Toyota recall hearings

[DGuller]

I find it funny how just on this page three posters found it fitting to dismiss my knowledge about the inner workings of cars, and none of them either disproved anything factual that I said, nor offered up much knowledge on their own (except for claiming that the engine can overpower the brakes, but nonsense doesn't count).

[Monoriu]

Ok, I have a question.  In my experience, the brake always overrides the accelerator.  Without exception.  I've only driven Camrys before.  So I really don't understand this unintended acceleration problem.  Even if the pedal is stuck, can't you stop the car by braking? 

[DGuller]

Ok, I have a question.  In my experience, the brake always overrides the accelerator.  Without exception.  I've only driven Camrys before.  So I really don't understand this unintended acceleration problem.  Even if the pedal is stuck, can't you stop the car by braking?

The Toyota cars in question did not have the electronic over-ride, if that's what you mean, so if you wanted to drive at full throttle and fully apply the brakes, with both of them working, you could.  You would be slowly slowing down and possibly doing damage to your car, though.

[Berkut]

I find it funny how just on this page three posters found it fitting to dismiss my knowledge about the inner workings of cars, and none of them either disproved anything factual that I said, nor offered up much knowledge on their own (except for claiming that the engine can overpower the brakes, but nonsense doesn't count).

Nobody has disputed the facts about what you have said about how brakes operate - it isn't even under debate.

Mostly they just find it funny that you have held yourself up as some kind of automotive expert. I don't think anything you have said about how brakes work, for example, requires any kind of expertise to find out - I imagine a basic google search could tell one that - so trumpeting that you are correct about how brakes work doesn't actually say anything.

Indeed - even the basis of your claim to expertise is a bit spurious - how does working on a car prject in college tell you how to effectively stop a car that is suffering from this kind of problem? Seems unlikely to have come up, as opposed to simply googling on the problem, which would tell one as much or more.

[dps]

I find it funny how just on this page three posters found it fitting to dismiss my knowledge about the inner workings of cars, and none of them either disproved anything factual that I said, nor offered up much knowledge on their own (except for claiming that the engine can overpower the brakes, but nonsense doesn't count).

Nobody has disputed the facts about what you have said about how brakes operate - it isn't even under debate.

Mostly they just find it funny that you have held yourself up as some kind of automotive expert. I don't think anything you have said about how brakes work, for example, requires any kind of expertise to find out - I imagine a basic google search could tell one that - so trumpeting that you are correct about how brakes work doesn't actually say anything.

[KRonn]

I find it funny how just on this page three posters found it fitting to dismiss my knowledge about the inner workings of cars, and none of them either disproved anything factual that I said, nor offered up much knowledge on their own (except for claiming that the engine can overpower the brakes, but nonsense doesn't count).

I doubt you're referring to me because I haven't tried to dispute, or corroborate, what you say. I just don't know really. My main concern/issue is that these cars go out of control and in at least some or perhaps many of the instances, the drivers are unable to regain control even by taking what would seem correct actions.

[Ed Anger]

I for one, just don't believe a Russian can be an expert. Unless it involves heavy drinking, launching pogroms or making beet soup.

[grumbler]

Nobody has disputed the facts about what you have said about how brakes operate - it isn't even under debate.

The question is not how brakes operate, but how the brakes operated in specific situations.  It is simply not credible to argue that, because one once fastened some lugs nuts on some wheels in a college club,  one knows more about operating vehicles at high speed than people who have actually received training in operating vehicles at high speed and do so for a living.  it is possible to know more than a CHP officer about how to operate vehicles at high speed, certainly; it just requires more qualifications than "I was in a car club in college."

Lack of evidence doesn't become evidence of lack merely because one declares one's self an expert.  CHP training doesn't disappear because a newspaper reporter doesn't include every detail in a story.  Being highly judgmental doesn't improve the quality of judgments.

[DGuller]

Nobody has disputed the facts about what you have said about how brakes operate - it isn't even under debate.

It's not, but it's useful to have a correct understanding of them, given the subject.

Mostly they just find it funny that you have held yourself up as some kind of automotive expert. I don't think anything you have said about how brakes work, for example, requires any kind of expertise to find out - I imagine a basic google search could tell one that - so trumpeting that you are correct about how brakes work doesn't actually say anything.

Several issues with that.  First, is saying something that's not Google-able the standard now?  In that case, I don't think even JR would measure up, I'm sure all the legal stuff he's talking about can be looked up.

Second, that's not even true.  Looking up how brakes work is easy enough, but knowing what happens when you use your brakes in a stuck throttle situation is not.  I didn't try Googling it, but I'm pretty confident that someone who doesn't know much about the subject wouldn't be able to find something useful, and be able to know it's useful.

And that brings me to the third point.  Looking up stuff doesn't take understanding.  Knowing what you need to look up, and knowing how to tell the good info from the garbage, takes understanding.  Google didn't stop grumbler from making a pretty dumb statement about the brakes, for example. 

Indeed - even the basis of your claim to expertise is a bit spurious - how does working on a car prject in college tell you how to effectively stop a car that is suffering from this kind of problem?

It doesn't, and it didn't mean to.  That part was meant to establish that:

1)  I do know how cars work in some detail, as I was one of the people designing and building one up from scratch.
2)  That maybe I have an interest in knowing how cars work, and would therefore be the kind of person who actively makes himself familiar with all sorts of car topics.
3)  That maybe, being a highly intelligent and intellectually curious person, I would know enough about how some systems of the car work to also understand in what circumstances they can stop working.  Knowing that your typical passenger car brakes aren't designed for continuous heavy performance is very useful to know when your throttle sticks.

Seems unlikely to have come up, as opposed to simply googling on the problem, which would tell one as much or more.

So, by that standard, Joan Robinson can't opine on legal matters that he didn't encounter in practice?  Please. 

So let's compare our contributions.  I provided analysis of the situation when stuck throttle happens, and what you should and shouldn't do.  You merely said, and not very accurately, that "I could've Googled that".  Which one of us in this thread made Languish a more informed place?

[DGuller]

I doubt you're referring to me because I haven't tried to dispute, or corroborate, what you say. I just don't know really. My main concern/issue is that these cars go out of control and in at least some or perhaps many of the instances, the drivers are unable to regain control even by taking what would seem correct actions.

I'm not.

[HVC]

In the paper i read that there's a class action lawsuit in the works to sue toyota for the lost value on used cars. I just find that weird and i hope it gets thrown out of court before it goes too far.

[DGuller]

In the paper i read that there's a class action lawsuit in the works to sue toyota for the lost value on used cars. I just find that weird and i hope it gets thrown out of court before it goes too far.

Lost value is not easy to deal with.  What if you crash your car, and insurance pays to have it fixed, but it still loses value nonetheless just because car history shows that it crashed. 

Should insurance pay for that?  No easy answer.  The lost value happened for exactly the same reason the bent fender happened: somebody made a mistake and caused a crash.  But on the other hand, it's an intangible loss.

The same applies to the lawsuit.  People buy cars with a reasonable expectation of its resale value down the road.  It makes sense to buy a more expensive car if its known to depreciate a lot more slowly.  The lost resale value is a real loss to the Toyota owners, and something that was caused by Toyota.  It's not clear to me that such losses should just be the risk that you take when you buy a car, although it's even less clearcut than the insurance example.

[Berkut]

Nobody has disputed the facts about what you have said about how brakes operate - it isn't even under debate.

It's not, but it's useful to have a correct understanding of them, given the subject.

Of course.

Mostly they just find it funny that you have held yourself up as some kind of automotive expert. I don't think anything you have said about how brakes work, for example, requires any kind of expertise to find out - I imagine a basic google search could tell one that - so trumpeting that you are correct about how brakes work doesn't actually say anything.

Several issues with that.  First, is saying something that's not Google-able the standard now?  In that case, I don't think even JR would measure up, I'm sure all the legal stuff he's talking about can be looked up.

If JR came along and said he was a elgal expert because he was in a club in college that sometimes held mock trials, and then when that was rightly dismissed as not impressive, responded with "Yeah, but I was totally right about knowing that you can't force someone to testify against themselves, so clearly I really AM an expert!" then in fact we would (and should) not find his ability to be right about a legal requires no expertise (and isn't even disputed) to not be very convincing that he is in fact some kind of expert - even to the extent that we should assume he is a GREATER expert than someone with actual legal training.

Second, that's not even true.  Looking up how brakes work is easy enough, but knowing what happens when you use your brakes in a stuck throttle situation is not.  I didn't try Googling it, but I'm pretty confident that someone who doesn't know much about the subject wouldn't be able to find something useful, and be able to know it's useful.

I disagree. I just did a google search, and there were lots of articles about how to stop a car in this situation. They pretty much all agree that stomping on the brakes is going to stop the car. Car and Driver even did testing on this, and in every single case, no matter what the throttle was doing, and at speeds up to 120mph, stomping on the brakes stopped the car.

Sounds like useful info to me, and not at all hard to find.

And that brings me to the third point.  Looking up stuff doesn't take understanding.  Knowing what you need to look up, and knowing how to tell the good info from the garbage, takes understanding.

No it doesn't. I can know NOTHING about cars, and read this article:

http://www.caranddriver.com/features/09q4/how_to_deal_with_unintended_acceleration-tech_dept

and know exacty what I need to know, AND know that the article is credible. I don't have to understand how brakes work at all to understand how to stop a runaway car.

So your claim that you understanding how brakes work makes you a more credible expert than some CHP guy is spurious. Indeed, one could know how brakes work, and NOT know how to stop a car in this situation, simply because their knowledge of how brakes work may not extent to unsual circumstances.

Hell, I am certainly an expert on the software system I helped write and maintain, but I can assure you it does shit all the time none of us expect, because we have not seen every possible combination of unusual or unanticipated circumstances.

So let's compare our contributions.  I provided analysis of the situation when stuck throttle happens, and what you should and shouldn't do.  You merely said, and not very accurately, that "I could've Googled that".  Which one of us in this thread made Languish a more informed place?

Since when is anyone goal to make languish a more informed place? Your goal is to impress us all with yet another example of your incredible (and unique) intelligence.

mission: Failed.

As far as useful information is concerned, the practical use of info for the average languish poster as it relates to this issue can be summed up with:

If your car experiences an out of control throttle, stomp on the brakes. It will stop.

[HVC]

The same applies to the lawsuit.  People buy cars with a reasonable expectation of its resale value down the road.  It makes sense to buy a more expensive car if its known to depreciate a lot more slowly.  The lost resale value is a real loss to the Toyota owners, and something that was caused by Toyota.  It's not clear to me that such losses should just be the risk that you take when you buy a car, although it's even less clearcut than the insurance example.

Yeah, but isn't that the risk of buying with the intention of reselling? That the price might not be what you expected? If i buy shares of a company and the shares go down (say for a company mistake, like a bad acquisition) i can't go around and sue the company i bought shares from.

[KRonn]

We'll see where this goes. I just heard it on the morning news today. Now this, along with on going news of the acceleration fiasco, how long it took to address, and still not fixed, and questions about what Toyota knew and when they knew it.

I don't have anything against Toyota; I like their cars and almost bought one last year, buying a Ford instead. But these actions from Toyota seem to me to be blowing up into a major scandal of many proportions.

http://money.cnn.com/2010/02/26/autos/congress_oversight_letter_biller/index.htm


Oversight chief says Toyota withheld documents

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- A key lawmaker on Friday leveled new accusations that Toyota Motor hid evidence regarding vehicle rollover cases.

The Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, headed by Edolphus "Ed" Towns, D-N.Y., held a hearing this week on complaints of uncontrolled acceleration problems in Toyota (TM) cars. Toyota President Akio Toyoda testified.

As part of its investigation of Toyota's handling of safety defects and recalls, the committee had subpoenaed documents from former Toyota attorney Dimitrios Biller.

Biller has been engaged in litigation with Toyota for years. He alleges that the documents in question prove the automaker was aware of and hid safety defects in its vehicles and that he was unjustly terminated.

"We have reviewed these documents and found evidence that Toyota deliberately withheld relevant electronic records that it was legally required to produce in response to discovery orders in litigation," Towns wrote in a letter Friday to Toyota North America President Yoshimi Inaba. "Many of these documents concern 'rollover' cases in which the plaintiff was injured."

Among the documents, the letter said, was a memo sent by Biller in September 2005. In the memo, Biller reminded his supervisor of the need to turn over information from an internal Toyota database regarding known design flaws and countermeasures to deal with them. Such sharing of information is required by law as part of the "discovery" process in a lawsuit.

"Clearly, this information should have been produced in litigation before today." Biller wrote in the memo, as quoted in Towns' letter, "[Toyota] is clearly not producing all of the relevant information/documents in it possession." Finally, Mr. Biller concludes, "We need to start preserving, collecting and producing e-mails and electronic discovery."

Some information from this database was kept in secret "Books of Knowledge" maintained by the company, Biller asserts, according to the letter.

Biller's documents indicated that Toyota entered into multimillion-dollar settlements with plaintiffs whenever the plaintiff's attorneys seemed to be close to uncovering the "Books of Knowledge."

The documents also indicated that Toyota had long known about problems with unintended acceleration, according to Towns' letter.

"Toyota takes its legal obligations seriously and works to uphold the highest professional and ethical standards," Toyota has said previously regarding Biller. "Mr. Biller continues to make inaccurate and misleading allegations about Toyota's conduct. Toyota believes it acted appropriately with respect to product liability litigation."

Toyota spokespeople were not immediately able to respond directly to Rep. Towns' letter.

In a separate action, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration announced it had purchased a Lexus ES350 once owned by Rhonda and Eddie Smith, a couple who testified at Wednesday's hearing regarding sudden acceleration.

Rhonda Smith said she experienced a frightening episode of unintended acceleration in the car in 2006, and that Toyota had failed to adequately respond to her complaints.

"The Smiths' former car is being taken to NHTSA's Vehicle Research & Test Center (VRTC) in East Liberty, OH, where it will be thoroughly studied," the auto safety agency said in its announcement.