Journalist test drive cost him $174,000

Hope the link works.I felt sorry for the poor guy. http://autos.yahoo.com/blogs/motoramic/writer-ordered-pay-174-000-rare-porsche-blows-210104855.html

That's one hell of a money shift. Damn telltales on the tach...

hope the writer got his $174K worth

fasted58 wrote: hope the writer got his $174K worth

The way this is flying around the forums suggests that at least WE are getting his money's worth . . .

Poor guy(s).

Another reason to not drive your hero.

Keith Tanner wrote: That's one hell of a money shift. Damn telltales on the tach...

Hhahaha, Graham Hill used to carry a magnet in his driver's suit to "adjust" the telltale on the tach.

Ahhh, the technology, eh?

I don't understand how when you have a $2 million dollar car and obviously many other and the wealth that goes with it, you allow someone else into your car to wail it around a track, and then sue the driver when the engine blows up regardless of what caused the engine to blow in the first place.

COMMON SENSE RULE #1 WHEN TRACKING A CAR: If you can't afford to ball it up and walk away, or pay for the repairs, don't put it on the track.

Yep. As an amateur journo, I cannot place the blame on the guy driving.

As an automotive enthusiast, were it my 917, I'd take 100% of the responsibility of the blown engine. My car, my risk.

It was in very poor taste for the owner to request the money from the journalist, and it was quite an unwise judgement.

In reply to Maroon92:

In general principle, I agree with you. That said, I've tracked many, many cars that weren't mine, and it's always been "you break it, you buy it". Granted none were 917's, and it usually meant that I was doing the repairs with them, but still.

The journo should have had insurance, and also shouldn't have over-revved by that much. I don't think the car owner was out of line, here.

Read about this this morning, re-read it. The writer paid to drive the car. Doesn't this shift some of the responsibility? What about who the writer works for, don't they have insurance or something to cover this sort of thing or at least the employer pick up a share?

I rode some kids bicycle 40+ years ago and busted up some spokes. I rarely drive any one else's car - it's not worth it - things happen.

wlkelley3 wrote: Read about this this morning, re-read it. The writer paid to drive the car. Doesn't this shift some of the responsibility? What about who the writer works for, don't they have insurance or something to cover this sort of thing or at least the employer pick up a share?

The article was written freelance, so the writer WAS the employer at this point.

Read this piece. Chris Harris has an interesting take on it.

It's a tough thing. I've been lucky enough to have an engine fail when it was being driven by a journalist - not a work car, my own personal one. But he was driving it exactly how I told him he could drive it, a couple of lifters just finally said "okay, that's enough" and they let go. So I apologized for cutting the fun short and I fixed my own stuff.

But if I'd told him to keep it to 7000 and it came back with a rev counter pointing to 8200 and a sump full of rod shards - we might have had a different conversation. Yes, it was an old, highly stressed race car. But that was no secret, and the driver should have taken appropriate care.

I personally don't buy the "if you can't afford to ball it up, don't let it on the track" line. Life is not that black and white, and that line means we'd never have the Le Mans Classic or articles about old race cars on the track. The only difference here is the number of zeros. If this had been a $40,000 car and the journalist had done $1500 worth of engine damage, would you expect the owner of the car to just shrug his shoulders?

There's no winner here. The courts have decided against the driver, which is going to have some tough repercussions for him personally.

Another article - note the bit at the bottom.

Press Association said: The judge said Mr Piper, of London Road, Windlesham, Surrey was "certain, accurate and truthful" in his evidence. He described 62-year-old Mr Hales, of Fen Lane, Conisholme, Lincs, as "a most unreliable witness whose evidence was creative, inconsistent, self-motivated and incredible".

http://uk.cars.yahoo.com/news/48-000-ex-replica-car-owner-170500429.html

And more - here's the actual judgement. After reading this, things seem a little different than the usual internet snap judgement against the guy with the money. Heck, the driver admitted in writing that he broke the engine by failing to select the gear properly!

http://www.leeds-solicitors.com/piperhales.pdf

This is EXACTLY what business insurance is for. I'm sure the policy to drive irreplaceable race cars is high, but that's part of doing the job correctly.

Also, don't drive a fast car faster than you can react. 1,200 rpm is a lot to miss a shift by.

Kinda weird. Most private property won't let us shoot video without a proof of insurance. Can't imagine it would have been that expensive to get coverage for something like this.

So we are talking about a kit car then. A really expensive one, but ultimately a kit car. Maybe he should have just dropped a 427 side oiler in it and called it a Can Am kit car.

In reply to bearmtnmartin:

Where did you see that? An original 917 wouldn't be a "kit car".

Keith Tanner wrote: The only difference here is the number of zeros. If this had been a $40,000 car and the journalist had done $1500 worth of engine damage, would you expect the owner of the car to just shrug his shoulders?

Generally speaking yes, although it would also be considered in good taste to help help as much as possible with wrenching the repairs. If somebody can truly afford to own a car, they can afford to fix it when it breaks. And if they are willing to let anybody (including themselves) drive it in anger, then they are willing to risk that person breaking it. Accidents happen to even the best of drivers, especially on old cars with tempermental gearboxes. If this is disagreeable to the owner, they shouldn't agree to any such activities in the first place.

Since it's only zeros, would it be justified to financially ruin a man and his family over a $1,500 engine repair on a $40,000 car, when it was obvious before ever choosing to hand over the keys that he could never afford any meaningful repairs on the car if he did accidentally break it?

If I had to pay that, I'd keep every part that was replaced. Every last damn piece. You know, for spite.

Keith Tanner wrote: I personally don't buy the "if you can't afford to ball it up, don't let it on the track" line. Life is not that black and white, and that line means we'd never have the Le Mans Classic or articles about old race cars on the track.

Re-read my post, OR can afford to fix it. If I have a large car collection with multi-million dollar cars in it, I think i can afford a $75,000 engine rebuild, after all if it's a race car, it should be expected. If I'm irresponsible enough as the owner to allow someone else who can't pay for an engine rebuild on my car to go hoon my multi-million dollar car, maybe I should have thought twice. Emotions or no, black and white or no, the owner agreed. Had he not, or driven it himself, this wouldn't be an issue. And don't think I'm saying 100% of the liability is in the owner's camp, there is a shared responsibility, both parties were involved.

Let’s change this a bit. You give your car to a mechanic to find a problem that requires a test drive. He damages the car. Who do you think should pay? What if he can’t afford it? After all, you let him drive the car, you knew something could happen.

Nathan JansenvanDoorn wrote: Let’s change this a bit. You give your car to a mechanic to find a problem that requires a test drive. He damages the car. Who do you think should pay? What if he can’t afford it? After all, you let him drive the car, you knew something could happen.

That's what insurance is for. Apples and oranges.

Glad to hear that other journalists have set up a fund and are pressuring the owner to ease up.

I'm guessing there was some talk before the drive. I'm guessing the talk went more like: "Dude, you know if I wad this up, I can't afford to buy it" than "Oh don't worry man. I'm a multi millionaire. I just do this journalism thing for fun!"

Just a guess.