Why the "Out of Control" Prius Driver Is Full of It

Filing for bankruptcy does show lack of judgement and poor character. If you are stupid enough to live beyond your means, I guess it is plausible that you are stupid enough not to realize the definition of neutral isnt "reverse-n-flip".

The corvette club jacket though makes it very suspicious that he doesnt know a thing or two about cars. I am not saying he should know how to refurb an engine or something, but regular driving things should be known to someone who goes out of their way to include themselves in an auto club.

The whole thing stinks and I find the lack of common sense in this country appauling.

 

A lot of people are part of a car club for social purposes. Maybe Sikes was networking for his swingers site?

 

The motorcycle course in California you talk about is about a weekend in length (16 hours, max), and costs about $250 to $300. And is well worth the money.

 

Re: Sikes says he has no plans to sue Toyota

So your car has gotten much usage in the past month or so I take it?

 

Re: Sikes says he has no plans to sue Toyota

Nope. Non-hybrid cars have been driven more.

 

You missed something that DOES make him a liar ... the fact that he filed unsubstantiated claims for stolen property supposedly worth $59,000, yet couldn't provide one iota of evidence that he possessed any of his claimed losses. That, plus all the other "bad decisions" he made recently plus a HUGE motive against Toyota make highly likely that he would commit fraud as a publicity stunt.

 

I happened to stumble across this story earlier today: Corvette owner James Sikes can't handle runaway Prius (not sure if this has been posted)

But everyone else beat me to the punch talking about the jacket.

 

Where did that come from? It has been a blur what with all of the claims about Sikes. Do you have a link that is not a gossip site? Was Sikes charged with filing a fraudulent claim?

What is the HUGE motive against Toyota? The pending expiration of his lease?

 

Not specifically a hybrid, but any vehicle other than a standard or automatic transmission vehicle. It's time to take a page out of the aviation industry with its safety record and think about the use of "endorsements" for non-standard vehicles be they electric vehicles, hybrids, or simply continuously variable transmission vehicles.

The basic operating tenets of such vehicles may differ substantially to affect the safe operation of such a vehicle unless one has been properly trained. The motorcycle is an excellent example - while it's still an ICE driven 2-wheeled vehicle, the traffic regulations and operating characteristics are sufficiently different to warrant an "endorsement".

 

Just because Sikes is wearing a Corvette Club jacket does not make him a member, much less an owner of a Corvette. That is a bit of a stretch.

 

What do you think would happen to the sales of the cars that require such a special endorsement?

BTW, I think that some people are driving around who should not be driving anymore. So the question is kind of whether there should be a generally higher bar for a license; or, whether there should be different 'endorsements'.

 

Not much. The Prius on its initial presentation to the public already came at a premium cost - and the consumers were willing to pay for it. What it would do would be to slow the mass adoption of the vehicle, and if there is anything Toyota can learn from this debacle, is that it might not be a bad thing at all...

 

That might not work out too well for Toyota. Slowing the adoption of hybrids could open up an opportunity for EVs. And then there is the matter of the production capacity that Toyota ramped up in anticipation of increases in hybrid demand that wouldn't be there if the rate of adoption were slowed.

 

Well, better a low profit margin over longer period of time than face the wrath of an angry, ignorant public caused by the appearance of a defective product due to unqualified owner/drivers.

 

If you were ever a creditor to someone who declared bankruptcy you wouldn't asked such a naive question.

When people incur debt, they say "I WILL PAY YOU BACK THE DEBT".

When people file bankrupcty they are saying, "SORRY, I LIED WHEN I SAID I WOULD PAY YOU BACK. ACTUALLY I WILL NOT PAY YOU BACK. I cannot fulfill my promises and my statements that I would pay my creditors are all false."

Sikes LIED TO ALL OF HIS CREDITORS.

That he lied before, to all his creditors, is very relevant in evaluating whether he may have lied to the 911 operator, to the police and to the media.

Similarly, his other character flaws and implausible claims indicate to those who have any common sense that this is not a man to be trusted.

 

It is the totality of character "flaws" and the pattern that lead to questions about his credibility. Over half of all bankruptcies are due to medical bills but not in this case. Lots of real estate pros get fired for all sorts of reasons. Many of them are having problems making a living. Non-Corvette owners wear Corvette Club jackets. Lots of folks have x-rated websites- it's the free enterprise way. Lots of people have only one car with a lease about to expire, and would like a replacement.

Mr. Sikes' story didn't sound plausible so people dug further. Was this a Heene-style hoax (if you listened to those 911 tapes you would believe they were upset too)? I don't know. None of us does, unless there is a mind-reader among us. But using this incident to prove some sort of conspiracy by Toyota doesn't add to anyone's credibility or reputation for objectivity.

 

According to 10 News San Diego, who interviewed a police dept detective in central California, Jim Sikes filed two burglary claims back in 2001 in central California. The total was for $59,000 and went unsubstantiated. I don't know about you, but if I'm going to file a burglary claim for even $1000, I know that I'll need to provide some sort of proof that I owned the said items, either receipts, photos, etc. Toyota 'Mystified' By Runaway Prius Incident - San Diego News Story - KGTV San Diego
click on the "questionable past ..." video link.

The motive was two-fold -- that he owed a lot of money on his Prius and was about to lose it when his lease expired; and that the Toyota dealer recently turned him away when he took his Prius in to take care of a recall notice.

 

Better yet there is a new Legislation in the works that will give Toyotas their own designated lane. No other make car can travel in these designated lanes. In addition there won't be any stops signs and all lights will be green giving Toyotas the right away. Any other make car cutting in the designated "Toyota lane" will be severely punished (TBD - legislators are accepting input now).

 

Meh. It kind of depends on the circumstances. A friend's home was burglarized about 3 years ago. There was proof of the forced entry and attempts to break into a safe that was bolted into one of the interior walls. The friend had a stated value insurance policy for some artwork that was taken. Additionally, there were other 'miscellaneous' items that were taken - silver utensil set, and other items. Because there was proof of the forced entry, the insurance policy basically took the inventory at face value. No receipts needed to be provided. A general value for the silver set was established by going to Amazon.com and finding a comparable set. The artwork was insured for a stated value, so that was paid with no issue. And, and, and.

That is a bit of a stretch. How much money was owed on the lease? The fact that the lease was about to expire certainly would be a tough sell to a prosecutor, much less a jury to establish motive. A Toyota dealer telling him that there was no recall in place for his car is even more of a stretch. Good luck getting the PD or the DA to bite on that one.

 

There is a difference between an outright lie to people who lend you money and events not working out. My understanding of the circumstances of Sikes' debts is that they were secured by real estate that basically went upside down when the housing bubble burst in 2007. At the time the loans were written, the creditors were very happy with the collateral position they had. Otherwise, they wouldn't have made the loan(s). The bubble burst and Sikes' had the file BK. But that doesn't make him a liar, not to mention guilty of fraud.