darinmg

You are nuts if you think they are going to give you a full confession of guilt in writing. To me it sounds like you are wanting to cash in on this "almost" accident.

LeX2K

He should get cash and a big fat apology in writing. I would have hired an attorney long ago.

MikeFoxx

iTrader: (8)

Crazy story what a trip

oohpapi44

iTrader: (1)

How much cash exactly? And why? What exactl was his damages that he needs to be reimbursed for?

Or should a million dollars make up for the possibility of what 'could've happened'? Sad part is there is no shortage of idiot attorney's who love to see people with ridiculous claims like this walk in the door.

oohpapi44

iTrader: (1)

Should probably use data from a more recent study. Your link seems to be from 1998. The design of the catalytic converters since then has likely made much of this information posted above irrelevant.

Not trying to diminish your concerns but you need better information before others will be as emotionally invested in this issue as you are.

I hate quoting Wiki but this is not my issue so not going to spend an enormous amount of time researching it further, but here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suicide_met...

Infrared

To your point, if it's an "almost" accident, why would they be averse to putting what happened in writing? You sound like someone with a pretty low ethical standard. As a business owner, I'm never afraid to put in writing anything I say to anyone. Any business (or person) that is afraid to put it in writing is trying to hide something, plain and simple. If there are no damages, and therefore no financial liability or obligation on the part of Lexus, they should have no problem putting this in writing.

As to your comment about "cashing in", I don't need the cash. I make plenty of money. If I were in charge at Lexus, however, and this was truly an isolated incident and we had fixed the process that allowed this to occur, I would do everything reasonable--and then some--to make it right by my customer. That doesn't necessarily mean cash. But it does mean doing something.

I agree that more recent information would be nice, but there is almost nothing out there on the internet with any credibility. What I do know is that there are multiple factors making this situation more concerning than it may otherwise have been:
1) January in Colorado is cold, and from my reading, cars emit exponentially higher PPM of CO gas during their first 10 minutes of operation, when all the components are cold and not running efficiently.
2) Winter time in Colorado means the house has negative air pressure, and more gas from the garage could therefore enter the home.

Lastly, to be clear--I posted this story just so others with new Lexus vehicles can be aware this is a very real possibility. I don't need anyone's "emotional investment" in my story. Not looking for pity. This is, however, a real issue that could quite easily have been deadly.

oohpapi44

iTrader: (1)

From the looks of the response, changes have been made so that VIN can't be accessed by additional persons (or did I miss something). What else do you want from them? 'Nothing' actually happened to do you so if this can't occur again, doesn't that make it right? You can't have the fear again if it can't occur again.

darinmg

I actually have an extremely high ethical and moral standard. I didn't say they shouldn't, I'm saying they won't. As a business owner, would you really give a disgruntled customer a written admission that you screwed up for them? No. But if you are what you are asking for, you would just make it right for them. That is what Lexus is doing. They don't need to put it in writing to be sincere.

I guess I shouldn't judge your motives, but I can say your wording and demand of admittance in writing sounds like lawsuit ammo is what you are after. Appearance is everything, but you know this, as a business owner.

michwrigh

I feel your pain, its very scary to go out to your garage and find your car running. This happened to me and they were apologetic. I feel this programming is unreliable and dangerous.

JT4

Was it recent that this happened to you?

Infrared

Calling me a "disgruntled customer" is an attempt to shift the dynamic around and somehow make this situation about me. It's not about me, it's about Lexus. And if you read my previous posts, you'd know I'm not really a disgruntled customer at all--I own and have owned a ton of Toyota/Lexus products.

But to your question, if I made a product that malfunctioned due to my failures (either on the process end, training or systems side), to a degree that could very easily have resulted in death or permanent injury, I would not only "own" this, I would absolutely put in writing to the customer an extremely sincere apology and outline the failure and how it has been resolved.

Because here's the thing: without anything in writing, how do I know they changed anything with how they do business? When I bought my car, had I asked the technology expert at the dealership if this could ever happen (my car being started by someone else without my knowledge) they probably would have laughed at me and assumed I did not "understand" the technology.

Well, fast forward to my situation, and clearly this scenario is very possible. Asking for something in writing from Lexus indicating what went wrong and how it was fixed would give me peace of mind. I'm tired of verbal assurances. That's not how I do business and it's frankly not how any real company should do business. If you can't put it in writing it didn't happen.

As you previously alluded to--there were not actual damages (that I know of, CO exposure can take years to manifest but I'm not going down that rabbit hole right now) --and given that there were no actual known damages, what risk does Lexus have in putting this in writing? The ONLY reason they would not put this in writing, that I can think of, is because they know this could still happen.

As a business owner, owning mistakes, making things right by your customer and putting everything in writing is par for the course. This is why I challenge your ethics. You seem very dismissive of me and of this situation and seem to scoff at my request to put this in writing. This tells me you don't understand the importance of integrity and ethics.

So yes, I would put it in writing. And my asking this of Lexus is quite reasonable.

oohpapi44

iTrader: (1)

They won't put anything in writing because of posts like the above where you keep repeating over and over about a near-death scenario when that is the furtherst from the truth. You weren't and should stop saying it until you have something to back it up with. There would be no car manufacturers in business today if there was a great chance of suffocating yourself in a modern vehicle that was idling for 10 minutes in a garage. There are too many 10 min remote starters and people with garages still in existence today as proof that the threat is minimal.

If remote start is such a worry, then don't install it. You've spent more time here making this an emotional argument than finding data to disprove what a google search says that suffocating yoursefl in a garage with an idling CC equipped vehicle is a difficult way to kill yourself as catalytic converters have reduced what was 25% carbon monoxide to less that 1% in your Lexus.

A lot of dramatics over a mistake in the system which has now been corrected. Understand you had a concern over 1998 data you posted but there is sufficient data to show that you concern level can be lowered. Until you have something that shows otherwise (actual damages) then let it go.

darinmg

This says it all

lobuxracer

iTrader: (2)

CO isn't the issue. The real issue is the remote start application is built on a faulty security model. The engineering built into the engine to get it into zero percent (yes, 0.0) CO within seconds of starting is pretty impressive. But even my 1993 Supra with 21 year old catalytic converters measured zero (0.0) percent CO on it's last emissions test.

I would personally disable Enform in its entirety when I bought the car. Why? Situations just like this. Somebody botched an entry in a database, and now, I no longer own my car. Heck, with Enform enabled, you never have exclusive ownership of your car.

What happens if your phone is stolen through a small act of violence and the thug taking your phone forces you to unlock it? Can they start your car with the app? Can they unlock the doors remotely? Can they get in your car and drive away?

Sorry, but I will never, ever, own a car where I do not exclusively own root access. Never.

GearHead69

I understand where you are coming from.

You can start the car with the App, but once you open the door or trunk the car shuts down even if you have the key on your person. Unless you have a pass code of 1234 then it will be harder for someone to take your phone and figure out the code, unless of course they beat you so bad you give it up. Even then you will still need the key to be able to start the car, hence the reason it shuts down when you open the door.

Heck while we are at it lets all disable Bluetooth or Wi-Fi on our cars as that can be hacked, and then remotely controlled. Once we entered into the realm of computers in our cars we gave up the idea of full control long ago. Just saying, and I'm in computer security so I know.