Topic: Out Of Warranty Corolla Owner Takes Toyota To Court, Wins

[BradT]

It would be interesting to see the details of this case.  Quite simply, I don't see how a manufacturer could be held liable 5 years after the powertrain warranty has expired, and nor should they be held liable for a previous owners negligence.  In fact, if the resultant failure was because of this, the manufacturer should be able to go after the previous owner.

Did you have issues with your EGR valve in your Protégé?  Did Mazda cover the cost of the replacement or did you foot the bill?

[mixmanmash]

It would be interesting to see the details of this case.  Quite simply, I don't see how a manufacturer could be held liable 5 years after the powertrain warranty has expired, and nor should they be held liable for a previous owners negligence.  In fact, if the resultant failure was because of this, the manufacturer should be able to go after the previous owner.

Did you have issues with your EGR valve in your Protégé?  Did Mazda cover the cost of the replacement or did you foot the bill?

Lol.  333000kms now and never had an issue with the EGR.  As an aside, you can get the new style EGR for the Protege that has a water jacket to keep it warm (i.e. dry up the moisture) that solves this issue for under $200.  It comes complete as a kit with gaskets, water lines, etc.  In fact, this revised part is only available in Canada.  I know many people on the Protege forums in the US that have ordered the part from Canada.  Pretty simple install IMHO.

Unless there was a recall issued, I wouldn't be barking at Mazda to foot the bill.  I don't think that many Corollas of that era had transmission issues.  I'm willing to be this is a one off case, probably related to lack of maintenance or abuse.

[Snowman]

Toyota not only cheap on the interior parts but also on hiring the lawyer...

My vote is stupid.

Quit whining. It's not like Toyota doesn't have its problems...like with the Camry Hybrid.

I don't care who made the car, that is not what we are debating here....or did you miss that part 

[johngenx]

Trolls have difficulty with reading comprehension.

[99 Silver]

Small claims court is the root of the problem here.

My experience in Ontario being a defendant in small claims actions gives be the opinion that the court is BS.  The judge hears the evidence but isn't bound by case law.  If they see you as having deep pockets, he will side with the other party most times.

[Gardiner Westbound]

The Great Diversified Dominion lacks the strong consumer protections Americans enjoy. The automaker lobby has ensured no lemon or right to repair laws reduce their profits. Civil servants will not rush to your rescue if the manufacturer refuses to accept responsibility for the issue.

Small Claims Court, the kiddie table of the justice system, is presided over by arrogant, imperious government patronage appointees, many second rate hacks who couldn’t find a clue if you spotted them the “cl” and the “e”. Often retreaded politicians, bagmen, apparatchiks, girlfriends, hangers-on, and judge-wannabe civil servants, they dine at the taxpayers’ trough. Experienced plaintiffs and defendants know judgements often reflect the judicial whim of the day. For the $75 filing fee it's often worth the gamble.

Litigation can be a risky proposition. There are no guarantees and the loser is usually ordered to pay part of the winner’s legal expenses. A settlement, with the certainty it provides, is often superior to going to trial. Make a realistic assessment of your best and worst case scenarios. Look at your potential liability to pay the other side’s legal costs if you lose. Submit a fair settlement offer. Avoid the courtroom if you can.

[ArticSteve]

Small Claim Court Judges are experienced lawyers who are paid by the day @ approx. $700.  The Deputy Judge you encounter first off is to move the cases thru the system and they tend to be pretty brutal.  They write the pretrial report if the parties cannot settle.  He puts a number  $$$ on the claim.  If you as the Plaintiff, go on to a full trial with witnesses, and do not exceed that number, then you pay costs.  Hence, the first "hearing" is usually the most important. 

[X-Traction]

At least here in BC, the courtroom session of a small claims case is preceded by at least one settlement conference.  The settlement conference is run by people with mediation skills, can hear any evidence that would be used in court, but is not conducted under oath.  This saves a huge amount of court costs, but tends to water down the outcome toward finding the point where the parties are willing to go away and leave each other alone (as opposed to a win/lose outcome).

[ArticSteve]

Same here X.  They call it the same thing.  But it's not a sit around the table type of thing.  There is a clerk, everything is recorded and the Deputy Judge sits way up there about 20 feet away and he gets very aggressive.

A year ago, I was the Plaintiff on a slam dunk.  The problem I had was the amount of damages.  Judge literally told me "not a hope in hell" I was getting the 25K maximum in the claim.  Then asked me for my bottom line.  I said $5K.  The insurance lawyer said $200. for costs.  Judge told him 5K.  Lawyer said he wasn't authorized.  Judge told him to leave the court room, make a call and don't come back into the room without the 5K.  I was stunned.  Lawyer comes back with the 5K.  Then as the Clerk drew up the papers, the Lawyer and the Judge, both being graduates of U of T, shot the like best buddies.  It's just a business to these guys.

The most important thing I learned from that experience was to bring a bottle of water with you.  I had a Marco Rubio moment. 

[rrocket]

  I had a Marco Rubio moment.

You mean someone called you the crown prince of the tea party?   

[Black Hatch]

okay this lawsuit/claim is just plain stupid without enough facts unless there was a reason to believe that the Corolla had regular maintenance done then there may be a point.

I guess you can't just choose any Corolla and be sure that they won't break down.

Ie do you homework first

[Gardiner Westbound]

Small Claim Court Judges are experienced lawyers who are paid by the day @ approx. $700.  The Deputy Judge you encounter first off is to move the cases thru the system and they tend to be pretty brutal.

Almost all Small Claims trials are presided over by deputy judges. A referee presides over pre-trial settlement conferences.

Deputy judges are currently paid $537 a day, $67.13 an hour. A 2011, Toronto Star survey reported most earned less as lawyers. It seems the worst lawyers tend to be appointed judges, perhaps because they couldn't earn a satisfactory living as lawyers!

[ArticSteve]

Small Claim Court Judges are experienced lawyers who are paid by the day @ approx. $700.  The Deputy Judge you encounter first off is to move the cases thru the system and they tend to be pretty brutal.

Almost all Small Claims trials are presided over by deputy judges. A referee presides over pre-trial settlement conferences.

Deputy judges are currently paid $537 a day, $67.13 an hour. A 2011, Toronto Star survey reported most earned less as lawyers. It seems the worst lawyers tend to be appointed judges, perhaps because they couldn't earn a satisfactory living as lawyers!

Perhaps you should provide links to your assertions.

The settlement conference is before a judge or referee appointed by the court, with referees being more common in large cities.


http://www.roadwarriors.ca/settlement_conference

Our Judge came from Orangeville and told the other lawyer that he was paid $700. per day plus mileage.  He said he was hoping to get out by 2:00 p.m.  Court starts at 10:00 am so I assume he gets there by 9:00 am.   

[tenpenny]

Although it's understood, one would think that before saying "all" small claims courts do this or do that, you'd say "all in whatever province", since it is a provincial thing, and quite different from place to place.


Sent from my Vic20 using Java Moose

[fixer]

Trolls have difficulty with reading comprehension.

OOPS, you have a corolla.

[Gardiner Westbound]

Perhaps you should provide links to your assertions.

The settlement conference is before a judge or referee appointed by the court, with referees being more common in large cities.


http://www.roadwarriors.ca/settlement_conference

Our Judge came from Orangeville and told the other lawyer that he was paid $700. per day plus mileage.  He said he was hoping to get out by 2:00 p.m.  Court starts at 10:00 am so I assume he gets there by 9:00 am. 

1. ONTARIO Small Claims Court presiding adjudicator: Paragraphs 4- 6.
www.attorneygeneral.jus.gov.on.ca/english/about/pubs/cjrp/050_scc.asp

2. ONTARIO Small Claims Court deputy judge current rates: Article 1(6)
www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/html/regs/english/elaws_regs_080161_e.htm

3. ONTARIO Small Claims Court referee: Rule 21
www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/html/regs/english/elaws_regs_980258_e.htm 

[Noto]

Small claims court is the root of the problem here.

My experience in Ontario being a defendant in small claims actions gives be the opinion that the court is BS.  The judge hears the evidence but isn't bound by case law.  If they see you as having deep pockets, he will side with the other party most times.

You're kidding, right?  Small Claims is 100% bound by case law, but case law is typically easily distinguished, and therefore need not be followed if the case is sufficiently different.

Small claims has simplified procedure and is more befitting disputes that need not be hopelessly complex, like the 3 week trials we deal with.

Deputy Judges are no doubt the problem, but they are not useless - they just tend to use the principles of equality over the principles of law.  The only reason it didn't settle before hand would surely have been because Toyota would have said "our warranty is up, you have no claim, and we'd rather spend $14,000 in legal fees than pay every person who brings a claim against us $1,400 without reason."  It seems absurd, but it ultimately lowers their legal bills in the future for frivolous cases.

Our Judge came from Orangeville

Justice Edwards?  We're buds   Great guy and excellent Judge.

[tooscoops]

i would have thought this was more a contract law situation against the dealership who sold the car. if it was new, then they could go gainst the manfuacturer, but used, especially 7 years old, how can that be an issue with initial build quality? it's obviously that particular car's issue, which falls under the dealer's responsibility to do their due dilligence to discover any faults with the car and give full disclosure to the customer.

i would assume as others have said that this was just a case of it not being worth fighting, especially against a lawyer who could find a way to find more damages and create a hubbub over nothing just to drag them through the mud.

don't agree at all with the outcome... if it was against the dealer, i don't think i'd have a problem with the verdict. seven years is an acceptable time for a transmission on a new car... under one year for a transmission on a used car however most likely falls under not being fit for intended use (depending on what they paid and the disclosures on the car [accident, etc.])

[dkaz]

Bring out the Toyota haters. Honestly we don't know the circumstances. Was he abusing the vehicle? Maybe the car had 400,000km on it. Or he was frequently towing a trailer.

I rented a Mazda 2 through my car co-op with 41,000km on the clock and the transmission sounded terrible and was slipping like no tomorrow. Poor car being in the hands of infrequent drivers who must abuse the hell out of it.

[ArticSteve]

Small claims court is the root of the problem here.

My experience in Ontario being a defendant in small claims actions gives be the opinion that the court is BS.  The judge hears the evidence but isn't bound by case law.  If they see you as having deep pockets, he will side with the other party most times.

You're kidding, right?  Small Claims is 100% bound by case law, but case law is typically easily distinguished, and therefore need not be followed if the case is sufficiently different.

Small claims has simplified procedure and is more befitting disputes that need not be hopelessly complex, like the 3 week trials we deal with.

Deputy Judges are no doubt the problem, but they are not useless - they just tend to use the principles of equality over the principles of law.  The only reason it didn't settle before hand would surely have been because Toyota would have said "our warranty is up, you have no claim, and we'd rather spend $14,000 in legal fees than pay every person who brings a claim against us $1,400 without reason."  It seems absurd, but it ultimately lowers their legal bills in the future for frivolous cases.

Our Judge came from Orangeville

Justice Edwards?  We're buds   Great guy and excellent Judge.

No, my Judge had a difficult last name to pronounce so I just referred to him as "your Honour" and this guy knew the Ontario Libel Law to a tee and as such the insurance lawyer for the Defendants was neutered right off the bat.  Damages were a bit of a to get thru though. 

If you win you think the system good.  If you lose then the opposite.