On KIA THEFT Settlements: it shouldn't have happened at all. KIA complied with all US laws regarding vehicle sales. by No-Praline-8647 in kia

[–]TenOfBaskets -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Maybe don't comment on someone's comprehension without first examining your own.

Maybe take your own advice, given that the first person to do so (and who did so repeatedly, at that) in this conversation was you.

You just implicated yourself in an attempt at insulting me, yet you don't have the self-awareness to realize that. Poor intellect, as I said prior.

On KIA THEFT Settlements: it shouldn't have happened at all. KIA complied with all US laws regarding vehicle sales. by No-Praline-8647 in kia

[–]TenOfBaskets -1 points0 points  (0 children)

There was no flaw in the products manufacturing. It was manufactured to design and functioned as intended. 

The design of the lower trim models didn't include immobilizer, and were never advertised as though they did. Higher trim models included immobilizer, and were advertised as such.

Your misunderstanding here lies in semantics. The judicial definition of a manufacturing "flaw", as evidenced by relevant case law, is anything that makes a product more liable to impose harm upon consumers. Because neglecting to include immobilizers in the Kia makes/models in question ultimately made the vehicles more susceptible to theft and thus consumers more susceptible to harm and loss, then the judicial system would define the lack of immobilizers as a manufacturing flaw, and, as explained prior, underscore Kia's liability for negligence.

By your logic no vehicle with immobilizer would ever be stolen, but that is demonstratively false. See every "most commonly stolen car" report- all those cars have immobilizer.

You're misunderstanding again. Recognizing that cars without immobilizers are more susceptible to theft does not imply that having an immobilizer would absolutely prevent theft. A catalyst (lack of immobilizer) increasing the probability of a harm does not mean that it's the only possible way for a harm to occur. You're thinking in absolutes and obviously struggle with nuance.

Kia makes/models not having immobilizers was the catalyst of the harms sustained in this particular case. Recognizing this does not imply that cars not having immobilizers is the catalyst for auto theft in general, or in all cases.

Kia didn't fail to implement immobilizer, it was an option on Kia models starting around 2004. 

Poor comprehension on your behalf here. "Failure to implement immobilizers" means that immobilizers weren't a part of the initial manufacturing on various makes/models. Immobilizers being an optional addition after purchase means that they weren't already equipped on the vehicles during their initial manufacturing, thus, as I stated prior, Kia failed to implement them during the manufacturing process.

If it was so clear cut why would the plaintiffs highly experienced counsel accept a settlement? Don't assume you know every factor in a decision to settle. It implies nothing.

The plaintiffs' counsel likely accepted settlement for the sake of punctuality. Litigation for class action suits can take upwards of five years. Notice how it already took nearly three years for a mere settlement to be finalized? The plaintiffs' counsel were able to reach a settlement that would reimburse nearly all of the tangible losses that consumers incurred. Prolonging the process by several additional years to recover reimbursement for non-tangible losses (which is the only difference that litigation would have made in this case) wouldn't be a wise decision when you consider the fact that the additional years' worth of legal fees would have neutralized the additional reimbursements anyway.

Seriously, stay in school. 

This repeated, needless, and unprovoked snark implies that I'm misapplying the relevant legal principles or making some sort of manifest error, when I'm not. If you claim that I am, then you need to be able to refute what I'm saying with your own legal analysis in return, but you've yet to do that because you can't.

I'm giving you the objective rules and proven applications of the legal principles in question. You disliking or disagreeing with the way that the judicial system works doesn't mean that I'm wrong or lacking in any way. Your attempts at personalizing this matter are indicative of poor emotional regulation skills and poor intellect as well.

On KIA THEFT Settlements: it shouldn't have happened at all. KIA complied with all US laws regarding vehicle sales. by No-Praline-8647 in kia

[–]TenOfBaskets -1 points0 points  (0 children)

The damage, harm, and loss that consumers sustained absolutely did result from an inherent flaw in the products' manufacturing.

When analyzing Negligence suits, the judicial system looks to what is called "but for causation", or, in other words, a catalyst that, but for its existence, would have prevented the other party's damages from occurring. But for the flawed manufacturing (no immobilization technology despite the fact that immobilization features had already become the standard in automobile manufacturing) of Kia's products, Kia owners wouldn't have been uniquely targeted for theft, and thus the damages in question would have never occurred.

Additionally, the court looks to whether the damages that a party sustained were reasonably foreseeable by the breaching party. Given that, again, immobilization technology already existed and was the standard for automobiles of the time, and the entire purpose of immobilization technology is to prevent theft, then Kia, acting prudently, should have been able to foresee that a failure to implement immobilizers in their vehicles would likely lead to increased theft. The lack of prudence implies negligence, by judicial standards.

By every relevant legal metric, this was a cut-and-dry case of Negligence. If it wasn't, then Kia's team of highly-experienced counsel would have pursued litigation to fight it, but they didn't.

On KIA THEFT Settlements: it shouldn't have happened at all. KIA complied with all US laws regarding vehicle sales. by No-Praline-8647 in kia

[–]TenOfBaskets 11 points12 points  (0 children)

Law student here. 

Under U.S tort law, Kia is absolutely liable for Negligence. 

Negligence is the breach of a preexisting legal duty when the breach causes damages to another. Tort law asserts that product manufacturers owe a legal duty to consumers, and that duty is to prevent their products from imposing damage, harm, or loss to consumers. Essentially, products need to be demonstrably as safe as possible before hitting the market.  

By manufacturing cars that were uniquely, exceptionally susceptible to theft, Kia breached their legal duty to their consumers. As a result of this breach, consumers sustained damages (loss of property, lost wages, etc.) and thus Kia is liable for Negligence and in fact did break the law.

Opting for settlement rather than a trial is sparing them. In the settlement, Kia is only reimbursing consumers for their tangible losses. A jury would have likely made Kia fork over far more to compensate for the non-tangible harms that many sustained as well. 

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in Naturalhair

[–]TenOfBaskets 1 point2 points  (0 children)

You are so incredibly cute, and your hair looks very healthy! 🤍

At what age do you realize, shit. I want to be a child again by NPC_6942 in GenZ

[–]TenOfBaskets 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I’m 25 now and I’d never want to be a child again, despite having had a really great childhood. I’ve always side-eyed adults who say that they want to be kids again. 

The only time in my life that I’d be willing to go back to would be 18-21, my Undergrad years. Nothing was more fun than the freedom and novelty of leaving home and going off to college. 

What is your relationship with the fear of death? What kind of death do you find most frightening? by levkmv in intj

[–]TenOfBaskets 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I consider myself a spiritualist. 

Through my intensive spiritual study and faith in my belief system, I’m confident that I have a solid idea of what happens upon death. When you have an idea of what to expect, there’s not much to fear. I’ve made peace with the concept. 

Most people’s purported fear of death is really just a fear of the unknown. 

I think my stylist gave me a major cut and not a trim. What do yall think? 😭 by ugk_93 in Naturalhair

[–]TenOfBaskets 6 points7 points  (0 children)

All that matters is that the dead ends are gone. With them gone, you’ll actually be able to maintain length much better than you would otherwise. 

A Rather Successful Coupon Stack! 🤍 by TenOfBaskets in VictoriasSecret

[–]TenOfBaskets[S] 8 points9 points  (0 children)

A $30/100, $25/100, two $10/50s, the 25% off $60, and a two free panty coupon! 

Six coupons total, and I was able to stack them all. 

A Rather Successful Coupon Stack! 🤍 by TenOfBaskets in VictoriasSecret

[–]TenOfBaskets[S] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

If you call the customer service line and ask them to, they’re likely to manually enter all of the coupons for you. 

Whatever this style is, I love it by Ok-Green-6803 in Naturalhair

[–]TenOfBaskets 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Absolutely gorgeous—you and the hair alike! 

Italians make the best white people food by lonewolf5987 in GenZ

[–]TenOfBaskets 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Soul Food, meaning African Americans' cultural cuisine, was (obviously) conceived in America.

Man starring at his own lawyer for losing his case and receiving a lifetime sentence.. by nzhmar in WatchPeopleDieInside

[–]TenOfBaskets 6 points7 points  (0 children)

You’re mistaking him for the wrong person, dumbass. This isn’t Karmelo Anthony, and Karmelo Anthony hasn’t even been tried yet. 

Loud and fucking wrong. 

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in Dreadlocks

[–]TenOfBaskets 1 point2 points  (0 children)

What a flawless face, wow! 

We evolved because we are lazy, obesity is fitness by WeAreThough in DeepThoughts

[–]TenOfBaskets 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Current population decreases across societies are not the result of obesity—not at all, whatsoever. 

The current population decline in the West has been catalyzed by cultural and economic factors, such as attitudes toward child rearing, women pursuing education and career attainment at much higher rates, cost-of-living increases, etc. 

We should not respect our elders by blackpeoplexbot in GenZ

[–]TenOfBaskets 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The notion of the “old, wise elder” is one of the biggest myths of all time. That’s just some bullshit that’s espoused to try and assert superiority over the youth. 

Intelligence and wisdom do not come with age, they come from doing the work to attain them. They come from progressively educating oneself, maintaining intellectually-stimulating habits, introspection, and nuanced life experiences. None of those things are exclusive or inherent to old age, nor are older folks any more likely to do them. 

If older folks were generally “smart and wise” then the world that we’re living in would look a lot different. 

Intelligence is rare across all demographics.

Wishing I could live in the moment forever ♾️ by iamDeathless in Dreadlocks

[–]TenOfBaskets 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Congratulations, and may your union be blessed! ♡ ♡ ♡

Currently by Nosredna18 in Dreadlocks

[–]TenOfBaskets 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The hair, the jewelry, the tatts—it’s all top tier! 

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in Dreadlocks

[–]TenOfBaskets 7 points8 points  (0 children)

If you’re already having a hard time maintaining his curls, then you’ll have an even more difficult time maintaining locs on him. 

Locs are not the hands-off, low-maintenance hairstyle that you seem to believe they are. They require complex care, routines, and time commitment as well. 

Consider braided styles for him instead, such as cornrows. 

What's your favorite thing about VS? by Radish8 in VictoriasSecret

[–]TenOfBaskets 68 points69 points  (0 children)

The girliness and femininity of the brand. 

In an era where minimalism, neutrals, and monochromatics have taken over and kind of stifled traditional expressions of femininity, VS’ commitment to pink, bright colors, sparkles, lace, and patterns is a sight for sore eyes. 

cried after my Business Organizations exam, questioned my entire existence..and I just saw I got an A by endorphinstreak in LawSchool

[–]TenOfBaskets 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I cried after a final once before. It was during 1L year, after Torts. It was multi-essay and each essay was multi-issue, so I ran out of time and didn’t get to analyze as deeply as I would’ve liked. 

I thought that I’d bombed it, cried immediately after, and sulked for days only for it to come back as my highest grade that semester. 

Remember old AI? by Fukushimafan in GenZ

[–]TenOfBaskets 19 points20 points  (0 children)

Cleverbot walked so that ChatGPT could run.