Last post on Nov 14, 2013 at 1:28 PM
You are in the Honda CR-V
What is this discussion about?
Honda CR-V, SUV
Go to NHTSA to file a safety complaint.
Or call Monday-Friday (8 am to 8 pm ET) (888) 327-4236 TTY: (800)424-9153
#1736 of 6957 Re: Honda does not care our safety, we should care ourselves [julia]
Sep 08, 2004 (9:16 am)
Whether your 2003 or 2004 CR-V get engine fire or not, Honda did and does violate the consumer protection act by failing disclose the potential risk of engine fire after oil change for CR-V 2003 and 2004 model when sell them. Here is US, consumer has every right to know the fact/truth before we buy
Whether or not Honda violated the law is something for the courts to decide. Are you a lawyer or have your received a judgment against Honda for failure to disclose the fire possibility? Then it's your personal opinion, not a fact of law.
I'm having trouble finding references to a US "consumer protection act" that would apply to disclosure of risk. Can you provide some references to online or printed resources? I've found references to laws by that name in Canada and the UK, but none in the US. I did find references to US Consumer Credit Protection Act, Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act, and a Telephone Consumer Protection Act; but none of those apply directly to disclosure of risk.
I'm sorry that you've had problems with your CR-V. I'm very concerned about the fire possibility, because I had been thinking about trading in my 1999 CR-V for a 2005 CR-V. I'm going to wait for awhile before doing that to see if there are problems with the 2005 models.
Sep 08, 2004 (9:16 am)
And, of course, I sell them. I would never let my wonderful wife drive her 2003 EX CRV if I were in the slightest bit worried about a fire.
the chances of her getting in a bad accident I'm sure are a lot greater.
And, they do just fine in the snow too!
Sep 08, 2004 (9:17 am)
Sabrina went to court to sue Honda and won. Honda is appealing, but in the view of that courtroom Honda was found guilty and ordered to pay double her damages.
It's just one case, but it has happened.
Sep 08, 2004 (9:26 am)
That was interesting.. but, it was for $2K in small claims court.. Hardly precedent setting, and as you say.. under appeal. A small claims court listens to her, then listens to Honda, then decides by a preponderance of the evidence. 51% is all it takes, and then, it is just one person's opinion. Hardly relevant, I don't think.
Sep 08, 2004 (9:28 am)
I guess that makes me an opponent, and you an ally.... En garde!!
Sep 08, 2004 (9:36 am)
Oh I disagree, I think it's very relevant. It's the only case for an Edmunds member so far, and Honda lost, plain and simple.
Hee hee, call me a skeptic, I'm just not convinced it's a coicidence, 40+ coincidences when they sell more Accords with that engine and no fires there?
You want to buy the Brooklyn Bridge? I'm selling it. Cheap.
I'm open minded, but I don't buy the "tech's fault" theory because common sense would say the same tech would screw up far more Accords.
#1742 of 6957 Re: Touchee! LOL [ateixeira]
Sep 08, 2004 (9:50 am)
"Oh I disagree, I think it's very relevant. It's the only case for an Edmunds member so far, and Honda lost, plain and simple."
The case was to account for the $2000 that was lost when the vehicle was replaced. It was not determining Fault in a legal sense - it was determining justice as to the $2000 out of pocket costs.
#1743 of 6957 Re: Touchee! LOL [ateixeira]
Sep 08, 2004 (9:54 am)
"Hee hee, call me a skeptic, I'm just not convinced it's a coicidence, 40+ coincidences when they sell more Accords with that engine and no fires there?"
Let's see, I own a 2003, so I suppose I can speak here...
No, I don't think it is a coincidence. However, the fact that the oil could drip onto a hot surface is moot, since the oil is never supposed to hit hot surfaces anyway. And it would appear that when properly changed, oil will not hit the hot surfaces. One could just as easily say that if an accident occurred and oil was spilled, a fire could result.
I suppose that is what some forum members are suggesting that Honda salespeople say: "Oh by the way, if the oil is changed improperly and oil hits the hot engine, it could cause a fire. This won't happen if the oil is changed correctly." It doesn't make sense to say this at all when oil is always supposed to be changed properly...
Still, I would like to know why it is mostly England built models that seem to have this problem.
And I hope they take this stuff into consideration when they redesign for 2006.
Sep 08, 2004 (9:55 am)
There was more to it than that, I believe they concluded Honda was even negligent.
Sep 08, 2004 (10:00 am)
Are you sure? I thought the only question was if someone owed sabrina9 the out of pocket costs? Also, was Honda negligent, or was the dealer who changed the oil negligent? And as I recall from posts, I'm not even sure oil was the culprit in this case.
sabrina9, are you out there, and can you comment?