• FreeAdvice has a new Terms of Service and Privacy Policy, effective May 25, 2018.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our Terms of Service and use of cookies.

Yokohama nightmare

Accident - Bankruptcy - Criminal Law / DUI - Business - Consumer - Employment - Family - Immigration - Real Estate - Tax - Traffic - Wills   Please click a topic or scroll down for more.

Status
Not open for further replies.

Shay-Pari'e

Senior Member
What is the name of your state? Florida

Had several tire problems with my Yokohama tires. The worst was a disaterous delamination. Yokohama weaseled despite strong evidence of manyfacturing defect. I found an I’ve found an interesting way to get revenge that you may find VERY helpful.
Visit http://yokohama-tires-suck.com
web site.


MY STORY

We bought Yokohama AVID tires for our Ford Ranger pickup. Ironically, we replaced its original Firestone tires because of safety concerns. Until the day before the accident the truck was driven my 51-year-old husband who’s had a perfect driving record for decades. (This is important because Yokohama claims the tire was abused.)How does your hubby's driving record come into play here? Does the tire company follow his every move?
The tires had unbelievably low mileage on them and practically no wear because they were rarely used. There was no checking, cracks or rot. When it was wrecked, the truck only had 47,000 miles on it and even though they were 4 years old, the tires had low miles and wear. (This matters because Yokohama claims the tires were run in a chronically under inflated state.)47,000 miles is low on tires?[/B

]Days before his high school graduation, we gave the truck to our son to use for college. It was in perfect condition. He was so proud and happy that he didn’t mind going to his senior prom in a pickup truck.

On the way to his senior prom, the rear tire on the driver’s side delaminated. (The belt peeled away and separated from the rest of the tire.) It happened on the interstate while my son and his girlfriend were traveling at 70 m.p.h.. The truck skidded and spun access 3 lanes of traffic and back, then rolled over in the median.

Somehow they lived. The trooper said it showed amazing driving skill -- which is hardly what you’d expect of an accused tire abuser.A police office told you your little truck showed amazing driving skills? I'm sorry, but I would be elated that the kids survived, and not talking to a trooper about the trucks driving skills after putting 47,000 miles on the tires.

After the accident, Yokohama began a pattern of ducking calls. When I finally made contact with Ann Stott, Yokohama’s product liability person, she was full of “we take these issues seriously and will honor our warranty” blather. She demanded the tire be sent to California for assessment and claim determination.Normal procedure, yet I am still baffled over the whole thing. 47,000 miles on the tires, and you were concerned with blaiming someone for your son's accident? Did the cost of a new tire, really

Before giving them my tire, I hired a forensic engineering firm with extensive tire experience. Their experts took pictures, assessed the tire’s condition and gave their opinion of what may have caused the delamination. After they finished, I sent Yokohama the tire and they did their thing. And it showed what?

Yokohama sent back a report so bizarre that I couldn’t believe we were talking about the same tire. My report specifically contradicted the reasons they provided for the tire failure. And there were many. They put ALL the blame on the owner. Among other things, they claimed abuse and poor maintenance. I don't blame them. Where is your thinking here? You took the time to get pissed off at at a tire that had 47,000 miles on it, and blame that for your son's accident.

I hate to go here with you Mom, but 47,000 miles on a tire is rediculous. New tires were in order here.



Their warranty is worded so that they have the only vote in whether the warranty applies. Apparently using the tire violated their warranty.What are you smoking? Using the tire violated the warranty?


They whined so much that I think they must have been scratching for anything and everything they could find to throw in there. Sorry, but I think you are.

They even claimed there was a puncture and honey, I’ve got pictures from a certified engineering firm of a tire with no punctures!

Yokohama gave me 30 days from the date of their determination to claim my tire if I wanted it back. Here’s where it gets VERY SUSPICIOUS. Their determination letter arrived by certified mail 3 weeks AFTER it was dated. That gave me only a week -- 5 business days -- to get my tire back. Yokohama instructed me to call to get my tire back. Of course, they ducked my calls again.
Hang on, it gets stupider...

Exactly a week after Yokohama’s letter arrived, another letter showed up. It was from Yokohama’s “independent” claims administrator with more of the same whining. Funny how BOTH letters were delayed three weeks.

Finally my husband got through to ask for the tire and rim back. For some unknown reason, Yokohama ONLY SENT THE RIM! Is it me, or does this sound like they were trying to run out the clock?

Another call resulted in Yokohama’s denial and blaming us. Even though we sent them a tire mounted on the rim and asked for the same back, apparently, somehow we made them send just the rim! Naturally by now, the 30 days are gone. I called anyway and they promised to send the tire. It never came.

So either they played games until the deadline was up or they just plain lost my tire. Either way, I’ve got two reports that don’t match at all and no tire to re-examine or show to a judge. I am sure Yokohama will try to play the BLAME GAME again and make it my fault that the tire wasn’t requested in time.

I wish I could share more details about what the differences between the reports were. I plan to take this to Small Claims Court so I don't feel like giving Yokohama anything in my engineers' report here. Through no fault of his own, my son has no way to get to college. It pretty much stinks that our legal system is based on money, but because no one got killed, lawyers won’t talk to us. Basically they all say that tire companies are slippery and proving a tire case is very expensive. Without the possibility of a big judgment, they aren’t interested. So off to court I go.

If anybody knows of any property in Florida that is owned by Yokohama Tire Corporation or any of it’s subsidiaries, please email me. It will be very useful if I get a favorable judgment.

And if you need tires, please remember my experience. DON’T BUY from a tire maker that has a track record of poor customer service and/or accountability. Do you want to spend top dollar to a company that can’t afford to deliver time-sensitive documents overnight?

Cindy R., Palmetto, FL, 10/16/06

I had to stop reading folks.

BB, you out there?
 


ReallyMad

Junior Member
Re Yokohma nightmare

Dear Shay-Pari'e, Please re-read the entire story and learn to spell.

The truck had 47,000 tame miles on it. The tires had less than 12,000. You may nit-pick all you want but the tire self-destructed, the manufacturer incorrectly placed blame, finally agreed to settle, then wormed out. Did you blast the folks that exposed the Firestone coverup too?.
 

Shay-Pari'e

Senior Member
Dear you,

I simply replied to the post that you typed out. You NEVER mentioned the tires had 1,200 miles on them. If they were so bad, your husband would have known. DUH! DUH!


What did the police report state? Who's fault was the accident that could have killed your child and someone elses?

Others may view your post differently, but I view it as someone not stable and looking for a *Wind Fall*.

Did I pass *Spelling 101* for you?

 

cepe10

Member
Dear you,

I simply replied to the post that you typed out. You NEVER mentioned the tires had 1,200 miles on them. If they were so bad, your husband would have known. DUH! DUH!


What did the police report state? Who's fault was the accident that could have killed your child and someone elses?

Others may view your post differently, but I view it as someone not stable and looking for a *Wind Fall*.

Did I pass *Spelling 101* for you?


Excuses. Excuses. Nit Pick is right! I don't know how someone who can't see the forest from the trees can ever provide a legitimate thought process.
 

racer72

Senior Member
Is there a legal question here or just a rant? I have notified the modererator to decide the fate of this thread.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Find the Right Lawyer for Your Legal Issue!

Fast, Free, and Confidential
data-ad-format="auto">
Top