1 posted on
11/28/2007 2:43:16 PM PST by
SmithL
I guess a voucher to buy a Lexus would be out of the question.
2 posted on
11/28/2007 2:44:05 PM PST by
SmithL
(I don't do Barf Alerts, you're old enough to read and decide for yourself)
To: SmithL
The whole rollover thing was blown out of proportion: if you were a half intelligent driver you wouldn’t lock up the brakes whenever something odd happened, and the brake lockup was determined to be the root cause of the rollovers.
Ford is just trying to put this behind them so they’re paying some inept, incompetent whiners off. Of course the attorneys are the winners here. Just like in the Pinto case.
4 posted on
11/28/2007 2:55:43 PM PST by
Don W
(I wondered why the baseball was getting bigger. Then it hit me.)
To: SmithL
Me suspects Mr. Roddy’s voucher was for a tad more than $500 :)
5 posted on
11/28/2007 2:56:29 PM PST by
upchuck
(Hildabeaste as Prez... unimaginable, devastating misery! She will redefine "How bad can it get?")
To: SmithL
I guess taking mine off of my hands is out of the question as well.
6 posted on
11/28/2007 2:57:37 PM PST by
Corporate Law
(<>< - Xavier Basketball, Perennial Slayer of #1 Ranked Teams)
To: SmithL
It will allow vehicle owners to apply for $500 vouchers to buy new Explorers or $300 vouchers to buy other Ford or Lincoln Mercury products, Roddy told The Associated Press. Customers get vouchers and the lawyers get cash. At a Million vouchers at and average of $400 each, the lawyers should rake in about $100,000,000.00. Not a bad chunk of change. Of the $400 Million in coupons, probably less than 1 in 10 will be cashed. The lawyers will wind up getting more money than the plaintiffs.
I would love it if a judge banged his gavel and said that the lawyers had to accept the same worthless non-transferrable scrip as the plaintiffs. What are they going to do with 300,000 non-transferrable coupons for 10% off a Ford Explorer?
7 posted on
11/28/2007 2:58:04 PM PST by
gridlock
(Recycling is the new Religion.)
To: SmithL
"...plaintiffs in four states who claimed its Explorer sport utility vehicles were prone to rollovers..." This provides the perfect legal precedent for suing Schwinn - bicycles are also "prone to rollovers."
What a bunch of freaking left-coast morons...
8 posted on
11/28/2007 2:58:04 PM PST by
Who is John Galt?
( "He therefore who may resist, must be allowed to strike." - John Locke, 1690)
To: SmithL
I saw an ad for a class action against one of the major cereal manufacturers in the early 1990s and answered it. Since I was using one of those supermarket discount cards, I could demonstrate that I purchased the product. Otherwise, you had to have receipts. So I got the application and mailed it back, waiting to see what would happen. I did it out of curiosity. Sure enough, I got a coupon in the mail for half a buck off the cereal.
What a friggin’ scam. They accuse the maker of ripping off the consumer, collect a fortune in contingent fees from the settlement, and the payback for the so called victims is nothing more than an incentive to do further business with a company that supposedly ripped them off.
10 posted on
11/28/2007 3:34:45 PM PST by
sig226
(New additions to the list of democrat criminals - see my profile)
To: SmithL
Lets see, 1 million people in the class, times $500 per person equals a half billion dollar settlement. With at least 50% fees to the lawyers, that’s a cool quarter billion cash to the lawyers, and hardly anyone will use the certificates.
13 posted on
11/28/2007 4:18:32 PM PST by
norwaypinesavage
(Planting trees to offset carbon emissions is like drinking water to offset rising ocean levels)
To: SmithL
Is the boycott of Ford by the American Family Association still on be cause of Bill Fords support of the gays.He is supposed to be a big financial supporter of their causes.
14 posted on
11/28/2007 4:53:52 PM PST by
G-Man 1
To: SmithL
As usual: Millions for the Lawyers (CASH), and “coupons” for the actual harmed parties.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson