Volkswagen Cleared by Coroner in Melissa Ryan "Unintended Deceleration" Case

[ziggyboy]

The problem is that despite the fact that the judge exonerated VW, you continue to suggest that they are guilty of something primarily because you had an unrelated problem with your own vehicle. You're deluding yourself if you can't admit Fairfax implied a link between the death and VW. The fact is that the driver was on the phone, the car make was irrelevant. Why didn't Fairfax run a story on mobile phone use in cars??

This event had NOTHING to do with VW but Fairfax continued to mount a campaign against the company even going to the extent of documenting how many complaints there had been from VW drivers about their "issues". They even said the company would not respond to their requests for information. Absolute trashy journalism.

I never said they were guilty of the victim's death. They were not. It is unrelated. The issue with VW has not really just been their quality control which is pretty obvious, but the lack of support from dealerships and the company itself. You've been a member of this forum since 2007. How many times have you heard VW and its dealerships say "Nothing wrong with it, it's normal" being told to people who have had problems? Or being given the runaround? And if you call VW head office you're given the cold shoulder and told it's a dealership problem....while other manufacturers entertain customers, VW head office don't. Their new customer service centre is new this year because of this.

So to answer your question. YES THEY ARE GUILTY of their lack of support and any care to fix customer problems before this year.

[JustCruisn]

So i read the whole darn thing.

Here are the brodie notes...

* "No definite indication of the wearing of a seatbelt was identified" Seatbelt pretensioner fired - indicates seatbelt was used.

* on phone without a hands free kit, phone in lap or centre console.

*Brake lights on before crash
*Impact speed approx 40km/h Truck 100 * car 60 or 90 - 50
*50km rear impact spin hit guard rail at 31km
*Was in a gear lower than 3rd in a 100km/h zone
*General mechanic used basic scanner and came to wrong conclusion, that the engine was in limp mode. VW used their equipment which shows time stamp - proved no issues with vehicle. No codes logged in ECU, not in limp mode.

Document does address the media attention and dismisses the link if the recall for 7 speed DSG and Diesel engines to manual petrol GTI. *"none of the complaints are relevant"
*Of the 79 cases raised only 3 were manual or petrol, none were the same combination as this car.
*VW has had no complaint before of after this accident relevant to the situation claimed in the case.

Summary:
It is likely that the girl was not paying attention, traffic had slowed, then failed to keep up with traffic when it sped up again.
There is discussion that the truck driver may have seen traffic moving on again further up the road and not noticed the Golf still at low speed.
Nothing wrong with the car.

[PassatB6]

Any improvement in customer care for any manufacturer is welcomed. I just think that SMH got this one entirely wrong.

[brimway]

I wonder who started the whole blame VW thing. Was it Fairfax or the truck driver's lawyer looking to get him off?

[The_Hawk]

Where was that info? Would love to see the source.

Edit, never you mind, it seems my work computer wasn't loading that window for some reason.

[ziggyboy]

New article has just come out.

Melissa Ryan inquest exposed Volkswagen

Let's hear it, VW apologists!

[The_Hawk]

New article has just come out.

Melissa Ryan inquest exposed Volkswagen

Let's hear it, VW apologists!

Hear what? The article says nothing, it implies the inquest was looking into major issues with VW, which they weren't. They were looking at a specific accident. They would have considered if there was a widespread problem and potentially linked to that problem as a factor... but doesn't the report say the other concerns were unrelated?

Bottom line the inquest has said SFA about VW and their reliability.

[werzel]

New article has just come out.

Melissa Ryan inquest exposed Volkswagen

Let's hear it, VW apologists!

... so other than referencing their own material with mysterious sources, the only information with any basis in fact is the paragraph:

"Victorian coroner Heather Spooner handed down findings on Friday that did not attribute any blame to Mr Mumford or Volkswagen for Ms Ryan’s death",

which seems to contradict the title of the article.

apology accepted, Ziggyboy.

[wai]

It would be great to see all the details of the inquest with the evidence. I am not saying anything either way, just that I would be interested in it. Unfortunately, the news media have to sell papers or get people to watch/listen to them. As a result, you get the evidence filtered which does not help anyone.

The bottom line is that if you do have concerns, then get a dash cam installed. At least if you don't survive hopefully the dash cam will and you will get your point across, even though it won't necessarily help you.

The complexity of modern cars means it is very easy to jump to the wrong conclusion. This is why it is important to be able to drill down to what actually happened.

It doesn't help bring back the lost life, however it will hopefully clarify things for those left behind. We are always just a split second away from something going wrong. We all need to accept this and try and make sure that we do not place ourselves and others in danger. We get caught up with our gadgets and forget that we are in control of around 2 tonnes of vehicle travelling at generally between 14 to 30 metres per second. Even a small distraction can mean we have travelled quite far, and even the most advanced driving we might have undertaken cannot necessarily give us the distance needed to react and then try and control the car.

[mfl]

So i read the whole darn thing.


Summary:
It is likely that the girl was not paying attention, traffic had slowed, then failed to keep up with traffic when it sped up again.
There is discussion that the truck driver may have seen traffic moving on again further up the road and not noticed the Golf still at low speed.
Nothing wrong with the car.

I may have missed the point, but how is the truck driver not responsible in any way, he drove into the back of the Golf at a 40km/h differential, how fast and how close to the Golf was he travelling, that he didn't see the car and couldn't stop in time.

As for the issue of VW and its procedures for dealing with issues, it needs to learn how to deal with customers, I have had a few issues with my GTI, car has been off the road for about 5 weeks in 4 years in total for various issues and every warranty repair was fight with the dealer. and it didn't have to be.

[Guest001]

It would be great to see all the details of the inquest with the evidence. I am not saying anything either way, just that I would be interested in it. Unfortunately, the news media have to sell papers or get people to watch/listen to them. As a result, you get the evidence filtered which does not help anyone.

The bottom line is that if you do have concerns, then get a dash cam installed. At least if you don't survive hopefully the dash cam will and you will get your point across, even though it won't necessarily help you.

The complexity of modern cars means it is very easy to jump to the wrong conclusion. This is why it is important to be able to drill down to what actually happened.

It doesn't help bring back the lost life, however it will hopefully clarify things for those left behind. We are always just a split second away from something going wrong. We all need to accept this and try and make sure that we do not place ourselves and others in danger. We get caught up with our gadgets and forget that we are in control of around 2 tonnes of vehicle travelling at generally between 14 to 30 metres per second. Even a small distraction can mean we have travelled quite far, and even the most advanced driving we might have undertaken cannot necessarily give us the distance needed to react and then try and control the car.

When I learnt to drive it was emphasized that driving is a full time occupation. NOT something to do while doing makeup, changing Cd's talking on the phone (that came much later LOL). I have seen couriers reading paperwork at 100kph a girl reading a book in traffic in the middle of Christchurch ( a Porsche none the less).. It seems with all the extra bits that actual driving comes a distant second.
Now Ford are putting multimedia units in the cars God Forbid.
Another accident with a truck running over a car in QLD this morning. Car was turning off highway, B double went right over it and girl burnt to death Did she not indicate, was she talking on the phone and braked late after nearly missing her turn, was the truck too close, (apparently). Road was wet someone mucked up. Guess Coroner will determine. At least it was a Commondore and not a VW LOL, so no conspiratorial theories.

[IN2VWS]

Yes, Melissa was talking on the phone, which is wrong. More importantly though, the truck ran up her arse. He is in the wrong here. I suspect it was his lawyers that pushed the "blame VW" story.
Why is the truck driver not being held responsible?
Is that the new defense for running into the back of someone? "He was talking on the phone, not my fault".

[Transporter]

Yes, Melissa was talking on the phone, which is wrong. More importantly though, the truck ran up her arse. He is in the wrong here. I suspect it was his lawyers that pushed the "blame VW" story.
Why is the truck driver not being held responsible?
Is that the new defense for running into the back of someone? "He was talking on the phone, not my fault".

Not according to coroner.

[wai]

When I learnt to drive it was emphasized that driving is a full time occupation.

Sadly there are many who do not understand this and do many dangerous things. We tend to feel we are safe and secure in our little cocoon.

This applies to truck drivers as well. Many simply do not realise what they are actually doing.

Things are not made much better by the incident in the M5 (Sydney). What happened was a truck and trailer were travelling into the M5 tunnel when (for some reason) the truck started to tip its trailer. This was not an oversize truck, but something went wrong and the truck started to tip. It was this that put it over the height for the tunnel.

But it amazes me that the authorities do not protect their assets better. For a fraction of the cost and inconvenience, suitable protection can be implemented.

First, give a warning that a load is over height for the tunnel when the truck driver can actually do something about it and leave the motorway.

Second provide a second level of protection that will turn on red lights requiring all vehicles to stop before entering the tunnel if an over height vehicle is still trying to go through.

Third, implement a protective barrier that will prevent damage to the tunnel asset.

All this can be done at much less than the cost of repair and inconvenience.

We all need to take more care, but accidents will happen. No one sets out to do something where someone is killed or injured, or something is damaged or destroyed.

[PassatB6]

Yes, Melissa was talking on the phone, which is wrong. More importantly though, the truck ran up her arse. He is in the wrong here. I suspect it was his lawyers that pushed the "blame VW" story.
Why is the truck driver not being held responsible?
Is that the new defense for running into the back of someone? "He was talking on the phone, not my fault".

If you read the Coroner's findings they show Ms Ryan was talking on the phone at the time of the accident and did not have Bluetooth in her vehicle, 2. Probably put her brakes on because the brake light filament was on at the time of the crash 3. Was likely in a gear lower than 3rd gear.4. Was travelling at about 40 kph at the time of the accident. All in a 100kph zone. The car was functioning normally. There was no limp mode issue. The Police believe she slowed down suddenly while talking on a mobile phone.

The truck driver initially looked at her car which was at a normal distance ahead, then looked in his rear vision mirrors. By the time he looked back her was right on top of her car and couldn't stop. He changed his story to say the brake lights were not on but the his original evidence showed he didn't know at the time. Both the truckie and the deceased solcitors favoured the defect theory because it suited both their cases.

In the end it appears it was a case of distraction due to mobile phone usage.