Statement: Toyota Responds to the Disclosure of the Saylor Settlement
12-23-10, 11:53 AM
#1
Lexus Connoisseur
Thread Starter
Statement: Toyota Responds to the Disclosure of the Saylor Settlement
Wow. Bob Baker Lexus vs. Toyota USA. Sounds like someone is about to lose their franchise.
Courtesy: TMS USA
Dec. 23, 2010 – Toyota issued the following statement in response to the disclosure of the Saylor settlement today:
“Toyota and the Saylor and Lastrella families reached a private, amicable settlement through mutual respect and cooperation without the involvement of the courts, so we are disappointed that the amount of this settlement has now been made public against the express wishes of these families and Toyota. As is common in these cases, these parties agreed to keep the amount confidential, in part to protect the families from unwanted solicitations and to allow them to move on from this difficult period. Unfortunately, Bob Baker Lexus, along with the Orange County District Attorney and several news organizations, fought to make the amount of the settlement public, and the court agreed to do so.
“Indeed, Bob Baker Lexus already knew the terms of the settlement. However, Mr. Baker now wants the amount publicized in an apparent effort to shift the focus away from his dealership as he continues to litigate this case with the families.
“Mr. Baker and his dealership continue to ignore the December 2009 San Diego County Sheriff’s Department report on the Saylor accident, which determined that the cause was an incompatible all-weather floor mat from a Lexus SUV model that was installed incorrectly in the ES 350 sedan at the dealership then loaned to the Saylor family by Bob Baker Lexus. Specifically, the report concluded that:
“Our deepest sympathies remain with the friends and family of Mark, Cleofe and Mahala Saylor and Cleofe’s brother Chris Lastrella. However, as in the past, Toyota will continue to defend itself vigorously against the misleading allegations Bob Baker Lexus is making against Toyota. Toyota is not, however, in a position to address the additional negligence claims the families have against Bob Baker Lexus that are independent of Toyota.”
“Toyota and the Saylor and Lastrella families reached a private, amicable settlement through mutual respect and cooperation without the involvement of the courts, so we are disappointed that the amount of this settlement has now been made public against the express wishes of these families and Toyota. As is common in these cases, these parties agreed to keep the amount confidential, in part to protect the families from unwanted solicitations and to allow them to move on from this difficult period. Unfortunately, Bob Baker Lexus, along with the Orange County District Attorney and several news organizations, fought to make the amount of the settlement public, and the court agreed to do so.
“Indeed, Bob Baker Lexus already knew the terms of the settlement. However, Mr. Baker now wants the amount publicized in an apparent effort to shift the focus away from his dealership as he continues to litigate this case with the families.
“Mr. Baker and his dealership continue to ignore the December 2009 San Diego County Sheriff’s Department report on the Saylor accident, which determined that the cause was an incompatible all-weather floor mat from a Lexus SUV model that was installed incorrectly in the ES 350 sedan at the dealership then loaned to the Saylor family by Bob Baker Lexus. Specifically, the report concluded that:
- The accelerator pedal became trapped either in the grooves of the all weather floor mat or underneath it, not allowing the accelerator pedal to return to idle when released.
- The size of the mat with relation to the size of the floor board did not allow room for easy manipulation to clear the pedal (the SUV mat is much larger and thicker than the sedan mat), and
- The plastic retaining clips were not attached, which could allow for the mat to move forward and apply further pressure on the accelerator pedal.
“Our deepest sympathies remain with the friends and family of Mark, Cleofe and Mahala Saylor and Cleofe’s brother Chris Lastrella. However, as in the past, Toyota will continue to defend itself vigorously against the misleading allegations Bob Baker Lexus is making against Toyota. Toyota is not, however, in a position to address the additional negligence claims the families have against Bob Baker Lexus that are independent of Toyota.”
12-23-10, 06:54 PM
#4
Lexus Fanatic
iTrader: (20)
wow, if this was the case where it seems the dealer put the wrong type of floor mat in the loaner car then they're 100% at fault and toyota/lexus is 100% blameless. if toyota/lexus still settled with the family but didn't admit guilt that's very noble of them. the dealership should have settled too if possible. if they're fighting all the way then they're going to lose huge.
edit: yes, it's clearly all laid out here (nice reporting)
edit: yes, it's clearly all laid out here (nice reporting)
Last edited by bitkahuna; 12-23-10 at 06:58 PM.
12-23-10, 07:03 PM
#5
Read the first post, it says so right there, right before the first bullet... it is as you have assumed.
12-23-10, 08:33 PM
#6
Even thought the dealer placed a wrong type of floor mat in the car, I don't think the dealer should be liable. How many times you go to a car wash and they don't secure your floormats after vacuuming your carpets? You can go to an auto parts store and buy aftermarket floor mats that do not fit properly.
As unfortunate as this incident is, it all goes back to poor driver education, simple as that.
As unfortunate as this incident is, it all goes back to poor driver education, simple as that.
12-23-10, 08:49 PM
#7
Even thought the dealer placed a wrong type of floor mat in the car, I don't think the dealer should be liable. How many times you go to a car wash and they don't secure your floormats after vacuuming your carpets? You can go to an auto parts store and buy aftermarket floor mats that do not fit properly.
As unfortunate as this incident is, it all goes back to poor driver education, simple as that.
As unfortunate as this incident is, it all goes back to poor driver education, simple as that.
Imagine going to a pharmacy to fill a prescription. The pharmacist gave you a lethal dose by accident. You die. Is it your fault because you should have known what you were taking? Because you weren't properly educated on what was right/deadly? I don't think so. A professional is liable to providing professional care, especially when it comes to safety. The dealership did not provide a safe product, and therefore is liable.
Trending Topics
12-23-10, 09:23 PM
#8
But it wasn't driver education. The driver was an experienced police officer. The driver was given a product that could (and did) harm him and others.
Imagine going to a pharmacy to fill a prescription. The pharmacist gave you a lethal dose by accident. You die. Is it your fault because you should have known what you were taking? Because you weren't properly educated on what was right/deadly? I don't think so. A professional is liable to providing professional care, especially when it comes to safety. The dealership did not provide a safe product, and therefore is liable.
Imagine going to a pharmacy to fill a prescription. The pharmacist gave you a lethal dose by accident. You die. Is it your fault because you should have known what you were taking? Because you weren't properly educated on what was right/deadly? I don't think so. A professional is liable to providing professional care, especially when it comes to safety. The dealership did not provide a safe product, and therefore is liable.
However when you are getting behind the wheel of a vehicle, you're expected to be competent. I could see if the dealer was liable if they provided a vehicle with broken steering or suspension, or bald/damaged tires, and even then, as a driver before you get behind the wheel of a vehicle, you should inspect it and make sure that the vehicle is safe to operate. But a floor mat isn't even a vital part of the car, and there are very simple driving techniques one can perform if it sticks the gas pedal - shift to neutral, apply the brakes hard, or just pull the mat out.
What if it wasn't the dealer who put the wrong mat in, what if a carwash attendant was to mix up the mats? What if one borrowed a car from a friend/relative that had a wrong/aftermarket mat it it?
I'd say if a dealership/carwash messed up with the mat, causing the driver to throw the car in neutral and causing damage to the engine, they would be liable for the repairs. But if the driver doesn't know what to do in such situation, thats his own fault and lack of drivers education, and nobody else should be held liable. There's a lot that can go wrong on the road, and a driver should be competent enough to know what to do in a particular situation.
12-23-10, 10:33 PM
#9
The foreign object prevented him from using his competence and skill to avoid an accident.
How did the improper floor mat get there? The liability is the dealership's, not the driver's.
12-23-10, 11:41 PM
#10
The driver was extremely competent. As reviewed by the 911 call, the driver is a trained police officer knowledgeable of how to maneuver and handle a car. Because of the mat, he was physically unable to control the car. So, it was not his competence; it was a foreign potentially-dangerous item placed by the dealership.
The foreign object prevented him from using his competence and skill to avoid an accident.
How did the improper floor mat get there? The liability is the dealership's, not the driver's.
The foreign object prevented him from using his competence and skill to avoid an accident.
How did the improper floor mat get there? The liability is the dealership's, not the driver's.
12-24-10, 12:15 AM
#11
Lexus Champion
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Arizona
Posts: 2,673
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The driver was extremely competent. As reviewed by the 911 call, the driver is a trained police officer knowledgeable of how to maneuver and handle a car. Because of the mat, he was physically unable to control the car. So, it was not his competence; it was a foreign potentially-dangerous item placed by the dealership.
I hate talking about people who are resting up there, but seriously? If my cars revs I am throwing that ***** in Neutral in a hearth beat. Honestly its 50/50 situation. Yes people panic, people get lost at situations like this, but from a backround of being a cop and not doing a simple thing like throwing it in neutral or shutting the car of is a big problem.
It sucks that the whole family was lost, and I feel for the remaining members, but this suit is meritless. It should never be allowed to go forward, and I hope the dealership countersues them. It definitely sounds like Toyota is going to punt him out into the ocean for challenging them, but they have that right. How ironic would it be if he countersues, wins, and Toyota's money goes to him? How quickly could he take $10M and turn it into another brand?
Big Mack
12-24-10, 12:27 AM
#12
Yes, it does say so, but one thing I haven't (and still don't) understand is why Toyota would pay a settlement when its Bob Baker Lexus's fault for installing an RX (or whatever) floor mat into an ES. Am I just over-complicating things or am I dumb? Has there actually been a legitimate case in which a Toyota vehicle actually accelerated on its own, without the aid of a floor mat (or an indebted and uncanny driver of a Prius)?
12-24-10, 02:51 AM
#13
Lexus Connoisseur
Thread Starter
Yes, it does say so, but one thing I haven't (and still don't) understand is why Toyota would pay a settlement when its Bob Baker Lexus's fault for installing an RX (or whatever) floor mat into an ES. Am I just over-complicating things or am I dumb? Has there actually been a legitimate case in which a Toyota vehicle actually accelerated on its own, without the aid of a floor mat (or an indebted and uncanny driver of a Prius)?
Believe it or not but its already been over a year since NHTSA concluded there is no defect with Toyota floormats and that the problem is due to driver error.
12-24-10, 01:13 PM
#15
Tech Info Resource
iTrader: (2)
The driver was extremely INcompetent. He, being a supposedly trained officer should have known how to maneuver and handle a car - shifting into neutral was not something he was physically unable to do because of a floor mat unless it was 2.5 feet thick and covered the entire shift mechanism on the console. You're right in that it was not his competence. It was his incompetence. Period.
Wrong again. The foreign object forced him to attempt to use his training, which he failed at miserably. Again, unless the floor mat was 2.5 feet thick and prevented the shifter from going into neutral, his training didn't kick in. His skills certainly didn't.
If a 2.5 foot thick floor mat was in there, covering the pedals and shifter, then the dealership should bear liability. Since he couldn't drive with a 2.5 foot thick floor mat, nor shift the car from park if it was covering the pedals and shifter, the dealership bears no responsibility.
Precisely. He's supposed to be trained NOT to panic. Instead, based on the partial recording that I heard, he did. He was not listening, he was not thinking, he was just yelling and panicking.
It sucks that the whole family was lost, and I feel for the remaining members, but this suit is meritless. It should never be allowed to go forward, and I hope the dealership countersues them. It definitely sounds like Toyota is going to punt him out into the ocean for challenging them, but they have that right. How ironic would it be if he countersues, wins, and Toyota's money goes to him? How quickly could he take $10M and turn it into another brand?
Big Mack
Wrong again. The foreign object forced him to attempt to use his training, which he failed at miserably. Again, unless the floor mat was 2.5 feet thick and prevented the shifter from going into neutral, his training didn't kick in. His skills certainly didn't.
If a 2.5 foot thick floor mat was in there, covering the pedals and shifter, then the dealership should bear liability. Since he couldn't drive with a 2.5 foot thick floor mat, nor shift the car from park if it was covering the pedals and shifter, the dealership bears no responsibility.
Precisely. He's supposed to be trained NOT to panic. Instead, based on the partial recording that I heard, he did. He was not listening, he was not thinking, he was just yelling and panicking.
It sucks that the whole family was lost, and I feel for the remaining members, but this suit is meritless. It should never be allowed to go forward, and I hope the dealership countersues them. It definitely sounds like Toyota is going to punt him out into the ocean for challenging them, but they have that right. How ironic would it be if he countersues, wins, and Toyota's money goes to him? How quickly could he take $10M and turn it into another brand?
Big Mack
In Europe, he would also likely be found at fault for failing to take reasonable measures to disable the car's ability to accelerate.
In the US, no individual bears any responsibility for anything because we're all victims and deserve to have the wealth redistributed to us when we do something completely idiotic.
I agree the driver was incompetent. At the same time, the dealership created an unnecessarily dangerous situation by installing the wrong part in the car. Had it been a part under the hood causing the throttle to stick open, no one would be blaming anyone but the dealer even if the driver was too panicked to put the transmission in neutral. There is a reason why no dealer will fix a component they can replace with a new one even if fixing the part is more economical - an attorney can easily convince a US jury a fix to a component is not reliable and caused a problem which would not have existed had they replaced the entire component. And that's why this is such a mess legally. The driver was incompetent despite years of training, the dealership was incompetent despite a number of TSIBs indicating improper floor mats can cause unintended acceleration, and because the family all died and it made national headlines, Lexus and the dealership are under the microscope.
I think it's pretty stupid. But no doubt we'll see the family get paid for wrongful death. This is the US after all.