Ford: Sue us... screw you!

Page 1 of 2  
Ford refuses to sell CV's to police departments that sue them:
http://www.forbes.com/associatedpress/feeds/ap/2004/09/28/ap1563920.html
I suppose you cannot have your cake and eat it too.
Bob
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
I don't blame Ford for that. What is really odd is why would the sheriff want to buy a model of car he believes to be unsafe? IF he did buy them and one subsequently exploded and killed one of his deputies, he sure would have a lot of explaining to do in court as to why he bought another "unsafe" CV! This is almost to stupid for words.
| Ford refuses to sell CV's to police departments that sue them: | | http://www.forbes.com/associatedpress/feeds/ap/2004/09/28/ap1563920.html | | I suppose you cannot have your cake and eat it too. | | Bob | | | |
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
James C. Reeves wrote:

On Usenet there is no such thing as "too stupid for words."
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Fri, 15 Oct 2004 19:00:47 -0400, "James C. Reeves"

Only in Florida, eh?
Pity!!

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote: | | >I don't blame Ford for that. What is really odd is why would the sheriff want | >to buy a model of car he believes to be unsafe? IF he did buy them and one | >subsequently exploded and killed one of his deputies, he sure would have a lot | >of explaining to do in court as to why he bought another "unsafe" CV! This is | >almost to stupid for words. | > | | Only in Florida, eh? | | Pity!!
I wonder if that sheriff's vote counted last time! ;-)
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
OK - I believe that the newer Fords have a safety guard over the fuel tank and differential so as to minimize the chance of an explosion after a rear-end impact.
Saying they have a right to not sell you a product means that if you send food back to a kitchen because it wasn't served right the first time, they can ban you from the place for life?
If Ford has fixed the cars and eliminated the tendency to explode with a rear-end collision, why should they be afraid of selling more cars to police departments. Maybe this is just Ford's way of coercing law enforcement departments into not suing them?
James C. Reeves wrote:

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sat, 16 Oct 2004, USENET READER wrote:

Y'think?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I'm wondering if that is happening here in Calif. I've seen a couple of Volvo CHP cars recently.
--
Paul O.
snipped-for-privacy@hotmail.com
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
USENET READER wrote:

First off, yes, the food establishment is within their rights to do this.
Second, your comparison isn't quite right. I liken it more this way: if you walk into a restaurant and are served food that causes you to become violently ill, then you take a chance and do it a second time and once again get violently ill, then what is the logic in continuing to frequent that establishment?
Likewise, if you accuse the restaurant of trying to poison you with their food or selling tainted food products, then turn right around and order more of the same food, don't you think the proprietor of said establishment has a right to be skeptical of your claim, AND refuse to serve you to limit their risk?

...because general business practice dictates that if someone accuses you of negligence or making a defective product, even if that claim is untrue, it is not wise to continue to do business with that client because it increases your risk that they'll turn right around and sue you again.

No, I think it's Ford's way of saying the concept of suing a company for defective products and then ordering more of the same makes no sense.
I don't hold Ford blameless, I do think that if you market a vehicle as being particularly suited for police applications, you should not turn around and say things like "what do you expect? Police applications are tough conditions and this car wasn't designed for that!" On the other hand, it is totally stupid for a plaintiff to buy more products that they claim are death traps.
--
E-mail fudged to thwart spammers.
Transpose the c's and a's in my e-mail address to reply.
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Your premise is right on target.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Someone wrote: "I don't blame Ford for that. What is really odd is why would the sheriff want to buy a model of car he believes to be unsafe? IF he did buy them and one subsequently exploded and killed one of his deputies, he sure would have a lot of explaining to do in court as to why he bought another "unsafe" CV! This is almost to stupid for words."
I believe you can blame Ford for design flaw with their product but the real blame is for the drive that hit the rear of the car in the first place. The problem with the Crown Victoria was the gas tank was being puncture by the rear end due to the way the tank was mounted. This was occurring in multiple crashes with a few catching on fire. Ford at first refused to retro fit the cars with a shield to protect the tank. The new models have been modified to protect this problem. I think you can go back to the days that Pintos were catching on fire from rear end collisions. It took several lawsuits before recognized the problem.
Why would the Sheriff want to continue buying the CV is simply for economy reasons. If an officer totals a car in a wreck he can rob parts of the car to fix his other vehicles. If he starts buying other makes and models he limits his used parts available. The Ford CV out last the Chevy Impala and handles better. Ford police package comes prewired for lights, radio, siren, and cage without having to modify the vehicle to install theses items. You can have all this stuff installed by the dealership prior to taking delivery for the state contract price.
Last is the price of the vehicle. In Louisiana the state contract price for a fully loaded CV was 17000 dollars compared to the state price for a Chevy Impala at 16000 and still having to modify the vehicle to install you top lights and other equipment that you must purchase separately.
Sarge
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sat, 16 Oct 2004 00:49:23 -0500, "Sarge"

The Sheriff is suing assembly because he thinks the cars are unsafe. Said Sheriff buys a new CV and gives it to officer X who is rear ended and dies due to fire. Officer X's family sues the city for umpty gazillion dollars because they provided him with a vehicle they already believed was unsafe evidenced by the lawsuit against Ford. Or in this day and age Officer X files a suit against the city without an accident ever taking place because they are requiring him to drive a vehicle they believe to be unsafe for his job.
If you believed a vehicle was so dangerous that you felt the need to sue the manufacturer would you put your family in one and send them out on the 11 ~ 7 shift every night of the week? Seems to me this sheriff is either an idiot of just trying to cash in from Ford.
Steve B.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Sheriff's don't sue. Some pencil neck politician downtown does it because he wants the attention and is otherwise worthless.
: Why would the Sheriff want to continue buying the CV is simply for economy : reasons. If an officer totals a car in a wreck he can rob parts of the car
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
But we are talking about the same state that did not know how to vote also
IceMan

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
| But we are talking about the same state that did not know how to vote also
Good point. I forgot how hard it really is to follow the arrow and push out a "chad". The thing that has yet to be explained is why it was more difficult for Democrats to figure out than any other group.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Since I drove Ford LTD police packages since 1978 they handled far better then the Chevy Impala pr Dodge Diplomats. I know from personal experience that they hold up a lot better in a frontal crash then the Dodge Diplomat since I was involved in two head on collisions. Once a drunk cross the center line and hit me and once I rammed a suspect trying to get away that had shot and wounded a fellow officer.
Other then the transmissions they out lasted any other make out there. I worked in a small department where at one time up to three deputies shared one car. It was not unusual to have a patrol car with 500 to 600 thousand miles on it before it was retired. It was amazing that we could get that out of the cars since we had a shade tree mechanic working on the cars.
I left before the problem with fires accord but I do know one trooper died from burns he sustained when his patrol car was hit from the rear and he was trapped in the vehicle. He would have died in the vehicle if bystanders would not have pulled him from the burning car.
Sarge
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Now, I'm not pulling for Ford, nor do I wish to imply any lack of concern for an officer who was burned from being rear-ended. That said, however, there is an inherit risk involved with carrying around 10 to 30 gallons of a potentially explosive liquid, in ANYTHING. Add to that inherit risk, fast speeds, lots of energy due to the speed and weight of the mediums involved, and your fair share of idiots on the road, and it becomes downright scary. I feel the original lawsuit is bullsh*t. Even a tank, if hit just right could spill fuel and catch fire. It is one of the risks one takes when you get behind the wheel and take off down the road with the other ten million idiots out there. (In my experiece, that percentage of idiots to licensed drivers is probably wayyyyyyy higher.)
P.S. Speaking of idiot drivers...
I drive a 7 mile stretch of very curvy, narrow, no-shoulder, state highway each way to work. This morning, I was behind a bread truck, and a guy in an SUV. We come down a hill around some sharp corners, a nice well banked lefty...an off-camber banked righty, another left, oddly banked, about a 100 yard stretch...another flat right....after this flat right, there begins a minimum-distance passing area on about a 2/10 mile straight going up and over a sharp little hill. Now, you can see vehicles coming toward you over this little hill as you come down the big hill. Naturally, as we come down the hill, a vehicle comes across the opposite hill onto the small straight. The IDIOT in the SUV, decides he doesn't want to follow the bread truck, and whips out to pass him before he even gets around the last right hander going onto the straight. About the time he gets even with the bread truck, here comes the oncoming car.....I thought for sure I was going to witness a fatality. Luckly, the oncoming vehicle see's what's going on, and locks it down, as does the bread truck. The SUV idiot never even slows down...just whips it back in his lane nearly clipping the truck and nearly hitting the oncoming car headon....not even a blip of a brake light....sheeshhh...
It is a shame there is no cell signal in that area....
--
Anthony

You can't 'idiot proof' anything....every time you try, they just make
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
| | > Since I drove Ford LTD police packages since 1978 they handled far | > better then the Chevy Impala pr Dodge Diplomats. I know from personal | > experience that they hold up a lot better in a frontal crash then the | > Dodge Diplomat since I was involved in two head on collisions. Once a | > drunk cross the center line and hit me and once I rammed a suspect | > trying to get away that had shot and wounded a fellow officer. | > | > Other then the transmissions they out lasted any other make out there. | > I worked in a small department where at one time up to three deputies | > shared one car. It was not unusual to have a patrol car with 500 to | > 600 thousand miles on it before it was retired. It was amazing that | > we could get that out of the cars since we had a shade tree mechanic | > working on the cars. | > | > I left before the problem with fires accord but I do know one trooper | > died from burns he sustained when his patrol car was hit from the rear | > and he was trapped in the vehicle. He would have died in the vehicle | > if bystanders would not have pulled him from the burning car. | > | > Sarge | > | > | > | | | Now, I'm not pulling for Ford, nor do I wish to imply any lack of concern | for an officer who was burned from being rear-ended. | That said, however, there is an inherit risk involved with carrying | around 10 to 30 gallons of a potentially explosive liquid, in ANYTHING. | Add to that inherit risk, fast speeds, lots of energy due to the speed | and weight of the mediums involved, and your fair share of idiots on the | road, and it becomes downright scary. | I feel the original lawsuit is bullsh*t. Even a tank, if hit just right | could spill fuel and catch fire. It is one of the risks one takes when | you get behind the wheel and take off down the road with the other ten | million idiots out there. (In my experiece, that percentage of idiots to | licensed drivers is probably wayyyyyyy higher.) | | P.S. Speaking of idiot drivers... | | I drive a 7 mile stretch of very curvy, narrow, no-shoulder, state | highway each way to work. This morning, I was behind a bread truck, and a | guy in an SUV. We come down a hill around some sharp corners, a nice well | banked lefty...an off-camber banked righty, another left, oddly banked, | about a 100 yard stretch...another flat right....after this flat right, | there begins a minimum-distance passing area on about a 2/10 mile | straight going up and over a sharp little hill. | Now, you can see vehicles coming toward you over this little hill as you | come down the big hill. | Naturally, as we come down the hill, a vehicle comes across the opposite | hill onto the small straight. The IDIOT in the SUV, decides he doesn't | want to follow the bread truck, and whips out to pass him before he even | gets around the last right hander going onto the straight. About the | time he gets even with the bread truck, here comes the oncoming car.....I | thought for sure I was going to witness a fatality. Luckly, the oncoming | vehicle see's what's going on, and locks it down, as does the bread | truck. The SUV idiot never even slows down...just whips it back in his | lane nearly clipping the truck and nearly hitting the oncoming car | headon....not even a blip of a brake light....sheeshhh... | | It is a shame there is no cell signal in that area.... | -- | Anthony | | You can't 'idiot proof' anything....every time you try, they just make | better idiots. | | Remove sp to reply via email
Ah but the lawyers have to blame someone since they can't take Mr. Physics to court.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

For what? The SUV idiot would be using one along with whatever other excuses he was using for not driving.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Anthony opined in

point of order...
Did I read that correctly?
I'm not excusing the SUV driver for the attempt to pass there or under those conditions... but answer this:
What would have happened if the SUV driver HAD hit the brakes?
Am I correct in thinking the Oncomer slowed greatly and the Bread truck slowed greatly... thus opening up a slot for the SUV to fit into?
You should be pretty glad that the guy after making ONE dumb mistake didnt make another one.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    Motorsforum.com is a website by car enthusiasts for car enthusiasts. It is not affiliated with any of the car or spare part manufacturers or car dealers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.