Interest Check- Owners joining together to file class action lawsuit

[snydes]

Ok guys, for the sake of this poll, and not to give away the specifics, lets just assume we have solid grounds as Alta owners to pursue a class action lawsuit. How many owners here would be interested in joining in? This is not to be considered a commitment, just putting feelers out.

 

[Rix]

Ok guys, for the sake of this poll, and not to give away the specifics, lets just assume we have solid grounds as Alta owners to pursue a class action lawsuit. How many owners here would be interested in joining in? This is not to be considered a commitment, just putting feelers out.

I have been involved in a class action lawsuit before, and am involved in one with the crappy hearing protection ear plugs I used in the military. Based on my previous experience, when the wash is done, its pennies on the dollar at best. I would be interested in getting in on this, provided there was one element met, and that is some kind of intentional negligence on behalf of Alta/Faster Faster/BRD. I have not seen anything that suggest intentional/gross negligence at any level. On the poll, said yes, but thats the criteria I said yes too.

 

[Bionicman]

I have more important fish to fry

 

[snydes]

One aspect that may be viewed as negligent could be having battery packs numbered in the hundreds affected by a known manufacturing defect that were not actively recalled. Could this problem cause a safety issue if left unchecked? That’s debatable. This is not to say that would be the sole reason for a suit.

 

[privateer703]

What would be the goal? The first thing that comes to mind is getting some information to help us repair or build new batteries or modules, but I have a feeling this is the stuff BRP bought, and would likely be protected info. I said yes in the poll, but not really sure where it can go. I guess that's what a lawyer would tell us.

 

[snydes]

Compensation in some form for loss of warranty, value, etc. The specifics a good attorney would sort out. This is just to see how the group feels about it at this stage.

I think a class action against BRP to have them uphold warrantee commitments to existing owners might be a good strategy. I was trying to research US law and there may be an obligation if the new owner to fulfill commitments of the old owner - even suppliers seem to have a possible commitment - 40 CFR § 1037.620 - Responsibilities for multiple manufacturers - starting point?

Really need a lawyer to weigh in on this but thinking we have an argument that BRP may have product support and warrantee commitments.

 

[Judaslefourbe]

One aspect that may be viewed as negligent could be having battery packs numbered in the hundreds affected by a known manufacturing defect that were not actively recalled.

If you go after this, you will lose for sure as your statement is widely incorrect.

 

[Philip]

I think the main arguments could be that they mismanaged the ABC, withheld information, and deliberately ignored owners as creditors.

 

[bluefxstc]

What would be the goal? The first thing that comes to mind is getting some information to help us repair or build new batteries or modules, but I have a feeling this is the stuff BRP bought, and would likely be protected info. I said yes in the poll, but not really sure where it can go. I guess that's what a lawyer would tell us.

To add on to this, what is there to go after? I am not speaking for or against the law suit, but we would need to understand what we are after. There are probably damages out there. Certainly some of the owners of R battery packs that failed under warranty could have claims. I am not sure if the rest of us do, but that is probably my ignorance of the law and not necessary a statement of lack of damages. My understanding is that there isn’t much of anything left of Alta, so what are we after? I think @ElectroBraap did say there is a bunch of Alta stuff in a storage unit somewhere which may have value, but we don’t know what it is or what we would do with it if we got it. Money is one thing, but distributing or storing physical parts in another. Not against the idea of a law suit, I just think we need to know what we are after and what we are going to do with it if we get it. One of those cases of being careful of what you ask for.

 

[Philip]

We still do not know who owns what, how a bunch of Alta parts and tools ended up on Ebay, and whether or not there will be an auction of some sorts.

Armanino promised to support the effort to create a service company, which would have access to suppliers, tools, and technical information needed to be able to repair and maintain bikes. They didn't assist at all.

They slapped NDAs on all who could have helped us or provided the needed information. They ignored our requests to allow select ex-Alta employees to talk to us.

Nobody knew which parts, tools, software, IP, etc were available for purchase or for bidding until after they were sold or given away.

 

[snydes]

If you go after this, you will lose for sure as your statement is widely incorrect.

Not intending to start an argument but what part would you say is incorrect? The quantity affected or the statement that Alta knew there was a problem? I just want to get the story straight. If there was a known point when the issue was acknowledged and there was firmware updates to better weed out the problem packs, then that would seem to support they knew there was an issue. Personally I absolutely would have taken my bike back to the dealer immediately had I been told my pack could be affected by a manufacturing problem and a firmware update would serve to detect it. Instead I waited for a convenient time to have the firmware updated which unfortunately for me was a week before the end of Alta.

I definitely appreciate your participation here and I’m not faulting you or any of the employees. If anything it would have been a management call way above your heads.

 

[Judaslefourbe]

I personally issued the recalls/service campaigns and did so voluntarily (it was not requested by NHTSA). We reached out to all the customers we thought might be affected, at least per our understanding of the issues, and fixed all the bikes we could get access to before getting in customers hands.
Alta went above and beyond to make sure customers had the best experience possible, even if that meant replacing parts we were not sure would fail. That was indeed a management's call, and as part of management, I made sure of we did right by the customers.

 

[Mikec265]

I voted yes, mainly because I want to be able to buy parts at a reasonable price as needed. I hate to say it, but my bike will be gone as soon as a worthwhile replacement becomes available. Now if parts were available for 10 years, I'd keep it longer.

 

[snydes]

Judaslefourbe, I would not argue that you guys went above and beyond in most every occasion we were aware of here, and you specifically have been nothing but helpful. I would respectfully disagree on the handling of the R pack issues but that’s a debate for another day, and honestly was not the motivating factor for this particular discussion. I certainly didn’t mean to discredit your efforts during your time at Alta!

Love ya man!

 

[SuburbanDad]

No thanks. Alta was a great company that failed at a difficult task. I am happy I was able to get one of their awesome bikes while they were available and it continues to be worth the money I paid for it. I have zero ethical grounds to sue for anything. R pack owners that exhibit problems definitely are in a pickle, but a lawsuit seems frivolous and unlikely to yield anything. $0.02

 

[VINSANITY]

I was thinking of pursuing BRP for warrantee and parts support - don’t really understand what the point would be in pursuing Alta?

 

[Philip]

Nobody is talking about pursuing Alta. Alta is dead. The owners got screwed by Armanino and BRP.

The investors who wanted out, and Alta managers, also had a hand in steering Alta where it is. But they are the same people who made these bikes for us. I would be forever grateful to them. There are no legal grounds to pursue them, or to pursue BRP to honor warranty claims, which is what @Judaslefourbe was trying to say.

Please ignore the last three back-and-forth posts between @snydes and @Judaslefourbe -- they are distracting. Should I delete them?

 

[Rix]

Nobody is talking about pursuing Alta. Alta is dead. The owners got screwed by Armanino and BRP.

The investors who wanted out, and Alta managers, also had a hand in steering Alta where it is. But they are the same people who made these bikes for us. I would be forever grateful to them. There are no legal grounds to pursue them, or to pursue BRP to honor warranty claims, which is what @Judaslefourbe was trying to say.

Please ignore the last three back-and-forth posts between @snydes and @Judaslefourbe -- they are distracting. Should I delete them?

I say don't delete them, everyone has a right to their own opinion. I think the comments show that Judas and Snydes don't see eye to eye, but given the opportunity, I bet they would be the type of guys that would go riding together, then have a beer after. Not saying this is the case here, but I think its okay to disagree, and still be friends.

 

[SuburbanDad]

...
Please ignore the last three back-and-forth posts between @snydes and @Judaslefourbe -- they are distracting. Should I delete them?

I thought they were informative tbh. To echo @privateer708 and @bluefxtc - what is there to gain? access to firmware source code? The battery is *the* liability on the bike now. And I am not seeing how additional disclosure on that will help.

 

[Philip]

A good question that was asked is what are we trying to achieve. Being able to repair these bikes is my main goal.

Right now, if we go to various suppliers, who know all the various wiring schematics and PCB boards, they might be prevented from helping us by various NDA agreements that were put in place by Faster Faster, Armanino, and now BRP. It might take a court order or a settlement agreement to make repairing our bikes possible and legal.