Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 02-02-2012, 09:01 AM
 
Location: Sacramento
14,044 posts, read 27,111,771 times
Reputation: 7373

Advertisements

I still don't get the point here.

According to the story:

Peters opted out of a class-action lawsuit so she could try to claim a higher payment for the failure of her Civic to deliver the 50 miles per gallon that was promised when she bought it.


According to the EPA website, the estimated mileage for a 2006 Honda Civic Hybrid is significantly lower, 42 MPG:

http://www.fueleconomy.gov/***/noframes/22643.shtml (broken link)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-02-2012, 09:04 AM
 
Location: By the sea, by the sea, by the beautiful sea
68,277 posts, read 54,017,893 times
Reputation: 40561
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank DeForrest View Post
So you are good with false claims because the government ok's/mandates them?
Specifically?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-02-2012, 09:08 AM
 
Location: OH->FL->NJ
16,934 posts, read 12,480,863 times
Reputation: 8858
Didnt she just get 30 MPG and isnt getting 30 MPG rather than 50 deceptive? Id say 45 was deal with it but 40% less...

>That is so true. I told my son that years ago and he's come back to tell me that it's true.<

LOL the one time Ive been flashed by a car of pretty girls: When I was driving my fathers Jag. Otherwise Im an average at best looking white guy with neither looks nor fame to up my cred.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-02-2012, 09:11 AM
 
Location: Dallas, TX
31,767 posts, read 28,708,320 times
Reputation: 12341
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank DeForrest View Post
Truth in advertising doesn't apply to government mandates?
Setting targets aren't advertisements. And what has the government got to do with this, or is it just the usual anti-government bickering?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-02-2012, 09:16 AM
Status: "Ephesians 6:12" (set 14 days ago)
 
44,987 posts, read 26,136,569 times
Reputation: 24729
Quote:
Originally Posted by EinsteinsGhost View Post
Setting targets aren't advertisements. And what has the government got to do with this, or is it just the usual anti-government bickering?
Sorry you didn't read the article.
Or is this more of your rambling deflection?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-02-2012, 09:20 AM
 
Location: By the sea, by the sea, by the beautiful sea
68,277 posts, read 54,017,893 times
Reputation: 40561
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank DeForrest View Post
Sorry you didn't read the article.
Or is this more of your rambling deflection?
The article says she claims she was promised 50MPG but doesn't state by who. Being that 50MPG doesn't appear in the EPA estimate , what do you have that says the government made that promise?

It'd also be interesting to hear why she's identified as a former lawyer, I would think most don't stop being lawyers unless they're disbarred for some reason.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-02-2012, 09:22 AM
 
Location: Dallas, TX
31,767 posts, read 28,708,320 times
Reputation: 12341
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank DeForrest View Post
Sorry you didn't read the article.
Or is this more of your rambling deflection?
No, a demand for reason and logic over irrational rambling. Deflection is YOUR style and you prove it over and over again as you attempt here. There is nothing about government mandate in this case.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-02-2012, 10:17 AM
 
14,838 posts, read 8,468,189 times
Reputation: 7295
Quote:
Originally Posted by AeroGuyDC View Post
This disgusts me, to be honest. She doesn't deserve a payout. She was not misled. She was misguided by her own ignorance. More importantly, all this does is portray women as being stupid and easily duped. How many women are duped by auto dealers and auto mechanics every single day? There's nothing that can be done about it because it's not quantifiable. But it happens, and it's no secret. So the responsible thing to do is take a competent person with her to help her sort things out. Someone who knows cars and can explain in a non-biased way instead of relying on a SALES person. That's just being a good consumer and applying due diligence.

This woman makes me sick.
I just don't get your attitude ??? You know, I applaud people who have become sick and tired of living in a world of universal deceit, of which this is just one more example, and who choose to do something about it.

I looked at motor trend who lists the vehicle in question as rated 44 mpg for both city and highway mileage ... apparently the battery helps do away with the traditional differences between city and highway driving mileage. So, this woman claims to be getting no better than 30 mpg, while being promised 50. And I can absolutely buy the plausibility of her being told that since the EPA rating was 44 city .. she could expect to get 50 on the highway, and a little less than 44 in the city ... that the 44 was more of an overall average. Seems perfectly consistent with what I've seen occur in the car business (having been personally involved in it at one time in my life), and I don't think it's even remotely close to being an example of consumer ignorance. This woman is a lawyer, for God's sake ... not just your average soccer mom who may be a little more vulnerable to slick salesmen.

The other point was that the car's eco-battery began to deteriorate prematurely ... so, not only was she not getting the 50mpg promised, nor even close to the EPA rating of 44mpg ... but failure of the battery that was not providing the claimed benefits, adding insult to injury.

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.

Why is fraud and false advertising so acceptable these days? We see commercials for food that use fake plastic and wax food that is created that looks NOTHING like the product you'll receive from the particular establishment. We have all sorts of examples of people being sold a total bill of goods regarding expensive products that often don't meet any claims promised, that are virtually worthless for the purpose purchased. This kind of thing used to be against the law. Now it seems to be the rule.

We have crap products being sold today which are purposely built to fail, called "designed obsolescence". This is the mark of a doomed society, for which everything is constructed around a fraudulent foundation. You simply cannot expect a great outcome when the world around you competes for who can be the most successful liars and con artists.

Under these conditions, is it any mystery why doctors now destroy health; or education destroys knowledge ... or Banks destroy the economy ... or government destroys liberty ?

The moment you find yourself disgusted by a person that demands to be treated honestly ... you know your head is screwed on backwards.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-02-2012, 10:22 AM
 
23,838 posts, read 23,030,956 times
Reputation: 9407
Quote:
Originally Posted by GuyNTexas View Post
I just don't get your attitude ??? You know, I applaud people who have become sick and tired of living in a world of universal deceit, of which this is just one more example, and who choose to do something about it.

I looked at motor trend who lists the vehicle in question as rated 44 mpg for both city and highway mileage ... apparently the battery helps do away with the traditional differences between city and highway driving mileage. So, this woman claims to be getting no better than 30 mpg, while being promised 50. And I can absolutely buy the plausibility of her being told that since the EPA rating was 44 city .. she could expect to get 50 on the highway, and a little less than 44 in the city ... that the 44 was more of an overall average. Seems perfectly consistent with what I've seen occur in the car business (having been personally involved in it at one time in my life), and I don't think it's even remotely close to being an example of consumer ignorance. This woman is a lawyer, for God's sake ... not just your average soccer mom who may be a little more vulnerable to slick salesmen.

The other point was that the car's eco-battery began to deteriorate prematurely ... so, not only was she not getting the 50mpg promised, nor even close to the EPA rating of 44mpg ... but failure of the battery that was not providing the claimed benefits, adding insult to injury.

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.

Why is fraud and false advertising so acceptable these days? We see commercials for food that use fake plastic and wax food that is created that looks NOTHING like the product you'll receive from the particular establishment. We have all sorts of examples of people being sold a total bill of goods regarding expensive products that often don't meet any claims promised, that are virtually worthless for the purpose purchased. This kind of thing used to be against the law. Now it seems to be the rule.

We have crap products being sold today which are purposely built to fail, called "designed obsolescence". This is the mark of a doomed society, for which everything is constructed around a fraudulent foundation. You simply cannot expect a great outcome when the world around you competes for who can be the most successful liars and con artists.

Under these conditions, is it any mystery why doctors now destroy health; or education destroys knowledge ... or Banks destroy the economy ... or government destroys liberty ?

The moment you find yourself disgusted by a person that demands to be treated honestly ... you know your head is screwed on backwards.
That's the problem. She TRUSTED government! And then she turned around and SUED a big corporation like any good liberal lawyer is expected to do.

You seem to agree with me that the fault was trusting the MPG ratings, which meant she TRUSTED GOVERNMENT. That makes her very ignorant in my book.

Have you EVER seen a post from me where I proclaim to trust the USG? Then why does it surprise you that I find this woman to be sufficiently ignorant for trusting the USG?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-02-2012, 10:25 AM
 
Location: Dallas, TX
31,767 posts, read 28,708,320 times
Reputation: 12341
Quote:
Originally Posted by GuyNTexas View Post
You know, I applaud people who have become sick and tired of living in a world of universal deceit, of which this is just one more example, and who choose to do something about it.
We agree on this, in fact that is most of my posts on C-D are about. So, let us see...

Quote:
I looked at motor trend who lists the vehicle in question as rated 44 mpg for both city and highway mileage ... apparently the battery helps do away with the traditional differences between city and highway driving mileage. So, this woman claims to be getting no better than 30 mpg, while being promised 50. And I can absolutely buy the plausibility of her being told that since the EPA rating was 44 city .. she could expect to get 50 on the highway, and a little less than 44 in the city ... that the 44 was more of an overall average.
By who? The argument she makes, and you support, can be made for ANY vehicle. Driving style/conditions dictate observed mileage, and that fact is spelled out on EPA estimate stickers. May be she was too dumb to recognize that, and the justice system being dumber for not catching it?

Quote:
This woman is a lawyer, for God's sake ... not just your average soccer mom who may be a little more vulnerable to slick salesmen.
That might explain it. But then, what it won't explain is, why is it Honda's fault?

Quote:
The other point was that the car's eco-battery began to deteriorate prematurely ... so, not only was she not getting the 50mpg promised, nor even close to the EPA rating of 44mpg ... but failure of the battery that was not providing the claimed benefits, adding insult to injury.
Ahem... EPA estimates are NOT a guarantee. Even a lawyer should know that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by AeroGuyDC View Post
That's the problem. She TRUSTED government! And then she turned around and SUED a big corporation like any good liberal lawyer is expected to do.
She trusted government with what? What I see is illiteracy about what EPA estimates entail.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top