10R80 Transmission Lawsuit Dismissed

[nick20s]

10R80 Transmission Lawsuit Dismissed

https://www.carcomplaints.com/news/2020/ford-f-150-transmission-lawsuit-dismissed.shtml

Sponsored

 

[Cobra Jet]

I read the entire article.

Here’s how that played out:

Original Complainant who started the CA didn’t have enough facts and/or Warranty Claims to back up the case, period.

IF he had multiple Service Center visits to support his claims, had damages (as claimed by supposed “fires”) and supplied other documented records to support the backbone of his case - he might have had better ground to stand on.

Doesn’t sound like his Class Action Attorneys were any good at supplying facts or any other basis for the claim either.

You can’t start a CA to be a hero and then end up in Court and be like “Um..............”.

To do it successfully, he or his Attorneys should have had every Ford TSB/SSM doc, any internal memos (if could be gained from sources), other F150 docs from online sources and maybe other F150 cases where property damage occurred to support the basis of the CA and his claims.

It doesn’t sound like he had the back up, or that his Attorneys didn’t or that his Attorney’s didn’t file proper motions to retort against any of Ford’s motions or findings.

Now, I don’t peruse the F150 forums - so I can’t answer the statements regarding F150’s going up in flames over 10R80 problems - reading that in the article was news to me. Not saying it didn’t happen, but if it did - the CA Attorneys obviously did not supply enough proof to correlate any fire or property damage to a 10R80, be it original Complainant or others in the CA.

Couid there be another CA? Certainly, but it will only hold ground IF facts are supplied - which is where this case seems to have fallen on its face.

Also, owners MUST let the Vehicle Manufacturer perform any and all diagnosis and repairs - for as long as it may take and/or inconvenience the Consumer. That is the one mistake most do not adhere to and lose their patience. The more proof one can provide of multiple failures AND attempts at repair - WITH supporting documentation (ie: service records with date/time stamps, any correspondence between owner and Dealership or Ford Corp, any phone call records, emails, voicemails, property damage reports, loss of wages,, etc). The more facts and ammo, the better anyone has stacking up a CA or solid case against “XYZ”.

The CA claim was not compelling enough to the Judge and the fact that as stated in the article, basis for the initial CA AND the other claims within, were not established or substantiated.

 

[nick20s]

I read the entire article.

Here’s how that played out:

Original Complainant who started the CA didn’t have enough facts and/or Warranty Claims to back up the case, period.

IF he had multiple Service Center visits to support his claims, had damages (as claimed by supposed “fires”) and supplied other documented records to support the backbone of his case - he might have had better ground to stand on.

Doesn’t sound like his Class Action Attorneys were any good at supplying facts or any other basis for the claim either.

You can’t start a CA to be a hero and then end up in Court and be like “Um..............”.

To do it successfully, he or his Attorneys should have had every Ford TSB/SSM doc, any internal memos (if could be gained from sources), other F150 docs from online sources and maybe other F150 cases where property damage occurred to support the basis of the CA and his claims.

It doesn’t sound like he had the back up, or that his Attorneys didn’t or that his Attorney’s didn’t file proper motions to retort against any of Ford’s motions or findings.

Now, I don’t peruse the F150 forums - so I can’t answer the statements regarding F150’s going up in flames over 10R80 problems - reading that in the article was news to me. Not saying it didn’t happen, but if it did - the CA Attorneys obviously did not supply enough proof to correlate any fire or property damage to a 10R80, be it original Complainant or others in the CA.

Couid there be another CA? Certainly, but it will only hold ground IF facts are supplied - which is where this case seems to have fallen on its face.

Also, owners MUST let the Vehicle Manufacturer perform any and all diagnosis and repairs - for as long as it may take and/or inconvenience the Consumer. That is the one mistake most do not adhere to and lose their patience. The more proof one can provide of multiple failures AND attempts at repair - WITH supporting documentation (ie: service records with date/time stamps, any correspondence between owner and Dealership or Ford Corp, any phone call records, emails, voicemails, property damage reports, loss of wages,, etc). The more facts and ammo, the better anyone has stacking up a CA or solid case against “XYZ”.

The CA claim was not compelling enough to the Judge and the fact that as stated in the article, basis for the initial CA AND the other claims within, were not established or substantiated.

Very well written, as always. Thank you.

 

[Zathras]

It sounds like a somewhat poorly prepared suit. To go up against Ford's army of lawyers, you probably need a case that's practically ironclad in both the legal technicalities and the supporting evidence/documentation.

I do think Ford has some real issues with the A10 as seen from the complaints here and on the truck boards, but it doesn't seem like Ford is doing much about it. Since 2018, I've kind of been expecting Ford to release some kind of major programming update for the A10 to address the complaints of hard shifts and lurching into gear...but the more time goes by, the more it looks like Ford is satisfied the way it is. I know some of this may be due to low-ish fluid from the factory (which is a whole other head-scratcher: you would think every A10 would get a precisely measured, correct fill at the factory--how can you eff that up?)

GM's version of the A10 tends to get pretty good reviews so I don't get what Ford's issue is.

Sponsored