Topic: Automakers named in class-action suit over keyless ignition systems

[mixmanmash]

I wouldn't be quite so quick to ridicule this concern.

How about cars with engine stop-start?  They might not be running when you park, so it would be less apparent that the car is "running".  This feature is becoming increasingly common.

In addition, those of us who grew up with cars that needed to have a key turned to start or turn off are deeply habituated to the action of shutting off the car when leaving it.  On the other hand, with the proliferation of remote starters, push button starters etc. there is a whole new generation of drivers who will never develop the habit of turning the key and so may be far more prone to forgetting to shut off a car.  Not all of these people can be written off as idiots.

Obviously the solution is some sort of automatic shut-off, although it will have to be done carefully so as to not cause frustration when there is a good reason for a car to be running for a long time with no driver interaction.  Or you Albertans will sometimes have to sit on cold seats in the winter.

All the stop start cars I have driven have the engine running once shifted into park...

That seems kind of dumb.  There's not a lot of reasons for having the engine running while in park, but I guess it provides a reminder that the car is enabled to run the engine.

Have you driven a hybrid?  The engine shuts off a lot of the time while stopped, and shifting into park doesn't by itself cause the ICE to start running.  I think the Prius also has a Start button, while the Escape Hybrid used key-in-ignition.  If you walked away from either of these with the ignition still on, they would cycle the ICE on and off to maintain temperatures until they ran out of gas.

So, then that is specific to hybrids and the class action should go after hybrids with keyless systems.

[ArtW]

The people who brought this suit up should be made to pay all the automakers lawyers fees plus for whatever courts time they wasted, have their licence taken away as they are obviously far too stupid to be entrusted with a car and be immediately sterilized to prevent the spread of their filthy seed any further. If you cannot figure out your car is running and you should shut if off, get off my planet.

Well, there is only 350 millions of them south of the border!  Only them (or their effed-up lawyers interpreting their effed-up laws) could bring this up in front of a judge... I'm actually not surprised this happened in the country where you can get millions of $$$ for being stupid not to know the coffee is hot enough to get you scalded while driving, in a country where a thief trying to break and entry through the skylight falls, breaks his legs and is allowed to sues the owner for getting injured on his property, another thief requesting compensation after the moral damages caused by being trapped in the garage (while trying to break and entry) and had to eat dog food for a few days. I'd like to see this "class action suit" brought up in Europe, for example, where, by the way, you don't need to depress the clutch to start a manual car! I'm pretty sure this extra "safety measure" was implemented after a few idiots this side of the pond hit their bumpers while starting their car!

[X-Traction]

I wouldn't be quite so quick to ridicule this concern.

How about cars with engine stop-start?  They might not be running when you park, so it would be less apparent that the car is "running".  This feature is becoming increasingly common.

In addition, those of us who grew up with cars that needed to have a key turned to start or turn off are deeply habituated to the action of shutting off the car when leaving it.  On the other hand, with the proliferation of remote starters, push button starters etc. there is a whole new generation of drivers who will never develop the habit of turning the key and so may be far more prone to forgetting to shut off a car.  Not all of these people can be written off as idiots.

Obviously the solution is some sort of automatic shut-off, although it will have to be done carefully so as to not cause frustration when there is a good reason for a car to be running for a long time with no driver interaction.  Or you Albertans will sometimes have to sit on cold seats in the winter.

All the stop start cars I have driven have the engine running once shifted into park...

That seems kind of dumb.  There's not a lot of reasons for having the engine running while in park, but I guess it provides a reminder that the car is enabled to run the engine.

Have you driven a hybrid?  The engine shuts off a lot of the time while stopped, and shifting into park doesn't by itself cause the ICE to start running.  I think the Prius also has a Start button, while the Escape Hybrid used key-in-ignition.  If you walked away from either of these with the ignition still on, they would cycle the ICE on and off to maintain temperatures until they ran out of gas.

So, then that is specific to hybrids and the class action should go after hybrids with keyless systems.

Nothing in the article said hybrids were excluded from the action, while there's also nothing to say that only hybrids have this problem.

While you said all the cars with engine stop/start you've driven cause the engine to start when shifted into park, do you know if that is true of all non-hybrids with stop/start?

Is there a compelling reason why non-hybrids with stop/start cause the engine to start when shifted into park?  And if not, what's to prevent manufacture of non-hybrids with stop/start that don't run the engine while in park?

[Noto]

I notice that no aftermarket manufacturers were named in the lawsuit. If the lawyers and plaintiffs were serious about this they would have gone after them as well - or is this because, if one has it installed as an aftermarket product you are essentially aware of the pros and cons and sign off on liability? Seems like a trivial case that has not so trivial costs.

Go for the deepest pockets.  Contingency Lawyer Arrangements 101.

I wonder about the standing for this suit (standing, as in "who has the right to bring the lawsuit").  28 plaintiffs, 13 dead...family members?  I suspect some are groups "acting for" the estate of the deceased.  These suits are purely a way to make money.  They'll get something of a settlement, but a smart Defence firm would say, "bring it on, biatch.  We got this."

[mixmanmash]

I wouldn't be quite so quick to ridicule this concern.

How about cars with engine stop-start?  They might not be running when you park, so it would be less apparent that the car is "running".  This feature is becoming increasingly common.

In addition, those of us who grew up with cars that needed to have a key turned to start or turn off are deeply habituated to the action of shutting off the car when leaving it.  On the other hand, with the proliferation of remote starters, push button starters etc. there is a whole new generation of drivers who will never develop the habit of turning the key and so may be far more prone to forgetting to shut off a car.  Not all of these people can be written off as idiots.

Obviously the solution is some sort of automatic shut-off, although it will have to be done carefully so as to not cause frustration when there is a good reason for a car to be running for a long time with no driver interaction.  Or you Albertans will sometimes have to sit on cold seats in the winter.

All the stop start cars I have driven have the engine running once shifted into park...

That seems kind of dumb.  There's not a lot of reasons for having the engine running while in park, but I guess it provides a reminder that the car is enabled to run the engine.

Have you driven a hybrid?  The engine shuts off a lot of the time while stopped, and shifting into park doesn't by itself cause the ICE to start running.  I think the Prius also has a Start button, while the Escape Hybrid used key-in-ignition.  If you walked away from either of these with the ignition still on, they would cycle the ICE on and off to maintain temperatures until they ran out of gas.

So, then that is specific to hybrids and the class action should go after hybrids with keyless systems.

Nothing in the article said hybrids were excluded from the action, while there's also nothing to say that only hybrids have this problem.

While you said all the cars with engine stop/start you've driven cause the engine to start when shifted into park, do you know if that is true of all non-hybrids with stop/start?

Is there a compelling reason why non-hybrids with stop/start cause the engine to start when shifted into park?  And if not, what's to prevent manufacture of non-hybrids with stop/start that don't run the engine while in park?

From everything I have read, it is true of all non-hybrids that have auto start/stop.  These systems have been in Europe for years.  Not sure the manufacturers reasoning, but my guess is to ensure the driver does indeed put the car into an off state.

There is nothing that could prevent the manufacture of a system as you describe.  But you can't put together a law suit on that premise, can you?

[X-Traction]

I wouldn't be quite so quick to ridicule this concern.

How about cars with engine stop-start?  They might not be running when you park, so it would be less apparent that the car is "running".  This feature is becoming increasingly common.

In addition, those of us who grew up with cars that needed to have a key turned to start or turn off are deeply habituated to the action of shutting off the car when leaving it.  On the other hand, with the proliferation of remote starters, push button starters etc. there is a whole new generation of drivers who will never develop the habit of turning the key and so may be far more prone to forgetting to shut off a car.  Not all of these people can be written off as idiots.

Obviously the solution is some sort of automatic shut-off, although it will have to be done carefully so as to not cause frustration when there is a good reason for a car to be running for a long time with no driver interaction.  Or you Albertans will sometimes have to sit on cold seats in the winter.

All the stop start cars I have driven have the engine running once shifted into park...

That seems kind of dumb.  There's not a lot of reasons for having the engine running while in park, but I guess it provides a reminder that the car is enabled to run the engine.

Have you driven a hybrid?  The engine shuts off a lot of the time while stopped, and shifting into park doesn't by itself cause the ICE to start running.  I think the Prius also has a Start button, while the Escape Hybrid used key-in-ignition.  If you walked away from either of these with the ignition still on, they would cycle the ICE on and off to maintain temperatures until they ran out of gas.

So, then that is specific to hybrids and the class action should go after hybrids with keyless systems.

Nothing in the article said hybrids were excluded from the action, while there's also nothing to say that only hybrids have this problem.

While you said all the cars with engine stop/start you've driven cause the engine to start when shifted into park, do you know if that is true of all non-hybrids with stop/start?

Is there a compelling reason why non-hybrids with stop/start cause the engine to start when shifted into park?  And if not, what's to prevent manufacture of non-hybrids with stop/start that don't run the engine while in park?

From everything I have read, it is true of all non-hybrids that have auto start/stop.  These systems have been in Europe for years.  Not sure the manufacturers reasoning, but my guess is to ensure the driver does indeed put the car into an off state.

There is nothing that could prevent the manufacture of a system as you describe.  But you can't put together a law suit on that premise, can you?

Maybe they need to take advantage of the fake exhaust sound feature.  Blast high-volume unmuffled exhaust noise through the sound system until the driver shuts down the ignition - whether the engine was actually running at the time or not.  Or a voice that calls the driver an idiot until they shut off the ignition.

But what about remote starters?  One would think there'd be cases of people remotely starting their cars in their garages and forgetting about it, or kids triggering the remote.

[mixmanmash]

I wouldn't be quite so quick to ridicule this concern.

How about cars with engine stop-start?  They might not be running when you park, so it would be less apparent that the car is "running".  This feature is becoming increasingly common.

In addition, those of us who grew up with cars that needed to have a key turned to start or turn off are deeply habituated to the action of shutting off the car when leaving it.  On the other hand, with the proliferation of remote starters, push button starters etc. there is a whole new generation of drivers who will never develop the habit of turning the key and so may be far more prone to forgetting to shut off a car.  Not all of these people can be written off as idiots.

Obviously the solution is some sort of automatic shut-off, although it will have to be done carefully so as to not cause frustration when there is a good reason for a car to be running for a long time with no driver interaction.  Or you Albertans will sometimes have to sit on cold seats in the winter.

All the stop start cars I have driven have the engine running once shifted into park...

That seems kind of dumb.  There's not a lot of reasons for having the engine running while in park, but I guess it provides a reminder that the car is enabled to run the engine.

Have you driven a hybrid?  The engine shuts off a lot of the time while stopped, and shifting into park doesn't by itself cause the ICE to start running.  I think the Prius also has a Start button, while the Escape Hybrid used key-in-ignition.  If you walked away from either of these with the ignition still on, they would cycle the ICE on and off to maintain temperatures until they ran out of gas.

So, then that is specific to hybrids and the class action should go after hybrids with keyless systems.

Nothing in the article said hybrids were excluded from the action, while there's also nothing to say that only hybrids have this problem.

While you said all the cars with engine stop/start you've driven cause the engine to start when shifted into park, do you know if that is true of all non-hybrids with stop/start?

Is there a compelling reason why non-hybrids with stop/start cause the engine to start when shifted into park?  And if not, what's to prevent manufacture of non-hybrids with stop/start that don't run the engine while in park?

From everything I have read, it is true of all non-hybrids that have auto start/stop.  These systems have been in Europe for years.  Not sure the manufacturers reasoning, but my guess is to ensure the driver does indeed put the car into an off state.

There is nothing that could prevent the manufacture of a system as you describe.  But you can't put together a law suit on that premise, can you?

Maybe they need to take advantage of the fake exhaust sound feature.  Blast high-volume unmuffled exhaust noise through the sound system until the driver shuts down the ignition - whether the engine was actually running at the time or not.  Or a voice that calls the driver an idiot until they shut off the ignition.

But what about remote starters?  One would think there'd be cases of people remotely starting their cars in their garages and forgetting about it, or kids triggering the remote.

Yep, but auto manufacturers probably have deeper pockets than aftermarket companies that manufacture or install remote car starters.  Also, the remote starter for my Odyssey requires a two different buttons to be pressed in a certain sequence in order to start the engine.  Pretty tough to have accidental starting, versus some of the single button starters which could accidentally start just from being in your pocket.

[Cord]

^^ Plus, remote starters do have timers so that they shut off after 10 minutes or so.

[X-Traction]

^^ Plus, remote starters do have timers so that they shut off after 10 minutes or so.

Thanks, I was unaware of that.  Great to learn of something sensible for a change -- if we MUST have remote starters to begin with.

[tooscoops]

ours are 15 minute run times and can go three times before they start thinking, maybe it's an accident (or just plain wasteful!) and don't go for a fourth.

[HeliDriver]

On the Yukon, run time on the remote start is ten minutes and you can only activate it twice.

[mixmanmash]

On the Yukon, run time on the remote start is ten minutes and you can only activate it twice.

Same on the Odyssey.