Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Oklahoma City, OK, USA
Both replies above have merit and are helpful! Most all of us have read (or have opportunity to read) the Notice from the Court including the model specific issues regarding tank size swelling, cosmetic, and which bikes have covers, etc.
I think it is most important that we know what the real percentage of effected bikes, as this gauges how important it is to inspect - keeping in mind the inspection requires removal of covers/tanks/hoses, etc. on some bikes for non-visible defects. The Court document from my reading is not clear if the burden to inspect is on Ducati (them compensating the Dealers), or not.
I am going to re-read the document, but if I knew the odds were high, or if the odds were low but combined with a real danger, I would think the Court should go ahead and make it clear that Ducati will, through the Dealer network, hold the burden to inspect for latent (not noticeable to the average consumer) defects -- not just repair/replace "if."
Despite this, my gut feeling is this has been overplayed and most unfortunate, but I don't know the severity of the problem, or if Ducati could have headed this off with a voluntary recall or other lower-cost action. If it was truly a hazard, DOT would have pushed or Ducati would have already done a voluntary recall. From how I read this, the overall effect is something LESS than a recall. It is a "we will pay, if you find your own defect."
'12 MTS Pikes Peak #123
'08 848 WHITE
'08 1098 YELLOW (Sold)
'09 Monster 696 WHITE (Sold)
Last edited by OKCDuc; Nov 18th, 2011 at 7:44 pm.