When I previously purchased a Ford/Mercury vehicle, never in my wildest dreams did I ever believe or intend that Ford's safety innovations would be tested by my real life experience. [This vehicle was fully researched for safety and protection issues prior to purchase.]
Ford has an electric fuel pump in the gas tank that shuts off on impact. [Reset button in trunk.] After impact, the fuel shutoff allowed my FORD vehicle to safely come to rest in someone's front yard. [There were other safety features that protected my safety that were engineered by FORD that won't be addressed here.]
For Toyota to continue to promote a BRAKING SYSTEM that allows no scrutiny, has no publicly disclosed information [What's the BRAKING SYSTEM? They won't tell you. What are the 'COMPUTER ERROR MESSAGES'? They won't tell you.]
Shovel all of the Horse Manure you choose. Toyota doesn't disclose their product beyond vague promises and horse manure.
The BRAKES on my TOYOTA LEMON FAILED.
I was told "NO COMPUTER ERROR MESSAGE."
Other drivers/owners of Toyotas have posted similar complaints. It's not simply the LEMON LADY making this up.
Toyota owners have posted complaints that seat belts fail to protect, airbags fail to deploy on impact. How are you safe?
How do you drive a BRAND NEW TOYOTA LEMON with NO BRAKES?
The case of Noriko Uno has gone to the jury in California [articles below] and the jury verdict is awaited.
It would be hoped that the jury would send a loud and clear message to Toyota that it's time to amend their business model, be responsive to complaints and change their computer software to protect Toyota drivers, occupants and others on the road.
There are ~ 80 other court cases pending......
When you read about Toyota, remember....
NEVER FORGET THESE WORDS --- TOYOTA KNEW AND ALLOWED PEOPLE TO DIE!
Toyota warned U.S. dealerships in 2002 that Camry owners complained of throttle surges and recommended adjusting the computer
"If you look at this document, it says electronics," attorney Clarence Ditlow said. "It says the fix is reprogrammed in the computer. It doesn't say anything about floor mats."
....repair bulletin proves the manufacturer misled the public about the causes of sudden acceleration.
FROM: http://middlebororeview.blogspot.com/2012/12/toyota-table-of-contents.html
....Toyota’s R&D chief Masatami Takimoto contradicted his own engineers, admitting in a March 2010 memo that every conceivable condition had not been anticipated: “When this Electronic Throttle Control System (ETCS) system was inspected, didn’t we fail to anticipate malfunctions such as an accelerator pedal itself remaining open?”
FROM: Documents Contradict Toyota
FROM: Toyota: ...biggest and most deadly corporate cover up of all times...
Here are the latest developments in what I believe may be the biggest and most deadly corporate cover up of all time:......
FOOTNOTE:
The early Toyota investigation showed the problems and the luck associated with SUA investigations. NHTSA randomly two vehicles that repeatedly demonstrated SUA. NHTSA knew the problem was in the cruise control computer because if they moved the computer from the bad Toyota that had SUA to a good Toyota that did not have SUA, the good Toyota developed SUA. When NHTSA tested the vehicles at VRTC, it could not find a failure mode.
3 Ultimately, NHTSA gave the computers to Toyota to take to Japan and test. Although Toyota found a failure mode in the printed circuit board, details of the findings were kept confidential.
Also:
Toyota Whistleblower
Closing Arguments in Case Against Toyota
A jury could begin deliberating by Wednesday to determine whether Toyota Motor Corp. should be held liable for the death of a California woman who was killed when her Camry apparently accelerated and crashed despite her efforts to stop.
The closing arguments that began Monday were expected to conclude Wednesday in a trial that is the first to go before a jury in state court dealing with unintended sudden acceleration. Known as a bellwether case, the outcome could help predict whether Toyota should be held responsible for sudden unintended acceleration as part of a larger group of litigation filed in state courts. The company already has agreed to pay more than $1 billion in lawsuits filed in federal court.
Noriko Uno, 66, died four years ago when she went onto a median and struck a telephone pole and a tree. Her family's attorneys blame Toyota for her death because the company failed to install a brake override safety system in her car. They are seeking $20 million in damages.
Toyota has defended its vehicles, saying it had a state of the art braking system and argued an override component would not have prevented the crash. The company's lawyers blamed the accident on driver error, saying Uno likely mistook the gas pedal for the brake.
"The brakes would have stopped the car in this accident if Mrs. Uno would have used them," said attorney Vincent Galvin Jr., who is representing Toyota.
Plaintiff's lawyer Garo Mardirossian said during closing arguments that Uno pulled her emergency brake before she died, proving she tried to regain control of the car and leaving a message for jurors.
The message: "I did everything to save my life and the lives of others," said Mardirossian, according to the Los Angeles Times (http://lat.ms/18mxKLS).
The Japanese automaker has blamed the driver, stuck accelerators, floor mats that trapped the gas pedal for the sudden unintended acceleration claims that led to the recall of millions of its vehicles worldwide.
Other lawsuits contending Toyota's electronic throttle control system was defective and to blame for the sudden acceleration have been filed in federal court where a judge is dealing with wrongful death and economic loss claims that have been consolidated.
Toyota has denied the allegation and neither the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration nor NASA found evidence of electronic problems. A trial in one of the lead cases is scheduled for November.
Other cases expected to go to trial in state courts this year include one in Oklahoma and another in Michigan. There are more than 80 similar cases filed in state courts.
———
Information from: Los Angeles Times, http://www.latimes.com
http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/closing-arguments-case-toyota-20434099Toyota Seeks to Sway Jury in Fatal Acceleration Trial
By Edvard Pettersson - Oct 1, 2013
Toyota Motor Corp. (7203) said plaintiffs’lawyers seeking to blame a fatal accident on unintended acceleration made up a theory of how a 66-year-old woman’s foot got stuck between the gas and brake pedal of a 2006 Camry.
Toyota’s lawyer, Vince Galvin, made his closing statement yesterday before a jury in Los Angeles County Superior Court. The plaintiffs, the husband and son of Noriko Uno, seek $20 million in damages, alleging that if the Camry had had a brake-override system, Uno would not have died because the car would have stopped when she was trying to brake.
It is the first wrongful death case to go trial related to a series of Toyota recalls for sudden, unintended acceleration. Uno’s family claims that her right foot got stuck between the pedals as a result of an initial accident, causing her car to speed out of control down the wrong side of a residential road as she tried to brake with her other foot.
“It’s a made-up theory,” Galvin told the jurors. “There was no stuck foot.”
Galvin said Uno wasn’t applying the brakes as she drove off after her car was struck by another vehicle that ran a stop sign. Toyota alleges Uno drove away from the scene of that initial crash without exchanging information with the other driver, made two turns and sped half a mile down the wrong side of the road until she struck a tree.
‘Pedal Misapplication’
“Brake override is not a solution for pedal misapplication,” Galvin said. “Under the circumstances of this accident, brake override would not have made a difference.”A brake-override system causes the engine to stop accelerating when the gas and brake pedal are pushed at the same time. Toyota claims Uno was cognitively impaired because of her medical condition, including diabetes and a liver ailment, and mistakenly stepped on the gas instead of the brakes.
The fact that the handbrake of Uno’s car was pulled up is evidence she was trying to stop the car, Garo Mardirossian, the family’s lawyer, said earlier in his closing statement. She ended up hitting a tree when she tried to avoid oncoming traffic while she accelerated out of control, he said.
“She tried everything to stop that car,” Mardirossian said. “This poor woman had no choice but to do what she did.”
Brake Override
It would have cost Toyota next to nothing to install brake override in the 2006 Camry because the car already had the necessary hardware and it was only a software patch, the lawyer said. Toyota recalled the 2007 Camry, after Uno’s fatal crash, to install brake override in that model, Mardirossian said.The Toyota City, Japan-based carmaker settled economic-loss allegations brought by U.S. drivers after the recall of more than 10 million vehicles worldwide in 2009 and 2010 for potential unintended acceleration with causes such as stuck accelerators and floor mats that shifted out of position.
That settlement was valued at as much as $1.63 billion by plaintiffs’ lawyers.
Uno’s 2006 Camry wasn’t among the Toyota vehicles recalled as part of the 2009 and 2010 recalls for possible unintended acceleration-related issues.
California Superior Court Judge Lee Smalley Edmon instructed the jurors before the start of closing statements that they could award punitive damages, in addition to non-economic and property damages, if they found there was “clear and convincing” evidence of malice. Toyota sought to exclude the possibility of punitive damages from the verdict.
Mardirossian is expected to give a rebuttal statement this afternoon after the lawyer for the woman involved in the initial crash, who is also a defendant in the case, gives his closing statement. The jury is expected to start deliberations tomorrow.
The cases are In re Toyota Motor Cases, JCCP4621, California Superior Court, Los Angeles County (Los Angeles).
Toyota loses bid to keep Lentz off witness stand in unintended acceleration trial
LOS ANGELES (Bloomberg) -- Toyota Motor Corp. lost a bid to keep North America Region CEO Jim Lentz from taking the witness stand in the first trial over a fatal crash blamed on sudden acceleration.
California Superior Court Judge Lee Smalley Edmon in Los Angeles today said Lentz may be called to testify in person over objections from company lawyers, who argued that previously made video depositions of Lentz should suffice.
"The parties have identified certain testimony he gave in depositions and everyone agrees is relevant and can be used in this case," Edmon said.
She said the video recording was for pretrial evidence-sharing "purposes only" and that "there's no question there is a difference ''between playing a videotaped deposition and testimony in person.''
The jury trial is over a crash involving Noriko Uno, 66, who died when her Camry sped out of control and crashed into a tree after it was hit by a car that ran a stop sign in Upland, Calif.
Toyota settled economic-loss claims by U.S. drivers after the recall of more than 10 million cars worldwide in 2009 and 2010. Lawyers for drivers valued the settlement at $1.63 billion.
The recall followed complaints of sudden, unintended acceleration, including stuck accelerator pedals and floor mats that would shift out of position and get wedged under the gas pedal.
Floor mats
Ono's 2006 Camry wasn't part of the 2009 and 2010 Toyota recalls for floor mats and gas pedal modifications, when Toyota also installed brake override system software and began making it standard.
Plaintiffs have argued that Toyota should have installed an inexpensive brake override system in Ono's car that could have stopped the vehicle.
Toyota has argued that driver error is responsible for that crash and others.
Anne O. Hanna, an attorney representing Toyota, argued there was no need for Lentz to appear in court.
''It's an enormous waste of a CEO's time and a disruption," she said, arguing that "if he's going to be hauled into court in every case, it seems like it's all for naught."
Garo Mardirossian, attorney representing the Uno family, told Edmon that he would call Lentz sometime in the next seven court days, when the plaintiffs expect to conclude their side of the case.
Carly Schaffner, a spokeswoman for Toyota, declined to comment on the judge's ruling.
Toyota re-issued a statement it put out on the opening day of the trial.
"Our sympathies go out to the family and friends of Noriko Uno," according to the company's statement. "Toyota is committed to providing its customers with safe and reliable vehicles, including the 2006 Camry driven by Mrs. Uno, which was equipped with a state-of-the-art braking system and has earned top safety and quality honors. We are confident the evidence will show that a brake override system would not have prevented this accident and that there was no defect in Mrs. Uno's vehicle."
Read more: http://www.autonews.com/article/20130819/OEM/308199913/toyota-loses-bid-to-keep-lentz-off-witness-stand-in-unintended#ixzz2gfh7i9z7
Follow us: @Automotive_News on Twitter | AutoNews on Facebook
