Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Agreeing to fix issues with a product in addressing customer complaints is a common thing that happens every day. Providing refunds and allowing returns happens every day. These things do not constitute "out-of-court" settlements.
And I don't care if you have such difficulty being wrong that you'd reach so far into left field to prove you are right.
If it's that damned important .. fine ... you're right ..happens every day. Satisfied?
1) The original MPG for the car was 50 mpg AS STATED by the EPA. this is not what Honda claimed, but what the EPA said it could do. Honda just posted what the EPA provided to them.
2) She didn't say a thing for FIVE years. If she didn't get the gas mileage, then why didn't she take it in in the first couple of months of ownership to have the Honda techs take a look at her car?
3) Honda did their due diligence in trying to offer help to Heather Peters. By offering checkups, to have her car looked over. But she never took up the offers.
4) In 2008, the EPA provided revised MPG for the car. So again, Honda just posted what the EPA claimed.
5) The article does agree (and I do) is that the car didn't get the gas mileage as first stated by the EPA, however, what I don't understand is WHY is Honda at fault, when it is the EPA that provides the MPG statistics?
There is also something inherently wrong with the EPA rating system to begin with ... and it defines our society today ... just a fraud, everywhere you turn ... slight of hand, and false promises abound. Couldn't we all agree that we need to do away with this paradigm of "fine print fraud" ? In the case of EPA mileage ratings ... put up numbers that are actually achievable and not this nonsense about "Your mileage may vary, and this rating is only to be used to compare against other models" nonsense? How about using REAL numbers on all of the models? Couldn't REAL numbers also be compared?
Sure, driving habits do determine actual mileage ... but there could easily be ratings that reflected "typical" driving ... and if the rating is 44mpg, and you only get 40mpg ... that wouldn't be a big deal. But 30mpg is a far cry from 44mpg, with the difference being between a typical midsized car and a full sized pick up truck.
But then again, if the EPA were forced to tell the truth about anything, I think it would be too much for them to cope with.
the EPA does not calculate fuel economy in the same manner that normal people do. they run the cars on a dyno, letting the factory drivers do the driving by the way, and they calculate the fuel economy based on the weight of the emissions produced rather than by the number of gallons used over a certain distance. they also use two different cycles, one city type driving, and one highway type driving. the EPA also allows the cars to be warmed up to proper operating temperature before any testing is done.
at least the road testers in the auto magazines use a driving cycle.
the EPA does not calculate fuel economy in the same manner that normal people do. they run the cars on a dyno, letting the factory drivers do the driving by the way, and they calculate the fuel economy based on the weight of the emissions produced rather than by the number of gallons used over a certain distance. they also use two different cycles, one city type driving, and one highway type driving. the EPA also allows the cars to be warmed up to proper operating temperature before any testing is done.
at least the road testers in the auto magazines use a driving cycle.
Interesting. I'd assume that takes out the wind resistance drag as well then.
the EPA does not calculate fuel economy in the same manner that normal people do. they run the cars on a dyno, letting the factory drivers do the driving by the way, and they calculate the fuel economy based on the weight of the emissions produced rather than by the number of gallons used over a certain distance. they also use two different cycles, one city type driving, and one highway type driving. the EPA also allows the cars to be warmed up to proper operating temperature before any testing is done.
at least the road testers in the auto magazines use a driving cycle.
I don't really care what methods they employ ... they can use tarot cards and crystal balls for all I care, so long as the numbers they come up with have a connection with reality.
Setting up a fuel economy test under conditions that do not reflect real world conditions, which produce mileage figures that cannot be realized by consumers, is at least useless, if not a complete fraud.
Some apparently don't consider it a big deal to see a rating of 44 mpg but only get an actual 30 MPG.
I wonder if those people would be so casual about agreeing to pay a $25,000 sale price for that car, only to have the price jacked up to $33,000 after they took the car home? That's the difference between 30 and 44 ... 32%.
I agree with you; the EPA's testing methods are so sterile and so unlike what real-workld driving conditions are so as to be essentially worthless.
But I also have to ask why did this lady stay silent for five years before she filed her preposterous lawsuit?
It's not a "preposterous lawsuit". And here's why it isn't:
(from a previous post)
She had repeatedly had Honda Certified technicians address terrible gas mileage, sluggish performance, failing auto-stop and rough idle ... and battery not holding a charge, with no satisfactory results ... but an actual worsening of the problem of mileage as they attempted to fix these issues. What made it worse? An (irremovable) software update designed to extend the battery life in response to prematurely failing batteries in those vehicles. Even the Honda Techs told her that the update as designed would reduce effective MPG, obviously in lessening the participation in the battery that is designed to improve gas mileage by providing alternative power train assistance.
Finally, after being told that nothing more could be done, she tried to make contact with Honda Corporate, but they did not respond until after she finally had enough of this BS, and filed a law suit.
Another stupid law suit, showing a legal system error that such nonsense is given the light of day. Take the woman out into the square and lash her for this nonsense. Did anyone query to see if she knew how to drive?
Mitt Romney says he is for the middle class... would she sue him after he proves it isn't true?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
)
