• Andrew Ramonas
    Lobbying Reporter
  • Beth Frerking
    Editor in Chief
  • David Brown
    Vice President/Editor, ALM
  • Diego Radzinschi
    Photo Editor
  • Jenna Greene
    Senior Reporter
  • Marcia Coyle
    Chief Washington Correspondent
  • Mike Scarcella
    Washington Bureau Chief
  • Todd Ruger
    Capitol Hill Reporter
  • Tony Mauro
    Supreme Court Correspondent
  • Zoe Tillman
    D.C. Courts Reporter

« In Miami, Fraud Task Force Examines Mortgage Schemes | Main | Revenues Up, PPP Down at Covington & Burling »

February 24, 2010


Paul K

The bottom line is that the auto companies are big clients that the "independent arbitration firm," has to keep happy. If they rule against the auto companies, they lose their big clients.

In my arbitration, the firm didn't suggest any other testing of my Prius' unintended acceleration (which I reported to NHTSA 1 year prior to it hitting the news) other than the dealer's response that they could not find anything wrong.

Roger Merriman

We too have experienced the Toyota position that if the dealer can't find anything wrong, it didn't happen. We too are going through arbitration. What I find very upsetting is that lives are put at risk, and the voice of the victims are not adequitely taken into account.
Shame on you Mr. Olson for calling this a "dissatisfying result". Of course it is dissatisfying, it is wrong.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Blog powered by Typepad