thick skull - this is happening. You can ridicule me all you want but I know that a major law firm (based in NYC with offices all over the country) has agreed to take this case on the basis of the potential recovery. The complaint has been drafted. You may not see the issue (actually, it is obvious you don't see the issue). But realize that there are attorney's that are far more experienced in these kind of cases than you are. This firm is not some johnnie-down-the-street-ambulance chasing-divorces-and-dui-kind of lawyer (which I suspect you might be).

I find it interesting that xfactor would kick a client out of his office who was fighting on the basis of principle. I guess what he is telling us is that he is one of those greedy slime-ball lawyers who Never fights for a principle. An ambulance chaser who has never done a day of pro bono work in his life? A lawyer with such a low opinion of his ability that he only takes cases where he thinks there is no chance of losing? A lawyer who is afraid of a fight (unless it is through the anonymity of an internet bulletin board)?

And to top it all off, he doesn't even drive a BMW. He's a BMW driver wannabee. In his signature he says he drives a Volvo. Nuff said!


----------



## mquetel (Jan 30, 2003)

Named Plaintiff said:


> I have really had it with xfactor calling me a liar.
> 
> Disagree with me all you want about what is and what is not fraud. But stop calling me a liar...


Sue him for libel or defamation of character...


----------



## Named Plaintiff (Jan 6, 2004)

FireFly said:


> If you ever get in front of a judge I think it will boil down to this:
> 
> The judge will determine that you do indeed have a valid claim against BMW because your FM reception is poor. The judge will order BMW to replace the unit.
> 
> ...


Firefly. First off, I appreciate you responding at this point in in a manner conducive to discussion. I have taken some serious abuse here from some others who have what I call "internet muscles"

With respect to your suggestion about how this might play out, you have to realize that the radio unit has ALREADY been replaced. So has the antenna hookup wire, so has the antenna amplifier. They even told me they hooked up the radio to a new rear window that they put in the back seat and drove around with. ALL TO NO EFFECT.

I would not be doing this if they could just fix the damn thing. I gave them 5 chances to do so over a 4 month period. They finally told me to go away because they could not fix it.

And, because of the integrated nature of the radio and the Nav system, there is no aftermarket option. I looked into that too. This lawsuit is a last resort. I have exhausted every other remedy I could think of. The reason we have framed it as a class action is to force BMW to deal with the issue, not just me.

I am doing this for everyone in the same position, and everyone who will get stuck with this down the road. The problem STILL EXISTS. I have heard from several people with 04 model year cars that are affected. But still I get crucified here for doing what I truly believe to be in the best interests of BMW owners, present and future. This is not just about me.


----------



## Named Plaintiff (Jan 6, 2004)

Plaz said:


> Aren't those two statements contradictory?
> 
> Have you contacted BMWNA now that they have requested as much on Roadfly, and opened up a ticket? What did they say?


That is rich.

After 5 months of dealing with BMW NA, both through their factory technician and the telephone reps on the toll free number, they eventually told me that there was nothing they could do. They could not fix the problem, and they would not offer me any other kind of relief.

Senior management at my dealer tried to intervene on my behalf, because even they were shocked by what was happening. They were rebuffed also.

But now that I am making a big stink on the web boards, BMW NA is offering assistance again. Very interesting because they told me to sue them back in November.

Yes I did respond to their standard form letter email to me telling me to contact them if I would like their assistance, but it is just more of the same. They know all about this. They know who I am. They know who my dealer is. Their offer of "assistance" is not a genuine expression of interest in resolving this. Trust me. I have been down this road multiple times over the last 7 months.


----------



## Impulss (Sep 5, 2002)

This is rather interesting...

I have HK and NAV and I don't seem to have this issue... but then again, i usually listen to CDs and not the radio..

I would like to know how this turns out...

But what about all the other common issues??

ie.

- Passenger side speaker rattling
- Rear mount rattling on E46 coupes
- Nav frozen at accept screen from time to time
- Sunroof issues

I used to have an intermittent xenon light issue where the left one did not alwasy turn on immediately. They replaced two different parts to no avail.... finally they replacing the whole light unit and I hope that fixes it?!


----------



## BradS (Aug 27, 2003)

It may be instructive to determine what exactly is in issue here, in order to pare down the ancillary issues getting bandied about. Named Plaintiff, you are alleging fraud by BMW. The elements of fraud at common law, are: 

(1) a false statement of material fact;

(2) defendant’s knowledge that the statement was false; 

(3) defendant’s intent that the statement induce plaintiff to act; 

(4) plaintiff’s reliance upon the truth of the statement; 

(5) plaintiff’s damages resulting from reliance on the statement.

Understanding that this defininition has been revised in most states' consumer protection acts, it's at least instructive here. I have no doubt that your and other similarly situated owners' radios are not performing to standard, and that you have suffered some calculable monetary damage, fulfilling element 5. The question I have is whether you can state a claim under the other 4 elements? I would imagine that your claim would be that BMW represented that it had a premium audio system (element 1), that it knew did not work (element 2), that they made that statement with the intent that you would order it (element 3), and that you did order it based on that statement (element 4). Does this sum up your common law fraud claim?

Now, if you proceed under most states consumer protection acts, the range of potential damages is potentialy quite broad, including actual economic damages, injunctive relief, punitive damages, reasonable attorney fees, court costs, and any other relief which it deems proper. I think that most courts, IMHO, would restrict recovery to actual economic damages and attorney's fees, as there really isn't conduct here by BMW that shocks the conscience. Instead, your damages can be accurately measured with an ecomomic recovery.

As to whether this is a viable class action, I don't doubt that you found someone to file--the potential recovery of fees is enormous. I have two counters to recovery in class action, though. One is certification. Typically, they are limited to cases where plaintiffs would it would not pursue numerous, small individual claims becasue it would not be economically feasible. I believe that position has been completely eroded, as a matter of reality, and you will probably get your certification. 

The second involves intentional conduct. You are unsatisfied with your car. However, just being unsatisfied with something you have bought may not be sufficient. The defendant's conduct is the key in determining the basis for a class action. In a class action alleging that your radio is not performing the way in the manner BMW represented, it is generally necessary that BMW deceived you, or ommitted a material fact to you in order to recover in a consumer fraud class action. Of course, this presupposes that they knew about it. I guess if you can prove BMW knew and intentionally misrepresented the quality, then you may get home on this element as well. So, you probably have a viable class action here.

I believe that main bone of contention here on this board is whether this issue is properly a class action, not from a legal sense so much as a the idea that you might be using a 20 pound sledgehammer to drive a tack. And I think reasonable people can disagree on that without being "BMW Nazi's" or "plaintiff's looking to make a quick buck." 

Personally, I don't think this is the sort of corporate malfeasance that warrants quasi-judicial punishment of the company, even if they knew about it. Instead, I think that you, as a plaintiff, can be made whole through an economic recovery. And making plaintiffs whole is the greater fundamental reason, in my view, that we have civil courts vice using them to "punish" every company that makes and markets a substandard product. 

I think, from my perspective both as a lawyer and as a member of society that class action suits have expanded far beyond their original intent, and should not be used as freely as they are. I mainly believe this because the costs of the recovery are borne by consumers as a cost of doing business. No director, manager, shareholder or other employee of BMW will be out one red nickel. That is the fundamental problem--people make decisions, but the consumer pays passed-through costs of litigation. Class action suits only enrich the laywers on both sides (and its great work if you can get it).

You, of course, disagree, and that's fine too. We get to do that in a free society.


----------



## FireFly (May 2, 2002)

Brad- you took the words right out of my mouth 

NamePlaintiff- I think you are catching flack from some, myself included, for posting on this forum with all guns a blazing.

Many here have had various problems with their BMW but they started a topic/conversation by asking the bimmerfest community for help and guidance. There are many here who offer great advice and my advice to you would be for you to listen to them.

I think if you had followed the protocol and explored all possible means of righting the wrong and at the end of the day you still had a problem you would most likely have gained the support from many members to move forward with legal action.

As I previously stated, none here wish you ill will and we all hope you can enjoy your BMW in the way you intended when you first purchased the vehicle.


----------



## swchang (Oct 5, 2003)

FireFly said:


> NamePlaintiff- I think you are catching flack from some, myself included, for posting on this forum with all guns a blazing.
> 
> Many here have had various problems with their BMW but they started a topic/conversation by asking the bimmerfest community for help and guidance. There are many here who offer great advice and my advice to you would be for you to listen to them.
> 
> ...


I think he/she does feel that all means were explored. Dealership tried unsuccessfully to fix it numerous times and BMWNA was contacted by multiple parties, all to no avail.

I sympathize with this person, and if the lawsuit is filed as a matter of principle, then I fully support it, no matter how ridiculous others may think it is. If prices go up as a result, so be it.


----------



## gray330 (Feb 21, 2002)

I need to jump in here again. Named Plaintiff, the fact that you hired a multi-office NYC law firm to handle the case means absolutely nothing. Anybody can draft a complaint.

To give you an idea of what a silly-ass problem you have, just look at the other posts on this board. Lots of people here have or have had some kind of problem with their car. Some of them have had radio reception problems, bi-xenon problems, window problems, etc. Face it--it is impossible to build a problem-free car.

Yesterday, a California appellate court decided a case brought against Disneyland. The lead plaintiff, who lives in Fresno, filed a class action against Disneyland because the park was offering discounted tickets to Southern California residents in an effort to boost attendance in the off-season. He was complaining because he could not get the same deal. He lost.

Take everyone's advice: grow up and take your problem to small claims court.


----------



## xfactor (Nov 5, 2003)

Although courts can and will rescind contracts, this is not a case where it would be done. I forget if you mentioned what year your car was, but some of the car owners with this problem purchased their car three or four years ago. Courts would not rescind a contract for the purchase of a car after so long a period when the problem was relatively minor.

You are correct that you would not be given the purchase price of the car AND be allowed to retain the car. In the unlikely event you were awarded $45,000 (and I again will point out I believe there is no chance of that happening), you would be required to return the vehicle to BMW. If the vehicle were, at that time, worth $32,000, the benefit to you would be only $13,000. I apologize if any of my posts were misleading regarding that point.

I fully believe BMW should be held accountable for this defect. Hopefully this attention will, at a minimum, put BMW on notice that they must find a fix. Because there aren't many components that make FM radio reception work (tuner, antenna, speakers, wires), it should not be challenging or costly for them to do so.

Good luck, and I hope this problem is resolved without the need to use the legal system. It likely would take years for the courts to hear this case and resolve the problem. You'd be waiting for a judgment long after you sold your car and purchased a new one.


----------



## Named Plaintiff (Jan 6, 2004)

xfactor said:


> Good luck, and I hope this problem is resolved without the need to use the legal system. It likely would take years for the courts to hear this case and resolve the problem. You'd be waiting for a judgment long after you sold your car and purchased a new one.


Just one last point x

I gave BMW every opportunity to resolve this "in-house" without resort to the legal system. After they admitted to me they did not have a fix (subsequent to their 5th attempt to fix it) I had discussions with BMW NA where they basically told me to get lost. I then had some conversations with the senior management of my dealership about taking it up the ladder at BMW NA. These gentlemen were very sympathetic to me after they listened to the radio. They assured me that I must have spoken to some low level person without decision making power. They told me, in their experience, BMW management would not hang a customer out to dry on such an obvious defect.

BMW's response to them was the exact same it was to me; they were told the defect was an operational characteristic of the vehicle and that nothing further would be done. I then let them know that I had the resources to pursue a legal remedy. The response was that BMW NA was comfortable with their position on this.

In essence, they told me to take my best shot. If they were assuming that my best shot would be a small claims action or a lemon law suit, they badly miscalculated. If you truly believe that BMW ought to be held accountable on this, you should understand the path I am pursuing. A small claims action would accomplish NOTHING. BMW has made it very clear that they are not going to do anything about this unless they are forced to. I know of no better way to apply pressure to a giant corporation to fix a wrong than through the mechanism of the class action lawsuit.

You are right about how long this may take and that I will likely be done with this car by the time the resolution becomes final. But there we get into that pesky issue of principle again and what I truly believe to be the common good. As with most things, time will tell.


----------



## ff (Dec 19, 2001)

I would take the radio out of the car, drive up to the front door of your dealership, and throw it right through. Hopefully you'll hit one of the managers in the leg.


----------



## SizzlerMA (Sep 23, 2003)

NamedPlaintiff,

Did BMW make any specific claims as to FM reception as a precondition to your buying the car, or in your contract of sale? If for instance, they had claimed that the tuner had an FM sensitivity of 11 dBf and it had only 9, as measured by an independent lab, you might have more solid grounds for a suit, since in that case BMW would have clearly made a demonstrably false claim. If however, you're relying on your ear to claim the FM reception "isn't good enough" how do you think that will stand up in court? It seems pretty subjective . . .

As an example, consider the 0-60 times that BMW claims for their cars. You might never be able to achieve these, since you might never duplicate their test environment or be skillful enough to do an agressive launch. Does that mean the car is defective? No! If however, they claimed 0-60 in 1.4 seconds instead of 6.4 for a 330i, we might be able to scientifically prove that 1.4 was impossible, i.e., not possible even if max HP/torque were simultaneously maintained throughout and that the structure couldn't stand the stress, etc. In that contrived example, you'd have a case. But with 6.4, it's again subjective . . .

Please, take my original advice and just replace the head unit with an aftermarket unit or new antenna with gain and be done with it!


----------



## gray330 (Feb 21, 2002)

Named Plaintiff said:


> Doesn't that just inflame your sense of fairness?


No, not really. :wahwah:


----------



## anon (Jul 8, 2003)

ff said:


> I would take the radio out of the car, drive up to the front door of your dealership, and throw it right through. Hopefully you'll hit one of the managers in the leg.


 that's pretty funny...


----------



## Named Plaintiff (Jan 6, 2004)

SizzlerMA said:


> NamedPlaintiff,
> 
> ...If however, you're relying on your ear to claim the FM reception "isn't good enough" how do you think that will stand up in court? It seems pretty subjective . . .
> 
> ...Please, take my original advice and just replace the head unit with an aftermarket unit or new antenna with gain and be done with it!


Sizzler

At what point does radio reception qualify as a defect. What if the radio did not work at all? I think you would agree that that situation would qualify as a defect that is actionable if BMW refused to fix it. What if it worked only 5% of the time? 10%? 20%? If you follow this logic, it becomes then a question of fact of what qualifies as a "defect" as opposed to just an inherently inferior product. The rapid switching back in forth from stereo to mono, the inability to reproduce a stereo signal for longer than maybe 30 seconds, the spasmodic changes in volume all point to a defect rather than just crappy reception.

My radio (as well as the radios of hundreds or even thousands of other BMW owners) does not work the same way other BMW radios work. That said, the most obvious and strongest standard of proof would be to compare the function of my radio (and others in the class) to the function of other Harman/Kardon BMW radios. Using that standard of proof, we will easily get past any threshold issue as to whether it is a defect or just an "operational characteristic" of the unit.

Finally, your aftermarket suggestion is well taken. If you followed this thread closely you would have seen that I had already explored that option. Putting aside the fact that, given the integrated nature of the nav system and the radio, I was told there was nothing that could be done, if you are telling me that I should spend my own money to fix something that is BMW's responsibility...let's just say we have a difference of opinion on that.


----------



## gray330 (Feb 21, 2002)

Named Plaintiff said:


> Sizzler
> 
> At what point does radio reception qualify as a defect. What if the radio did not work at all? I think you would agree that that situation would qualify as a defect that is actionable if BMW refused to fix it. What if it worked only 5% of the time? 10%? 20%? If you follow this logic, it becomes then a question of fact of what qualifies as a "defect" as opposed to just an inherently inferior product. The rapid switching back in forth from stereo to mono, the inability to reproduce a stereo signal for longer than maybe 30 seconds, the spasmodic changes in volume all point to a defect rather than just crappy reception.
> 
> ...


First you tell us that 20 or so people have reported this, then it jumps to "dozens" with this problem, and now it is "hundreds or even thousands."


----------



## Named Plaintiff (Jan 6, 2004)

gray330 said:


> First you tell us that 20 or so people have reported this, then it jumps to "dozens" with this problem, and now it is "hundreds or even thousands."


Exactly;

20 or so people originally reported this problem on this forum and at e46fanatics and roadfly (I believe I linked those original threads in an earlier posting).

Since I have posted this here and on other web boards, about 3 dozen people have contacted me complaining about the same thing.

According to BMW's corporate report, it has sold about 125,000 3 series (give or take a couple of thousand) a year in the United States since 2001. If 4 model years are involved we are looking at a number in excess of 400,000 vehicles (obviously we are only into the 2nd quarter of the 04 model year). Between e46fanatics and Bimmerfest my thread has been viewed about 5000 times. Even assuming no repeat views (which is unreasonable) that means only about 1% of the possible class has seen my post.

Continuing in this analysis: Given the hostility I have encountered regarding the filing of a class action, there are a great many people who would not consider joining on principle, even if they are affected. An even larger percentage either have learned to live with the problem, or just can't be bothered. It is therefore entirely reasonable to believe that of the 1% of e46 owners who may have seen my original posting, only a fraction of the people who have been affected would be inclined to respond to me. What that fraction may be is anyone's guess, but I think one third affirmative response and two thirds no response is reasonable.

Now let's do some math. I received about three dozen affirmative responses. For ease of numbers lets call it 33. If only one third of the affected people responded to me, that means of the people who viewed my thread, approximately 100 have been affected.

Therefore, if 100 out of each percentage point of vehicles sold in the USA are affected, the total class size would extrapolate out to 10,000 affected vehicles. QED

ps. This is a simple statistical abstract that assumed every viewer of the thread owned a 2001-2004 MY 3 Series and there were no repeat views. For every viewer of the thread who does not own one of these cars and for each repeat view, the possible affected class size goes up.


----------



## gray330 (Feb 21, 2002)

Named Plaintiff said:


> Exactly;
> 
> 20 or so people originally reported this problem on this forum and at e46fanatics and roadfly (I believe I linked those original threads in an earlier posting).
> 
> ...


Your math is correct, but your assumptions are faulty.


----------



## Named Plaintiff (Jan 6, 2004)

gray330 said:


> Your math is correct, but your assumptions are faulty.


So says you.

Actually, the only assumption I made in that post was that not everyone who is affected who saw my post contacted me to join. Even if you completely discount that, and assume that everyone who was affected who saw my post contacted me to join, then the number shrinks to 3,333. Although I find that an unreasonable assumption, it still gets us to a class size in the thousands.

So what assumptions are you referring to that are so faulty?


----------



## SizzlerMA (Sep 23, 2003)

Named Plaintiff said:


> Sizzler
> 
> At what point does radio reception qualify as a defect. What if the radio did not work at all? I think you would agree that that situation would qualify as a defect that is actionable if BMW refused to fix it. What if it worked only 5% of the time? 10%? 20%? If you follow this logic, it becomes then a question of fact of what qualifies as a "defect" as opposed to just an inherently inferior product. The rapid switching back in forth from stereo to mono, the inability to reproduce a stereo signal for longer than maybe 30 seconds, the spasmodic changes in volume all point to a defect rather than just crappy reception.
> 
> ...


Well, obviously if the radio never turned on it should be replaced immediately! And even if it did not turn on 25% of the time, you could probably sue BMW and win in small claims court. The reason being that marketing the car as having an FM radio implies, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the radio would actually turn on. However, marketing the car as having an FM radio does imply what the quality of sound/s2n ratio/tuning the radio will exhibit under daily use. And that's the rub of it. Did BMW claim the sound would be "crystal clear CD quality all the time"? No! If they had used a crappy, cheap tuner or antenna that might produce the problems you're experiencing . . .

Second, with regards to spending your money, do you recall the concept of "opportunity cost"? In other words, if you spend one hundred hours worrying about and handling a class action lawsuit against BMW just to avoid spending several hundred dollars, you're implicitly saying that the opportunity cost of your time is only a few dollars per hour. Since I assume that you can't afford a BMW on a minimum wage job, isn't your time worth more? Just buy the aftermarket radio and be done with it!!!

Look, I understand your frustration. Just recently I switched from cable company A to cable company B because B claimed faster download and upload speeds. At first B was pathetic---I went from 3 Mbps download on A to literally 1 Kbps download on B. I called their support and asked them to fix it. Since they claimed it might take up to 48 hours to fix, I wanted a prorated refund for the 2 days. However, they said the modem service didn't make any speed promises, and that even though I was experiencing 90% packet loss, they could still ping my cable modem, so no refund could be offered since the cable modem service was technically functioning, although obviously poorly. I told them BS, that they better fix it or I would dispute the credit card charges paying the bill, possibly sue them and switch back to cable company A. They ended up fixing it to my satisfaction, but would I have sued them if they hadn't? No! I would have just switched back to company A and blasted company B on the web . . .

Get the moral of the story?!?


----------



## swchang (Oct 5, 2003)

Hey Named Plaintiff,

I picked up my car on Monday, and while I haven't listened to the radio much, I think I just noticed what you're describing. Just a few things: 

Is AM radio also affected, or only FM? 

When you say that it fades in and out of stereo, would you say that what I experienced (sound became a little muted, as if power were cut to a speaker, and then went back to normal, and then muted again, and then went back to normal) is what you're experiencing? 

Finally, I think the problem went away when I changed stations. Has that worked for you?


----------



## gray330 (Feb 21, 2002)

Named Plaintiff said:


> So says you.
> 
> Actually, the only assumption I made in that post was that not everyone who is affected who saw my post contacted me to join. Even if you completely discount that, and assume that everyone who was affected who saw my post contacted me to join, then the number shrinks to 3,333. Although I find that an unreasonable assumption, it still gets us to a class size in the thousands.
> 
> So what assumptions are you referring to that are so faulty?


Well, for one thing, one could just as easily assume that the only people that have this problem have been watching the boards like bimmerfest. They have a problem and they want to find out if there are others that are similarly situated. That shrinks your numbers down into the tens.

Even with 3000 plaintiffs, the economics aren't there. Assume the judge determines the damages are $1,000 per vehicle. That's a total of 3 million before attorney's fees and costs. You'll be lucky to get back the cost of a replacement unit.

But we can make all kinds of assumptions.


----------



## Named Plaintiff (Jan 6, 2004)

swchang said:


> Hey Named Plaintiff,
> 
> I picked up my car on Monday, and while I haven't listened to the radio much, I think I just noticed what you're describing. Just a few things:
> 
> ...


Only FM is affected, although signal strength on AM is so limited that sometimes if I hit the seek function, it will scan through the entire band and not stop because it can't lock in a signal strong enough. I am in the NYC metropolitan area (outside Manhattan and not in the shadows of tall buildings), not exactly a rural backwater where radio doesn't reach.

The fading issue on FM is comprised of two distinct symptoms. First: the radio cannot reproduce stereo playback. The little ST indicator on the radio stays lit (never even flickers), but the output of the radio is spastic. It will mostly play in mono and then give me a little taste of what the radio should sound like when suddenly the sound gets full and rich with nice stereo imaging. But it is only a tease, because it will not last more than a few seconds. Sometimes I only get a second or two of stereo, sometimes it will stay on for a short period before it disappears again.

The second aspect of it involves volume but not loudness. It is a loss of dynamic range (i.e., the difference in volume between the loud passages and the soft ones). So the sound goes from the full rich stereo that is what should be normal, to a tinny tiny sound (like it was coming out of a cheap little boombox, and in mono).

If you have the H/K radio, beware of the speed sensitive volume control. You can turn down its sensitivity, but you can't shut it off. It is not very smooth in its operation and you can easily tell when it hits its trigger points as you accelerate or decelerate.

If you can determine that the difference in sound is not related to that function, you may be describing the problem. My radio spasms at all speeds and even when standing still. Listen closely to the fade outs. It is not necessarily that the volume gets muted, it's rather that its dynamic range gets squashed down, with most of the sound essentially being played back at the same volume. Also, I have noticed that some stations are affected worse than others. None are immune though.


----------



## Named Plaintiff (Jan 6, 2004)

gray330 said:


> Well, for one thing, one could just as easily assume that the only people that have this problem have been watching the boards like bimmerfest. They have a problem and they want to find out if there are others that are similarly situated. That shrinks your numbers down into the tens.


gray330:

You are certainly free to disagree with me on whether I should be doing this. But I have gone to great lengths to assess the scope of this matter using reasonable estimates and assumptions based on the information available.

Your counterassumption quoted above is absurd. It is not a reasonable or persuasive refutation of my analysis. Come on. I expect better of you.


----------



## BradATL (Apr 30, 2003)

SizzlerMA said:


> Second, with regards to spending your money, do you recall the concept of "opportunity cost"? In other words, if you spend one hundred hours worrying about and handling a class action lawsuit against BMW just to avoid spending several hundred dollars, you're implicitly saying that the opportunity cost of your time is only a few dollars per hour. Since I assume that you can't afford a BMW on a minimum wage job, isn't your time worth more? Just buy the aftermarket radio and be done with it!!!


Ah, you introduced a basic concept of economics -- opportunity cost. I believe you are correct that, from a financial utility standpoint, this isn't worth his time or effort. However, you are ignoring another basic concept of economics -- "psychic income", which is the non-monetary satisfaction or gratification derived from a product, service or activity.

It is evident that the expected value of Named Plaintiff's psychic income to be derived from pursuing (and winning) a judgement against BMWNA is, in fact, worth his time. Otherwise, he wouldn't be pursuing it.


----------



## BradATL (Apr 30, 2003)

SizzlerMA said:


> Look, I understand your frustration. Just recently I switched from cable company A to cable company B because B claimed faster download and upload speeds. At first B was pathetic---I went from 3 Mbps download on A to literally 1 Kbps download on B. I called their support and asked them to fix it. Since they claimed it might take up to 48 hours to fix, I wanted a prorated refund for the 2 days. However, they said the modem service didn't make any speed promises, and that even though I was experiencing 90% packet loss, they could still ping my cable modem, so no refund could be offered since the cable modem service was technically functioning, although obviously poorly. I told them BS, that they better fix it or I would dispute the credit card charges paying the bill, possibly sue them and switch back to cable company A. They ended up fixing it to my satisfaction, but would I have sued them if they hadn't? No! I would have just switched back to company A and blasted company B on the web . . .
> 
> Get the moral of the story?!?


Great story, and I think it does a good job of communicating the "moral" of Named Plaintiff's story. The mere threat of a lawsuit was sufficiently motivating to cable company B that they changed their original position and fixed your problem. Unfortunately, the threat of civil judgements is the only thing that causes some businesses to behave in a responsible manner. It is part of the "checks and balances" of our economic and legal system that make our country's economy and standard of living the envy of the rest of the world. An effective legal system that provides for the ability to enforce contracts is a necessary prerequisite to a well-functioning private economy.

By the way, I think it is great that your neighborhood enjoys the benefit of TWO cable providers. This is uncommon. Most areas of the U.S. have only one wireline cable provider. Wish my neighborhood had two.


----------



## BradATL (Apr 30, 2003)

xfactor said:


> 1. I don't think this will ever have class action status. At most, it will involve a handful of plaintiffs.
> 
> 2. You missed it. He thinks he is entitled to the entire purchase price of his car. Call me crazy, but I consider a $45,000 award for a defective radio to be a windfall.
> 
> 3. He didn't need to give me permission to post my opinions.


1. It may not ever gain class action status. But it may. Tough to determine w/o all of the background facts.

2. I didn't miss it. He isn't seeking $45,000 in damages. That would suggest he wants his original purchase price back and to keep his car. That's not the case. He is not seeking a windfall. He is not seeking punitive damages.

3. You are absolutely correct. You do not require anyone's permission to participate in this thread. His original purpose in starting this threat was to seek responses from other similarly situated persons (i.e., those who are experiencing the same problem). But you are under no obligation under the rules of this forum to respect the original purpose of his thread.


----------



## Named Plaintiff (Jan 6, 2004)

SizzlerMA said:


> Well, obviously if the radio never turned on it should be replaced immediately! And even if it did not turn on 25% of the time, you could probably sue BMW and win in small claims court. The reason being that marketing the car as having an FM radio implies, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the radio would actually turn on.


Good point SizzlerMa. You have just made my argument. I agree with you that marketing a car with a radio implies, "beyond a reasonable doubt," that the radio would actually turn on.

But is the ability to turn on the only implication for the normal operation of a radio? I think not. What if it turned on but played nothing but static? What if it turned on but you could not turn the volume up loud enough to hear it over the road noise and you could only listen while standing still in a quiet place? What if it played but could only receive one station? Do you see where this is going, or shall I continue? At some point a determination will have to be made as to whether a given product is "defective" or just inferior. That determination is a question of fact that should rightly be made by a jury.

I like your marketing argument though, because it fits in well with another theory of the case. This car was marketed to me as having "the premium, upgraded Harman/Kardon audio system" The premium and upgraded qualities were touted to me in both written materials produced by BMW and furnished to me by the dealer, and in the affirmative statements of my car salesman. If a premium car is actively marketed with a premium audio system I beleive there is an implication, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the audio system would be capable of functioning, at the very minimum, in a usual and customary manner. Mine does not. Neither do the radios of other people with this problem.


----------



## MojoJojo (Oct 10, 2003)

Best of luck in your battles with BMW and its apologist "Knights of the Roundel". 

I am amazed at how ones automobile hobby and brand affinity can cloud the judgement of some to the point of absolute corruption of ideals and priciples.

Lets face it: this individual has received a defective product. He has paid good money for this feature, and has every reason to expect it should function properly. It should have been fixed, and done so at a minimal inconvenience to the customer. 

It would appear that BMW has made some attempts at fixing this problem which is deserving of recognition. However, later intransigence when they are unsuccessful is alarming.

Once again this is a simple issue of right vs. wrong. A customer should not have to be pushed to such extremes to receive appropriate customer service. Period.


----------



## Thomas Andersen (Oct 30, 2003)

I think Named Plaintiff's strongest argument here is that he did in fact rely on the qualities of the stereo when he purchased his BMW. If he had not ordered HK then it would be difficult to argue that the radio quality had any affect on his decision to purchase. BUT he ordered the premium HK stereo and should be entitled to a premium sound system which I think any of us will agree should operate BETTER than a standard car stereo. In fact this stereo does not. 

I think he can make his case. The real fight will be over the measure of damages. How to make him whole? Experts can testify as to diminution in value but I can certainly see that at a minimum it would be the extra cost of the HK stereo option.

Named Plaintiff I do not generally favor class actions. However you deserved better treatment.


----------



## swchang (Oct 5, 2003)

Named Plaintiff, I just read in the owner's manual that if you have the HK premium sound system, "The system sometimes responds to poor reception conditions by repeatedly alternating between the stereo and monophonic modes. You should then switch the system off [i.e., press the button with the picture of the speaker to deactivate the acoustic enhancement]."

Have you tried shutting that off? I'm going to try it the next time I get that weird fading sound (which I got again today). It sounds like this is referring to what you say, which would explain why you say AM is never affected... (Aren't there some music stations on AM, though?)


----------



## Named Plaintiff (Jan 6, 2004)

swchang said:


> Named Plaintiff, I just read in the owner's manual that if you have the HK premium sound system, "The system sometimes responds to poor reception conditions by repeatedly alternating between the stereo and monophonic modes. You should then switch the system off [i.e., press the button with the picture of the speaker to deactivate the acoustic enhancement]."
> 
> Have you tried shutting that off? I'm going to try it the next time I get that weird fading sound (which I got again today). It sounds like this is referring to what you say, which would explain why you say AM is never affected... (Aren't there some music stations on AM, though?)


swchang: Indeed the owners manual says that. The problem is far more noticeable with the HK button engaged, but it still occurs with that feature off. Some people don't have a sophisticated ear and can not differentiate between output in mono and stereo. I am sure BMW has relied on that to stonewall the issue.

I anticipate that being part of BMW's defense (i.e., its a normal operating condition because they note it in the manual). But that is disingenuous to say the least. Installing a feature in the car presupposes that it will work, at least a majority of the time. In my car it ALWAYS has the problem. What good is the HK feature button if it NEVER works?

If turning off the feature was the fix, I would never have gone to the lengths I have. I would have chalked it up to being suckered into thinking something was better than it really was and just moved on. But the fact is that the inability to lock onto and reproduce a stereo signal happens regardless of whether the HK feature is on or off.


----------



## Covenant (Jan 12, 2004)

Named Plaintiff said:


> swchang: Indeed the owners manual says that. The problem is far more noticeable with the HK button engaged, but it still occurs with that feature off. Some people don't have a sophisticated ear and can not differentiate between output in mono and stereo. I am sure BMW has relied on that to stonewall the issue.
> 
> I anticipate that being part of BMW's defense (i.e., its a normal operating condition because they note it in the manual). But that is disingenuous to say the least. Installing a feature in the car presupposes that it will work, at least a majority of the time. In my car it ALWAYS has the problem. What good is the HK feature button if it NEVER works?
> 
> If turning off the feature was the fix, I would never have gone to the lengths I have. I would have chalked it up to being suckered into thinking something was better than it really was and just moved on. But the fact is that the inability to lock onto and reproduce a stereo signal happens regardless of whether the HK feature is on or off.


Which button are you referring to? Could you be specific? I have a 2003 330cic with HK Premium sound and NAV and have experienced the horror of losing my stereo signal constantly. It is something that you NEVER get used to. It is aggravating. I originally thought it was the speed sensitive volume kicking in that would make it seem like the right side speakers in my car went momentarily dead.

Having had negative past experiences with BMW service I chose not to do anything about this problem because the service will usually make things worse than they were to begin with. I also live in the NY area and have problems getting decent AM reception. I hate my FM stereo!


----------



## gray330 (Feb 21, 2002)

The Recorder 

A group of high-profile lawyers and professors is rallying behind Townsend and Townsend and Crew's hefty price tag for winning a consumer antitrust class action against Microsoft Corp. Townsend, whose lawyers served as lead counsel in the suit, is requesting a total of $258 million in attorneys fees. Its own share is calculated at $92.6 million with the remainder going to the other firms who helped. "I am very confident that our request is reasonable," said Townsend partner Eugene Crew.


----------



## Named Plaintiff (Jan 6, 2004)

Covenant said:


> Which button are you referring to? Could you be specific? I have a 2003 330cic with HK Premium sound and NAV and have experienced the horror of losing my stereo signal constantly. It is something that you NEVER get used to. It is aggravating. I originally thought it was the speed sensitive volume kicking in that would make it seem like the right side speakers in my car went momentarily dead.
> 
> Having had negative past experiences with BMW service I chose not to do anything about this problem because the service will usually make things worse than they were to begin with. I also live in the NY area and have problems getting decent AM reception. I hate my FM stereo!


Covenant:

As you now see, You Are Not Alone. There are many of us that have to deal with this garbage.

I sent you a private message about it.


----------



## andy_thomas (Oct 7, 2002)

Covenant said:


> Which button are you referring to? Could you be specific? I have a 2003 330cic with HK Premium sound and NAV and have experienced the horror of losing my stereo signal constantly. It is something that you NEVER get used to. It is aggravating. I originally thought it was the speed sensitive volume kicking in that would make it seem like the right side speakers in my car went momentarily dead.
> 
> Having had negative past experiences with BMW service I chose not to do anything about this problem because the service will usually make things worse than they were to begin with. I also live in the NY area and have problems getting decent AM reception. I hate my FM stereo!


No-one is belitting the trauma of having one's stereo fade into mono - it is horrific, as you say, almost up there with the horror of losing a limb, or a maybe loved one, in a car accident. Oh, wait, *I'm* belittling it. Damn .


----------



## pony_trekker (May 26, 2003)

gray330 said:


> The Recorder
> 
> A group of high-profile lawyers and professors is rallying behind Townsend and Townsend and Crew's hefty price tag for winning a consumer antitrust class action against Microsoft Corp. Townsend, whose lawyers served as lead counsel in the suit, is requesting a total of $258 million in attorneys fees. Its own share is calculated at $92.6 million with the remainder going to the other firms who helped. "I am very confident that our request is reasonable," said Townsend partner Eugene Crew.


Great work if you can get it. The guys who are good at this -- and who generally get this work -- spend the bulk of their day negotiating and justifying their fees.

PS named plaintiff: If a class gets certified it won't just go away if BMW buys YOUR car or fixes YOUR radio. You will be a fiduciary of the class and must ensure that the class injuries are remedied


----------



## Covenant (Jan 12, 2004)

andy_thomas said:


> No-one is belitting the trauma of having one's stereo fade into mono - it is horrific, as you say, almost up there with the horror of losing a limb, or a maybe loved one, in a car accident. Oh, wait, *I'm* belittling it. Damn .


With all the whining that goes on in this forum I am surprised by the amount of posts that have absolutely no sympathy for this aggravating problem. Maybe horror was too strong a word but believe me, when you commute to work in the New York area and your speakers pop on and off at will, it becomes infuriating! I hope my frustration with BMW's usual shoddy service record didn't offend anyone's sensibilities.


----------



## SanDiegoShaun (Jul 24, 2003)

Does anyone else have a popping sound when the Nav mutes the
stereo???

The Navigation has been replaced as well as the head unit. Local
dealer and the Region BMW tech have now said it is a "Normal
function", this is of course after they have replaced all the parts
trying to fix it. I am starting to think it is an electrical issue
in the cars wiring.

Also I used to be able to actually control the Nav volume but after
they replaced the Nav unit with a new one the new one only allows
volume mixing and does not actually control the Nav volume it just
controls the amount the radio mutes.

I would appreciate if everyone would chime in with there comments as
I am still in the middle of dealing with BMW NA and the Local dealer
and any help would be great...

It is a 2002 330CI
Thanks Very Much!
Shaun


----------



## Parump (Dec 25, 2001)

Yes,

My FM radio and NAV system are afflicted by most of the complaints previously posted. However, the problem exists in the Toyota Camry with the NAV system. This problem seems to be particular to factory installed NAV systems for different car manufacturers. This is one of the reasons why I disagree with the decision to file a class action lawsuit against BMW.


----------



## SanDiegoShaun (Jul 24, 2003)

I am looking for specific information, specifically if anyone has a loud popping noise..



Parump said:


> Yes,
> 
> My FM radio and NAV system are afflicted by most of the complaints previously posted. However, the problem exists in the Toyota Camry with the NAV system. This problem seems to be particular to factory installed NAV systems for different car manufacturers. This is one of the reasons why I disagree with the decision to file a class action lawsuit against BMW.


----------



## andy_thomas (Oct 7, 2002)

Named Plaintiff said:


> Only FM is affected, although signal strength on AM is so limited that sometimes if I hit the seek function, it will scan through the entire band and not stop because it can't lock in a signal strong enough. I am in the NYC metropolitan area (outside Manhattan and not in the shadows of tall buildings), not exactly a rural backwater where radio doesn't reach.
> 
> ...
> The second aspect of it involves volume but not loudness. It is a loss of dynamic range (i.e., the difference in volume between the loud passages and the soft ones). So the sound goes from the full rich stereo that is what should be normal, to a tinny tiny sound (like it was coming out of a cheap little boombox, and in mono).


The compression ratio is set by the broadcaster. Otherwise you'd never hear the quiet sections. If they didn't compress the signal to reduce the difference in amplitude between the quietest and loudest passages, you'd get deafened as soon as the broadcast signal amplitude shot up (which it often does). Ignorance is a basis neither for defence, nor attack.



> If you have the H/K radio, beware of the speed sensitive volume control. You can turn down its sensitivity, but you can't shut it off. It is not very smooth in its operation and you can easily tell when it hits its trigger points as you accelerate or decelerate.


That's disgraceful. Being able to hear the step points? On a radio with an electronic volume control? Oh, well now you *must* sue


----------



## Parump (Dec 25, 2001)

andy_thomas said:


> The compression ratio is set by the broadcaster. Otherwise you'd never hear the quiet sections. If they didn't compress the signal to reduce the difference in amplitude between the quietest and loudest passages, you'd get deafened as soon as the broadcast signal amplitude shot up (which it often does). Ignorance is a basis neither for defence, nor attack.


I understood that the use of the modulation compression equipment such as the "Optimod" is primarily to prevent overmodulation and exceeding the power output as licensed by the FCC for a particular station. At least this was the basis of compressing the modulation in the past at radio stations. Maybe, the situation has changed.

T


andy_thomas said:


> hat's disgraceful. Being able to hear the step points? On a radio with an electronic volume control? Oh, well now you *must* sue


----------



## Named Plaintiff (Jan 6, 2004)

andy_thomas said:


> The compression ratio is set by the broadcaster. Otherwise you'd never hear the quiet sections. If they didn't compress the signal to reduce the difference in amplitude between the quietest and loudest passages, you'd get deafened as soon as the broadcast signal amplitude shot up (which it often does). Ignorance is a basis neither for defence, nor attack.


Andy:

It is my hope by that this point in this thread, the readers have come to appreciate that I have done my homework on this. I full well realize (or realise to you UK'ers) that broadcast FM signals are somewhat compressed compared to listening to a cd. That is not what I am referring to. The problem occurs on a random basis, popping in and out in a highly noticeable and spasmodic manner. It is unmistakably a problem. And for the record, I am not a 16 yr old who is driving his first car who has no basis for comparisons. I have owned many vehicles over the last 24 years. Nothing like this had ever occured in any of them. From the beat up hand-me-downs to the 2000 Audi A4 that I traded in on the car in question.

I have explored every other option, I have looked into every other resource to avoid going this route and I have given BMW more than enough opportunities to either fix the problem, or deal with me one-on-one without resort to the legal process. ALL TO NO AVAIL. In my final communications with BMW NA I told them that this would be the course I would pursue if they couldn't (or wouldn't) come to some sort of resolution. I guess they took it as an idle threat. They basically told me to sue them. I was told their legal department felt comfortable with its position.

Maybe they thought I was bluffing. Let's just say, I feel comfortable with my position.

p.s., Just a little clarification here. My point about hearing the step points of the speed controlled volume feature was not about my law suit. I was just giving advice to someone who wanted to know what the defect was. I was telling him that hearing the step points was NOT what I am complaining about.


----------



## LoveL6 (Oct 22, 2003)

*Huge action over something so small*

I never had 2001-04 3ers but if you have a sound system problem ONLY using the FM radio and because bmw can't fix it you are going to suit bmw ...... 

OMG come on do you NEED to use FM every time you drive? or do you HAVE TO use it while GPS NAV is ON? I know this is a 40k car but if you think this is big problem, think again my best buddy is sales in mercedes-benz dealer. The 2001-03's E-class have alot problem not only sound system and BTW they cost you 50-75k,yes the AMG's ( I won't point out the problems but if you ask any one who has owned 01 E,ML or S class over years they will tall you this car sux ) Today people buy mercedes because its mercedes and if you buy BMW just because its BMW........ you sux

Now I began to understand why BMW won't bring the E46 ///M3 CSL in US coz of people like you will suit BMW not having A/C, sound system ( not even avaible with option ) plastic trunk lid and cardbord butten of trunk, ( you can't put stuff in it coz it's going to break ) racing slicks ( ONLY work in the dry ) and yet it will cost you around 85k if ever intro. to NA. This is the ultimate driving machine not DJ machine. get lost


----------



## andy_thomas (Oct 7, 2002)

Named Plaintiff said:


> Andy:
> 
> It is my hope by that this point in this thread, the readers have come to appreciate that I have done my homework on this. I full well realize (or realise to you UK'ers) that broadcast FM signals are somewhat compressed compared to listening to a cd. That is not what I am referring to. The problem occurs on a random basis, popping in and out in a highly noticeable and spasmodic manner. It is unmistakably a problem. And for the record, I am not a 16 yr old who is driving his first car who has no basis for comparisons. I have owned many vehicles over the last 24 years. Nothing like this had ever occured in any of them. From the beat up hand-me-downs to the 2000 Audi A4 that I traded in on the car in question.
> 
> ...


The best I could get of the problem dipping in and out of this thread, is that the fading in and out of stereo was excessive, and that a stereo signal could not be relayed for any meaningful length of time. (A simple check, and I don't know if this was done, would be to ensure the aerial amplifier was doing its job.)

Perhaps the popping sound is that which BMW recommends avoiding by switching out the HK circuitry? Who knows. My manual - though I don't have the HK option - just says (and I paraphrase) "in stereo/mono situations, turn it off. It'll sound naff."

BTW as it if needed saying, any residual sympathy is erased by ill-worded missives of support which relay the horror and devastation of discovering that one's radio was somewhat below the standard expected of a BMW (and I expect the radio of a BMW to be unexciting and pedestrian, as it goes, rather like I expect the handling of a Mercedes to be unexciting and pedestrian). (And I know the guy replied and said it was a strong word.)

But I bet I'm not the only one here who thinks "all this s*** going on in the world, all the dreadful things that could beset you or your family, and people are this upset by your car radio? How do you cope when when something really serious happens to you?"


----------



## Plaz (Dec 19, 2001)

andy_thomas said:


> But I bet I'm not the only one here who thinks "all this s*** going on in the world, all the dreadful things that could beset you or your family, and people are this upset by your car radio? How do you cope when when something really serious happens to you?"


Correct, you are not. :tsk:


----------



## Named Plaintiff (Jan 6, 2004)

andy_thomas said:


> But I bet I'm not the only one here who thinks "all this s*** going on in the world, all the dreadful things that could beset you or your family, and people are this upset by your car radio? How do you cope when when something really serious happens to you?"


In the same manner actually. I hit it head on and bring all the resources I can muster to bear. In life, sometimes you are a windshield and sometimes you are a bug. Most of the time you have to accept being a bug...but sometimes you don't.

I am going to say this for what seems like the thousandth time: There is a difference between an inferior radio and a defective one. The free market usually sorts out the inferior from superior, but, in this country anyway, the courts are usually left to resolve issues regarding known defective products intentionally put into the stream of commerce. (BTW, we have covered this ground before: please see posts 1-50 of this thread for a discussion of the merits and drawbacks of using the legal system to enforce issues of social justice if you want to get into that particular political discussion).

I have taken some heat here from some people who think it is a de minimus matter and have called me pathetic for wasting my time on this (but I ask who is the more pathetic: the person pursuing a class action for a perceived wrong, or the internet geek  who is getting all hot and bothered about an issue that does not concern them in any way, shape or form and who is following a 162 post long thread on a web board for several weeks?)

Other people are quick to tell me I should just accept taking a screwing. I think some of these people deride someone like me as a way of justifying their own apathy and laziness when they take a screwing. Their opinions matter little to me.

People who listen enjoy listening FM radio in their car get reminded of this defect everytime they are in their car. Imagine a spring poking through the seat and sticking you in the a$$ everytime you are in the car. That is about the emotional equivalent. It literally prevents me from enjoying the car. Then, to top it off, we get insulted by the extreme arrogance of BMW telling us that it is normal. That's fine, they are just going to have to get a jury to agree with them.


----------



## SanDiegoShaun (Jul 24, 2003)

I have to say I agree with Named Plaintiff 100%! He is just trying to get a known defect taken care of, and yes I believe this is a defect and not a lack of performance. BMW should have resolved this issue a long time ago and worked with HK to fix this issue. Rather they have chosen to ignore the people that have this defect, remember not everyone has it just certain cars. This tells you BMW/HK does not know what the problem is and how to fix it otherwise they would have. They have chosen not to take action and probably won't because of the cost and the fact that next year they will probably have something like "i drive" in the car and have probably already spent tons of R and D money on that. I am sure they figure why spend all the money to try to fix an issue now at this point if they are not going to make it this way in the future. The only it appears they will is if someone takes action through the legal system. 

As I said before this would be no different then if your AC only blew cold 95% of the time, half of you would say, well I really don't need AC because I live in "X" city and it is cold and you really don't buy a BMW because of the AC. While the people that live in Arizona and Miami need it to work 100% of the time. Named Plaintiff is not saying his AC does not get as cold as someone else's car he is saying that sometimes it does not work properly at all. Please get that through your head for the people that keep talking about reception. He is obvious not talking about reception, he is talking about a defect that causes it not to work correctly! 


For those of you who are not affected with this, way are you still in here making comments. How about you use your energy to help Named Plaintiff get his and everyone else with this defect get there cars fixed. Why don't you send an email to BMW NA and asked them to address this known defect. I am sure Named Plaintiff and others would do the same for you if you were dealing with something that kept you from enjoying your car. 

The funny thing is, the only ones who are giving Named Plaintiff a hard time are the ones who don't have this issue. I have not seen the same nasty tone from anyone who is actually dealing with it. For the record I do not have this specific issue but I do have a similar defect with my navigation/HK radio and guess what I also have got the run around from BMW NA, and why? Because they can as long as they want and when will they take action? They won't until some one steps up and takes more serious action. They had my car a total of 35 days over 2 years to finally not be able to fix it and now call it a "A NORMAL OPERATING CHARACTERISTIC OF THIS MODEL AND THE VEHICLE IS OPERATION PROPERLY" So if this is the case why did they spend 35 days trying to fix it? Basically in English this just means they do not know how to fix it. 

Remember Named Plaintiff is only dealing with BMW NA because they are giving him the same responses that most of you have given in this thread. So stop being part of the problem and help be part of the solution.


----------



## Named Plaintiff (Jan 6, 2004)

SanDiegoShaun said:


> I have to say I agree with Named Plaintiff 100%! He is just trying to get a known defect taken care of, and yes I believe this is a defect and not a lack of performance.
> 
> For those of you who are not affected with this, way are you still in here making comments. How about you use your energy to help Named Plaintiff get his and everyone else with this defect get there cars fixed. Why don't you send an email to BMW NA and asked them to address this known defect. I am sure Named Plaintiff and others would do the same for you if you were dealing with something that kept you from enjoying your car.
> 
> Remember Named Plaintiff is only dealing with BMW NA because they are giving him the same responses that most of you have given in this thread. So stop being part of the problem and help be part of the solution.


Hallelujah!!

Thank you Shaun. You put it very well.

I came to these webboards for help, figuring this would be a sympathetic forum being that we all know what BMW customer service is like. Some people have been cool. Some people have disagreed with me, but there has been intelligent discourse. Others have been clearly part of the problem, not the solution.

Ever hear the saying "no good deed goes unpunished?" I kinda feel that way about this. What I am doing will only benefit me marginally. I will likely be done with this car long before we a achieve a resolution. However, I believe what I am doing will benefit other BMW owners, present and future. Maybe it might even change the way BMW handles these kind of customer service issues in the future. Complaints of shoddy treatment at the hands of BMW is rife on this board. Not just me. Almost every other thread involves some sort of problem that was handled badly.

And what do I get from the BMW community for trying to do something that might benefit everybody in the long run? I get a lot of kneejerk guff from a bunch of yahoos who have big internet muscles and big opinions that are so gloriously free from critical forethought. I do not mean to paint with so broad a brush as to lump everyone who disagrees with me into that category. But there are some...

You guys (and gals) should have seen the pounding I took at roadfly. What went on over there was beyond juvenile. Name calling. Obsenities and other aspersions were just heaped my way. A real mob mentality that just piled on after a ringleader called me an @$$hole and a loser. I have now deleted that site from my favorites menu as a result and I recommend everyone else do so also. It is not a place to go for intelligent discussion or help with a problem. (It seems more like a place to go when you want to be with people who believe owning a BMW compensates for an anatomical inadequacy).

On the other hand, the thread I started at e46fanatics met with mostly positive replies. People there generally understood what I was doing. Most replies thought I had every right to be p!ssed off about it, and wished me luck. That thread died last week because there was no one else heaving missives at me of why I am: a) wrong that its a defect; b) wrong that I can start a class action about it; c) pathetic for pursuing so minor a complaint; d) the embodiment of everything that's wrong with this country and its legal system; d) a loser for daring to have a problem with the ultimate driving machine.

As long as people still keep this thread alive, I will continue to answer. We are approaching 5000 views now. New people who are affected keep contacting me at the email address I set up for this purpose. According to the lawyers, the response I have gotten has been remarkable. I think they would love for me to teach them about what I did to help them find plaintiffs to join other cases they have. It has been that successful.

If you are affected by the radio defect and you have not read the whole post, please read the post that started this thread and contact me at [email protected] if you want to join.

Thanks.


----------



## BradATL (Apr 30, 2003)

Named Plaintiff said:


> I have taken some heat here from some people who think it is a de minimus matter and have called me pathetic for wasting my time on this (but I ask who is the more pathetic: the person pursuing a class action for a perceived wrong, or the internet geek  who is getting all hot and bothered about an issue that does not concern them in any way, shape or form and who is following a 162 post long thread on a web board for several weeks?)


Amen, brother!!! Why are all these people getting hot and bothered about an issue that doesn't even concern them in any way?! Your original post described the problem you are experiencing, and asked for people to contact you if they are experiencing the same problem. Pretty simple, folks. If you are experiencing the same problem, then contact Named Plaintiff and share your experience. If you HAVEN'T experienced this problem, then move on to the next thread. Pretty simple.


----------



## Plaz (Dec 19, 2001)

BradATL said:


> Amen, brother!!! Why are all these people getting hot and bothered about an issue that doesn't even concern them in any way?!


Frivilous lawsuits should concern us all. Especially when they work to raise the price of our next Bimmers even higher. That's why.


----------



## Parump (Dec 25, 2001)

If named plaintiff is truly genuine, why hasn't he posted the name of the high profile legal firm supposedly willing to file the lawsuit? I can't imagine why the law firm would be adverse to the publicity. This maybe a scam.


----------



## SanDiegoShaun (Jul 24, 2003)

Plaz said:


> Frivilous lawsuits should concern us all. Especially when they work to raise the price of our next Bimmers even higher. That's why.


Actually the cost of the Bimmer would only go up if BMW lost in court. Even if that happend I am sure the judgment would not make much of an inpact on there bottom line. If they lost then they obviously were wrong in this matter. If they win then you have nothing to worry about since I am pretty sure all of there attorneys are already on retainer and BMW will not be out much. So I am not sure I see how if BMW is in the right and wins the cost of your next BMW will go up.


----------



## SanDiegoShaun (Jul 24, 2003)

Parump said:


> If named plaintiff is truly genuine, why hasn't he posted the name of the high profile legal firm supposedly willing to file the lawsuit? I can't imagine why the law firm would be adverse to the publicity. This maybe a scam.


Actually I can vouch for Named Plaintiff on this one. After my post Named Plaintiff emailed me the Name of the Firm and the attorney handling the case as well as contact information and a web site. I have to say they appear to be a very heavy hitter and list some pending lawsuits against some very big players.


----------



## epc (Dec 24, 2001)

SanDiegoShaun said:


> I am sure the judgment would not make much of an inpact on there bottom line. If they lost then they obviously were wrong in this matter. If they win then you have nothing to worry about since I am pretty sure all of there attorneys are already on retainer and BMW will not be out much. So I am not sure I see how if BMW is in the right and wins the cost of your next BMW will go up.


I'm not passing judgement on Named Plaintiff's course of action here. However, if many people think like you, and if many of them decide to file suits as well, then 1) BMW's retainer fees go sky high (and we're not talking about the suits' merits here), and 2) the pressure begin to mount for BMW to settle and pay out just to get rid of suits (again, not a matter of right and wrong here). The result of 1 and 2 is higher cost for consumers. It's one thing that 1 company is really screwing up and is being sued left and right. It's another when the company is being sued by many people who think like you and who file just for the hell of it (don't mean that you do).


----------



## rwg (May 10, 2002)

SanDiegoShaun said:


> Actually the cost of the Bimmer would only go up if BMW lost in court. Even if that happend I am sure the judgment would not make much of an inpact on there bottom line. If they lost then they obviously were wrong in this matter. If they win then you have nothing to worry about since I am pretty sure all of there attorneys are already on retainer and BMW will not be out much. So I am not sure I see how if BMW is in the right and wins the cost of your next BMW will go up.


 :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

The plaintiffs of a class action can convince an attorney to bring the suit and not pay him. The attorney expects to get paid from the defendant. The defendant, BMW in this case, has to HIRE attorneys to deal with the issue. It's expensive. In fact, it's ridiculously expensive. Insurance companies don't like to see law suits filed. They raise your rates.

Retainers generally don't mean that you get unlimited legal services for a set time period. They are an amount of money paid up front for services provided in the future. They are favored by attorneys because clients often don't like to pay the bill after the threat of the legal issue is settled. I am sure BMW pays their bills and I wouldn't be surprised if they didn't use the retainer system at all. Even if they did, they still have to pay for the work their attorneys do to defend against suits.

If the retainer was for "unlimited legal services," the law firm is not going to lose money. If the amount of work they are doing exceeds the value of the retainer, they are going to raise the retainer requirements.

I make no comment about the validity of this particular lawsuit. I am not trying to attack you personally, either, Shaun. But all of you that are participting in the discussion should all at least try and understand why some people like Plaz are so upset by this. Filing a lawsuit against BMW (or any other business) raises their expenses directly and raises the costs of their products indirectly. It's a fact of life and part of the cost of doing business.


----------



## SanDiegoShaun (Jul 24, 2003)

BMW has a very simple answer to keeping there legal costs down, TAKE CARE OF THE CUSTOMER. It is clear BMW NA knows about this issues, this thread alone has had thousands of views and BMW representatives are reading often in here.

BMW NA has chosen not to fix the issue and take the risk of being sued. They probably feel someone will never go through with it and if they do the only thing BMW will have to do is fix the problem or hand over some money, which they would have to do anyway if the fix it now. They can't just fix it now for one person they would have to issue a service bulletin and this would cost them either way. It is clear that they choose to roll the dice and take the chance, assuming that the worst is they will have the addition of legal fees if someone actually goes though with it and they lose. This is obviously worth the risk and loosing a customer is obviously not an issue either as they have so many that apparently support them regardless of how they treat their customer.



epc said:


> I'm not passing judgement on Named Plaintiff's course of action here. However, if many people think like you, and if many of them decide to file suits as well, then 1) BMW's retainer fees go sky high (and we're not talking about the suits' merits here), and 2) the pressure begin to mount for BMW to settle and pay out just to get rid of suits (again, not a matter of right and wrong here). The result of 1 and 2 is higher cost for consumers. It's one thing that 1 company is really screwing up and is being sued left and right. It's another when the company is being sued by many people who think like you and who file just for the hell of it (don't mean that you do).


----------



## SanDiegoShaun (Jul 24, 2003)

Thanks for your post and the way it was worded, glad to see some class in here. What I was trying to say was I am sure BMW has numerous attorneys that our in-House counsel and a significant legal dept. They would do the majority of the the work as well as prepare information for any trial or defense. I am sure any retainer agreements BMW has with outside counsel has a specific amount of hours built it for various types of services and a discounted rate for additional hours for various things. Bottom line BMW and the bean counters determine the risk of every specific situation and decide the risk vs reward before deciding to stone wall a customer or a issue. This lawsuit would have very little affect on BMW's financial unless they lost and if this happens they were obviously in the wrong.



rwg said:


> :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
> 
> The plaintiffs of a class action can convince an attorney to bring the suit and not pay him. The attorney expects to get paid from the defendant. The defendant, BMW in this case, has to HIRE attorneys to deal with the issue. It's expensive. In fact, it's ridiculously expensive. Insurance companies don't like to see law suits filed. They raise your rates.
> 
> ...


----------



## Terry Kennedy (Sep 21, 2002)

SanDiegoShaun said:


> BMW has a very simple answer to keeping there legal costs down, TAKE CARE OF THE CUSTOMER. It is clear BMW NA knows about this issues, this thread alone has had thousands of views and BMW representatives are reading often in here.


As I said in my earlier reply here, while I don't have this problem, I see a disturbing trend where BMW tries to portray a malfunction as a "normal operational characteristic" (their words) of the vehicle.

It is obvious that they can design, specify, and/or purchase a system that is reliable - you don't hear many reports of the cars going up in flames, or airbags going off for no reason. But they have apparently decided that it isn't worth the effort or expense to ensure that level of reliability in non-critical systems.

I would hope that this type of lawsuit (or even the threat of one) would simply encourage them to not pass off these problems as "normal operational characteristics".


----------



## SanDiegoShaun (Jul 24, 2003)

Well said!



Terry Kennedy said:


> As I said in my earlier reply here, while I don't have this problem, I see a disturbing trend where BMW tries to portray a malfunction as a "normal operational characteristic" (their words) of the vehicle.
> 
> It is obvious that they can design, specify, and/or purchase a system that is reliable - you don't hear many reports of the cars going up in flames, or airbags going off for no reason. But they have apparently decided that it isn't worth the effort or expense to ensure that level of reliability in non-critical systems.
> 
> I would hope that this type of lawsuit (or even the threat of one) would simply encourage them to not pass off these problems as "normal operational characteristics".


----------



## jvr826 (Apr 22, 2002)

becki said:


> i guess i am the only one that has read this, that has the same problem, and has the guts to post on this one-sided thread.
> i noticed it the day i picked up the car from the port at baltimore (i never listened to the radio much in germany, for the 2 weeks i drove it around there before shipping it).
> it was SOOOO noticable that i thought someone screwed with my car in the shipment, and i went so far as to bring it to an audio place in northern dc (i was staying in southern md, before heading out on a cross country drive [1-way] to oklahoma). they could not duplicate the problem, and of course i sounded like a fool...
> 
> ...


I have it too and I drive a 5er with nav. I can probably count on one hand the number of times I've experienced "stereo" reception while listening to FM. I drive on I280 in the Bay Area regularly and listen to a pretty high powered station (KFOG) and don't get stereo signal very much. They even have 2 broadcast centers - one in SF and another in San Jose on a different frequency. I have a 1999 Ford F150 with 100k miles and a 4 preset AM/FM stereo radio that gets better reception than my $50k BMW. I think it was even under water at some point - i got it used.

This is my second E39 and I had an E36 prior to that. My feeling is the sound systems in these cars just plain suck azz for the money you spend for the car. However, the sound system is not the main reason I drive it. I had a 1995 Mustang GT with the best factory sound system I ever heard in my life - Mach 460 baby! It rocked and had crystal clear FM reception no matter where I was. Incidentally, although the tone quality of the 1999 non nav system was equally as disappointing, I believe the FM reception was quite good - at least I don't remember having a problem with it.

I have not mentioned this problem to a dealer yet cuz basically they are gonna say 'cannot reproduce" just like most of the other minor things I mention to them. I have a seat click issue that is making me to want to rip the thing out and toss it over an embankment and just sit on the floor. They can't reproduce it - of course not, they put a 4' tall 80# kid in there, move the seat as far up as possible and can't hear it. Well guess what? It doesn't make any noise when it's empty either! And I get unlimited MPG when the car is parked and not running too!

I also paid $1800 for a nav system that is slower to respond than my first PC. When I'm in an unfamiliar area I hit "info on location" for a restaurant and 7-11 shows up. WTF is that all about? By the time I choose one and have it activated, I've driven by the exit and have to do it all over again. The resolution? Shell out $1500 to upgrade to the DVD based unit.

But I love driving the car regardless. I wonder if the M5 guys have the FM problems. You can bet they'd notice it.

Edit: btw, I'm no EE, but I'd bet a dollar that the satellite antenna is interfering with the FM antenna. The sat is under the rear deck while the FM is in the rear window. I believe the "tuner pack" for both nav equipped and non-nav cars are the same part numbers along with the non-dsp amplifiers, also the same. Go figure. Anyone with the problem try to disconnect the sat antenna and see what happens? I haven't, not sure where I'd find the plug without doing major surgery, but if someone can find it in the ETK I'd be willing to experiiment.


----------



## Ovidiu (Jan 18, 2004)

Plentiff:

First of all i want you to know that i'm in your corner.
First car a owned worth 1k and the audio system i added worth another 1k. Since then, every time i changed my car, the best audio system available was a must.

I have to say that i hate this kind of random occuring malfunctions that are so frequent in the late BMW models. For e.g.: active steering on E60. I went to the dealership, they "tested" the car, the fault did not occur, they said there was nothing wrong whit the car, they gave me some look and sent me home. Imagine how i felt after paying 100k for a car! After 2 months they told me they have a software upgrade that fixes my problem.
Is that the way to treat your customers?



Named Plaintiff said:


> My dealership was ready to order me a new car when BMWNA informed them that it is likely that an 04 equipped with nav would have the same problem. I asked BMW to do one of three things 1) fix the car (they couldn't do it) 2) give me a new car without this problem (they could not guarantee me that the new car would not have the same problem) 3) buy the car back from me (they told me no).


Regarding the quoted paragraph: Since your fault is occuring to a small percentage of the cars, why did you not take the chance to have your car changed? It might have worked properly...


----------



## Terry Kennedy (Sep 21, 2002)

Ovidiu said:


> I have to say that i hate this kind of random occuring malfunctions that are so frequent in the late BMW models. For e.g.: active steering on E60. I went to the dealership, they "tested" the car, the fault did not occur, they said there was nothing wrong whit the car, they gave me some look and sent me home. Imagine how i felt after paying 100k for a car! After 2 months they told me they have a software upgrade that fixes my problem. Is that the way to treat your customers?


I think Named's problem is worse, since he has a problem the dealer _can_ reproduce, and (IIRC) BMW field support eventually told his dealer to stop trying to fix it.

I can understand the position the dealer is in on the "cannot reproduce" problems - BMW will only reimburse them if there is an actual fault (either logged in the car's memory, or a burned out or inoperative component). Various parts get sent back to BMW for failure analysis, and if there isn't a fault, the dealer gets denied warranty reimbursement. On a new model car, there isn't enough field experience to know what the likely causes are for faults the dealer can't reproduce. Once there is field experience, they seem to have done the right thing and contacted you.

You can always take a picture (or have someone videotape the problem) to prove to the dealer that you're not making the problem up. Unfortunately, there are customers who make up problems, which ruins it for the rest of us.


----------



## Ovidiu (Jan 18, 2004)

Terry Kennedy said:


> You can always take a picture (or have someone videotape the problem) to prove to the dealer that you're not making the problem up. Unfortunately, there are customers who make up problems, which ruins it for the rest of us.


Like this, you mean.
Still they said there was nothing they could do about it!
And they didnt contacted me. I had to go back with another problem.


----------



## phlsteve (Jul 21, 2003)

*Pesky BMW Issues*

So earlier in the thread someone said something about fervent BMW fans being apologists. I'm a fervent fan, but not an apologist. I have an '02 325 ci and have had way more problems with it than I would have expected for my first bmw... peeling interior trim, intermittant power up of one of my xenon headlights, bad am reception, etc, etc...

I've come to terms with the fact that if I want to drive a German car, which I do because I prefer the feel of the car on the road more than any other, I have to take my lumps. Life is sometimes about the trade-offs we make. We all know that our lovely little cars aren't known for their quality non-mechanical craftsmanship- and anyone who does a teeny bit of research before buying a car knows it too. Consider yourself lucky that you didn't buy a VW.

I think it's fair to say that the "plaintiff" deserves a working radio if he paid for it. It's also fair to say it's a minor issue. It's most accurate to say that he feels worse than he should due in part to the poor BMW customer service. Those folks at BMW need to be empowered to take a less Draconian approach to the feelings of their customers. We all know that these pesky little issues exist and we all know that the BMW customer service folks don't care. But I also know that, for the money, my 3-series is the best ride out there for me.

Either suck it up or sell the car.... If you do go through with this lawsuit, make sure the lawyers are contractually obligated to the Class that they will not accept a payment unless they negotiate in the settlement an agreement by BMW to fix your issue. Otherwise, you'll be no richer, no more satisfied and have been played by both BMW and the lawyers.

---
One's thing's for sure.. you'll never see a class action suit against a class action attorney.


----------



## gray330 (Feb 21, 2002)

*News Item*

Prospects Bright for Passage of Class Action Legislation
The National Law Journal

The U.S. Senate, historically hostile to "tort reform" legislation, may take up new restrictions on class actions this week with a high probability of final passage. The class action legislation is one of a trio of changes in the tort system sought by President Bush and the nation's business community. In his State of the Union address last week, the president called for an end to "junk" and "frivolous" lawsuits, many of which are state class actions, according to business and Republican lawmakers.

:rofl:


----------



## xfactor (Nov 5, 2003)

Bush's plan has nothing to do with limiting frivolous lawsuits. It simply affects those lawsuits that are successful. Personally, I find nothing funny about his plan.


----------



## Mig29 (Sep 9, 2002)

Tyrone said:


> I'm not sure if this has been mentioned, but without reading all of the replies, I want to say that BMW is working on a fix. I have no additional details but here is the information. It only applies to Bordmonitor radios
> 
> Service Measure
> 
> ...


*03/24/2004* 
I guess he got their attention. :thumbup:

I wonder if I should sue them (CAL of course) for not releasing BT retrofit for 2001MY 3ers.
:wink: :wink:


----------



## LeucX3 (Dec 26, 2001)

Mig29 said:


> *03/24/2004*
> I guess he got their attention. :thumbup:
> 
> I wonder if I should sue them (CAL of course) for not releasing BT retrofit for 2001MY 3ers.
> :wink: :wink:


I wonder if we can sue them for 'designing ahead of the times'. They're designing for 2025 and it's only 2004. I want my 21 years of evolutionary design back.


----------



## Named Plaintiff (Jan 6, 2004)

Mig29 said:


> *03/24/2004*
> I guess he got their attention.


Ya think?


----------



## mikemac (Apr 7, 2004)

xfactor said:


> The fact that so few people have even reported problems leads me to believe the problem exists only in a small number of decks. Replacing the head unit (or perhaps the wiring) should fix the problem.


Well I think you can add me to the list. I have a 2004 330Ci with Nav and premium pkg and am just getting used to the car. I have seen this too but thought that the system was just being sensitive to speed variation. However there is no given speed at which it happens, its just a random thing.


----------



## BradATL (Apr 30, 2003)

Parump said:


> Although I am not a lawyer, I don't know how poor FM reception on a radio with apparent RF interference from the NAV antenna be can be construed as "deliberate malfeasance." Let's assume that the suit is filed, does Named Plaintiff expect BMWNA to retrofit all 3 series cars with an updated radio/NAV system?


Thank God for people like Named Plaintiff. Finally, BMW has gotten their heads out of their arses to address this problem as evidenced by the service bulletin posted above. BMW would have never addressed this problem IN A MILLION YEARS if people like Named Plaintiff didn't complain and/or threaten lawsuits.

Would you same pansy losers who have criticized Named Plaintiff for expecting the damned radio in his $45K car to work return a $75 toilet to Home Depot if it leaked? I bet you would.

I am convinced that most of the freaks who have posted against Named Lawsuit on this thread either (1) don't own a BMW or (2) obtained their BMW through inheritance or as a gift. If you haven't built your own wealth through your own hard work, then I guess you'll never understand.


----------



## gray330 (Feb 21, 2002)

BradATL said:


> Thank God for people like Named Plaintiff. Finally, BMW has gotten their heads out of their arses to address this problem as evidenced by the service bulletin posted above. BMW would have never addressed this problem IN A MILLION YEARS if people like Named Plaintiff didn't complain and/or threaten lawsuits.
> 
> Would you same pansy losers who have criticized Named Plaintiff for expecting the damned radio in his $45K car to work return a $75 toilet to Home Depot if it leaked? I bet you would.
> 
> I am convinced that most of the freaks who have posted against Named Lawsuit on this thread either (1) don't own a BMW or (2) obtained their BMW through inheritance or as a gift. If you haven't built your own wealth through your own hard work, then I guess you'll never understand.


 :bareass: :flipoff:


----------



## LeucX3 (Dec 26, 2001)

rumratt said:


> .


:rofl:

I just don't care because I didn't buy my BMW's for their radio reception. If i wanted something really good to listen to, i'd go aftermarket.


----------



## LeucX3 (Dec 26, 2001)

BradATL said:


> I am convinced that most of the freaks who have posted against Named Lawsuit on this thread either (1) don't own a BMW or (2) obtained their BMW through inheritance or as a gift. If you haven't built your own wealth through your own hard work, then I guess you'll never understand.


I think you have us confused with e46fanatics. Different board.


----------



## swchang (Oct 5, 2003)

Leuc330Ci said:


> :rofl:
> 
> I just don't care because I didn't buy my BMW's for their radio reception. If i wanted something really good to listen to, i'd go aftermarket.


I don't think you can go aftermarket if you have NAV...


----------



## sstuner (Mar 30, 2004)

Named Plaintiff said:


> Dear Alex:
> 
> Understood. My purpose in posting was not to inflame but to inform. There are similarly situated people like myself (I have identified about a dozen previous posters to this board with this same problem) who should know about what is about to happen.
> 
> ...


good day all

so you are suing BMW for a radio problem.

what are you hoping to gain by this???

get your radio fixed i gather and at what cost to everyone else..... hey if they know about the problem then sure make them fix it but do you reraly have to go with the class action deal there.....

it has been my experience that if you threaten to stand out front of the dealership with s sign telling people not shop there it works, got a new engine in my truck for free. not everything has to go to the courts.

just my 3 cents worth


----------



## kurichan (May 1, 2004)

I've never seen such a collection of clueless people throwing around opinions like they know what they are talking about.

I know a bit (a lot) about this subject. Unless the original poster is hallucinating, it sounds to me like there is sufficient evidence that BMW is guilty of fraud (check on the definition).

So he should just put up with it?

I don't get it... Whether it's FM reception, exploding fuel tanks, or whatever, fraud is fraud. If corporations aren't checked and continue to flaunt such behavior and it becomes an acceptable part of corporate culture, FM reception can become exploding fuel tanks.

My post above is serious, but to add some levity, why not a class action suit against BMW's new design team for mass pain and suffering... Will the E46 be the last gorgeous BMW... Oh the thought of it...


----------



## pony_trekker (May 26, 2003)

kurichan said:


> . . .
> I know a bit (a lot) about this subject.
> 
> My post above is serious, but to add some levity, why not a class action suit against BMW's new design team for mass pain and suffering... Will the E46 be the last gorgeous BMW... Oh the thought of it...


Apparently you don't know that much. You can't file a class action for pain and suffering because my pain is different from your pain. Thus no commonality this no class certification. Go reread Ortiz v. Fibreboard.


----------



## Mysticblue325i (Oct 31, 2003)

kurichan said:


> I've never seen such a collection of clueless people throwing around opinions like they know what they....


:blah: :blah:



kurichan said:


> FM reception can become exploding fuel tanks.


:lmao: :lmao: :lmao:
Yeah, thats likely!


----------



## kurichan (May 1, 2004)

Mysticblue325i said:


> :blah: :blah:
> 
> :lmao: :lmao: :lmao:
> Yeah, thats likely!


Take things out of context...

Typical.


----------



## kurichan (May 1, 2004)

pony_trekker said:


> Apparently you don't know that much. You can't file a class action for pain and suffering because my pain is different from your pain. Thus no commonality this no class certification. Go reread Ortiz v. Fibreboard.


Read again. I was kidding about the pain and suffering


----------

