Did Bankrupt Runaway Prius Driver Fake "Unintended Acceleration?"

[meegbear]

James Sikes, the San Diego runaway Toyota Prius driver, filed for bankruptcy in 2008 and now has over $700,000 in debt. According to one anonymous tipster, we're also told he hasn't been making payments on his Prius.

We received an email earlier today from an anonymous tipster who claims James (Jim) Sikes, the driver of the runaway Toyota Prius, was in financial trouble and even behind by five months on his payments for the Prius. If that's true, it's potential motivation for wanting to find an out — any out — on paying for the vehicle.

We did some public records searches (thanks to the help of Gawker's John Cook) and found Sikes and his wife Patty found themselves, like many in the California real estate business, on the bursting side of the real estate bubble last year. The two declared bankruptcy in June of 2008 and have a combined liability of over $700,000 dollars in debt.

Among the list of creditors holding secured claims is none other than Toyota Financial Services for a lease on a 2008 Toyota Prius with 7,200 miles on the odometer. Total value of the lease at the time of bankruptcy was $20,494.



So, with almost three-quarter million dollars in debt there's obviously the potential for financial motivation here. But, for his part, when we questioned Mr. Sikes over email earlier today, he denied being behind on his Prius payments.



Mr. Sikes also has not shied away from cameras appearing on CNN and numerous other television programs. In each, he's stated numerous times he's not going to sue and isn't looking for any financial remuneration from Toyota other than a new vehicle.

<snip>

http://jalopnik.com/5491101/did-bankrupt-runaway-prius-driver-fake-unintended-acceleration

[benld74]

1. WHy dont u go buy his old Prius from the dealer? Find out yourself,,,

[CountAllVotes]

6. lol!!

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

No thanks!

:dem:

[951-Riverside]

8. If its being sold at a reasonable price I'll buy it. n/t

[meegbear]

9. OK, but only if you douse yourself w/gasoline and test if you're flammable

[polpilot]

18. #1 Didn't turn off key #2 didn't put car in neutral #3 DID call 911 & ignore instructions.

Only Flat Earthers would believe this story.

[Bluerthanblue]

26. funny how the way he supposedly stopped was to

apply the brakes and the parking brake.

:shrug:

Even my teenage son wouldn't need to be told to do that by the police if he were experiencing something like this.

The man cannot possibly be as ignorant as he would like us to believe he was.

[TheDebbieDee]

28. Doesn't this car have a keyless ignition? And, does it do any good

to put the car in neutral with its new-fangled computer-controlled gearbox?

There was a long thread on this yesterday about how people who feel the way you do don't know all of the facts about these models of Toyotas. The transmissions are totally different. Just sayin'

[polpilot]

31. #1 'Keyless ignitions, of course, can be turned OFF #2 Transmission 101: P,R,N,L1,L2:

These aren't 'Jetson'Cars..They're not 'magic'. How do you think you turn them 'OFF' when you arrive at your destination? How do you think you engage the tranmission to go 'BACKWARDS'? OR 'FORWARDS'. This car doesn't just magically 'turn on' and 'take off' on its own.

[TheDebbieDee]

38. Maybe you should check out the explanation thread.............

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x7885271

[polpilot]

45. Confirmed what I stated: (1) shift to neutral and/or (2) turn off engine

I have a Cooper/No conventional 'key' but I can certainly turn the engine off at any time and can shift to 'neutral' anytime.

[Statistical]

54. A prius can be turned off. A Prius can be placed into Neutral

Move shifter to N = placing car in neutral.
Pressing and holding start button for 3 seconds = turns off engine.

[Hepburn]

72. +1,000...

...better yet, buy it out of the BK court where assets of the BK estate are sold as it.

:evilgrin:

[Fumesucker]

2. Extra butter please..

:popcorn:

[Dappleganger]

3. Do you have *any* idea just how many people in CA

have declared bankruptcy, are on the verge of declaring, are underwater and behind in their mortgages, car payments, etc.??

[Juneboarder]

84. It might be easier to guess...

how many people are not in that situation! :)

[Jennicut]

4. The only way to tell may perhaps lie in the investigation of the car.

Another acceleration issue with a Prius happened in NY the other day, where a woman claims her car accelerated and she smashed into a stone wall right outside her driveway. Some people could most certainly try to get out of payments on their vehicles and we could start seeing copy cats. It could also be a legitimate issue.

[RobinA]

29. This Sounds Like

a copycat Audi claim. Isn't the Toyota story that the accelerator gets STUCK? I never believed that CA story either. Although I'm dying for my sister to get home from Florida so I can drive her Prius and see if it can be shut off while driving by hitting the button. I already tried this in my Mazda and it turned right off, brakes worked, steering remained functional...

[Jennicut]

35. Don't know unless Toyota does an acutal investigation instead of stonewalling.

[Midlodemocrat]

5. Having driven Priuses, I never believed this guy.

He's full of shit.

[gateley]

22. It happened to Steve Wozniak in his Prius - it was the first Prius incident that

I heard. I doubt if he's doing it for the money. As a matter of fact, he also said he thought it was the electronics -- something that Toyota continues to disagree with.

[Midlodemocrat]

27. Kill switch or shove the car into neutral.

something every kid learns in driver's ed.

Not that hard.

[gateley]

30. You don't think Wozniak learned that in driver's ed? Why would he make such

a claim? And the guy you don't believe, I think he did finally go into neutral (can you 'shove' it into neutral on a Prius?) at some point.

I know what to do in a fire, too -- but I shouldn't have to worry about that every time I walk into my house.

[Midlodemocrat]

41. I'm sorry. I missed the thread where Steve Wozniak was a Prius guru.

Must have been after he crashed his Beechcraft for having a lack of familiarity with the aircraft.

Sorry bout that.

[harun]

50. He's a systems guru and he could reproduce the problem. As a

systems guy myself, once you can reproduce the problem you can work out the fix. Toyota once notified by Wozniak kept ignoring him and not doing anything about the issue. So keep worshiping Toyota, they knew about the issue and simply didn't want to admit it because of the repercussions.

[Midlodemocrat]

52. Excellent. Hyperbole much?

Only thing missing from that post is the obligatory Hitler reference.

:eyes:

[harun]

56. Jeez, save the drama for your mama.

[Midlodemocrat]

91. LOL.

The responses from people regarding this are fucking hilarious. :eyes:

[NashVegas]

61. Does That Fact That Woz Has Repeatedly Re-Created The Bug Say Anything?

Like, for example, that he was able to successfully come to a halt either by shutting the car down or shifting to neutral?

How about the widespread dissemination of an article where he spoke about how he got the car to accelerate in the first place?

[Midlodemocrat]

90. Why would you bring facts into this discussion?

It's WAY more fun to trash Toyota. Who, despite what some people here believe has made quality cars IN THE US for many years. Including the one my kids drive. Which is not involved in the recall, BTW.

[Tesha]

46. Something quite different happened to Steve Wozniak.

And he stated that it was related to the cruise control and, IIRC,
the incident could be ended by releasing the cruise control.

Tesha

[notadmblnd]

7. Wow! Generally they repossess your car when you get 3 months behind

how generous of Toyota for letting him keep it, especially if he filed bankruptcy on it in 2008.

[hughee99]

11. I imagine the repo industry is probably backlogged right now.

Who says a down economy hurts everyone.

[notadmblnd]

16. Still if he filed bankruptcy on it in 2008, they should have taken it then

they wouldn't have just let him keep it for the past two years free of charge. Some people may think his story stinks, but their story does too.

[Midlodemocrat]

43. Not sure about that. About a year ago, I had been paying the

car payment for a friend who was suffering because their child needed extensive treatment for cancer and they were really suffering financially. Not healthcare wise, but because Mom and Dad had essentially been paralyzed by this trauma. No judgment. Didn't happen to me, so I can't say what I would do/have done.

Anyhow. I got a phone call from a guy who had been poking around my house looking for the car that I had been paying on, because it had gone into repo. Which was weird, because the loan people had been taking my money all along. Not a huge amount, mind you, about $200 a month.

Pretty unnerving to find that a guy with a huge repo truck and a gun had been walking around my house looking in my garage for the car. Fortunately, the guy could tell that my van was not the one he was looking for, but still, unnerving. I kept thinking what might have happened had I opened the back door to let one of the dogs out and been confronted by this guy who was brandishing a weapon.

Anyway. That's my only experience with this. And it wasn't even my car. Weird.

[TeeYiYi]

77. So, what did you do?...

... Did you tell the creepy repo man where your friend lived? I hope not... :P

TYY

[Midlodemocrat]

93. LOL. No. I didn't. The guy had already gone to their house

and looked, in the garage, which is what he did to me (!!!!!) and they must have hidden the car someplace.

I did call up and get it out of repo for them, though. They were going through enough and Capital One, although majorly sucky in a lot of ways, doesn't require the entire outstanding amount of the loan to get it out of repo; just the past due.

[tammywammy]

12. It was an anonymous tipster

Which could be anyone. He may not be behind at all.

[elocs]

10. So, since this trouble how many of us have checked on how to stop our vehicles,

no matter what the model, it we encountered a stuck accelerator problem? I know I have, especially since I drive a Toyota made care (Scion xA). So how can somebody who drives a Prius, a vehicle that could surely have this problem, be totally clueless as to what to do when their accelerator was stuck? Even if the dealer had said it was ok this would be excellent knowledge to have.

Here is a YouTube video posted here yesterday about how to stop a Prius:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3N22LLJsChA

It doesn't seem to be rocket science does it? If it were to save my life I would certainly take the time to learn how to do it. As it is, with my car I know enough to put the car into neutral to stop it.

[Lance_Boyle]

14. FWIW, none of the Scion-branded vehicles are affected. n/t

[elocs]

21. I know that, but knowing how to stop a car with a stuck accelerator is a good thing to know,

right? I think that type of knowledge is useful for all of us.

[Statistical]

55. Exactly.

No Hondas have been affected but I know my ridgeline uses an ETC (Electronic Throttle Control) so I spent a few minutes just going through the motions in a "what if" while car was parked.

1) Put car in neutral
2) If car continues to accelerate turn off ignition.

I didn't try turning the car off but I did confirm I could put car into neutral at highway speeds just fine.

[Lance_Boyle]

59. no doubt! n/t

[obxhead]

40. Anyone that does not know how to stop a car with a stuck

accelerator doesn't need to be on our roads. It's really that simple.

That's one argument totally ignored by the MSM. While I will in no way excuse Toyota for this problem, I will fault any idiot not smart enough to stop a car with a stuck accelerator. Driving involves a great deal of responsibility, even if your driving a faulty product.

[jayfish]

13. Low, Low, Low.

Slander a victim to save a corporations ass without any evidence what-so-ever. Sounds like something I'd see on Faux. ...oh and I'd be on the horn with an attorney this minute discussing a suit against Jalopnik.

Jay

[Sebastian Doyle]

15. Well, you gotta admit, it's sure funny how all these Toyotas are suddenly "going rogue"

You never heard about any of this before Toyota admitted there was a problem. Now suddenly there's a new instance being reported every day.

Now either you have some Japanese Dr. Evil activating these Franken-cars by remote control, or else you have a bunch of sleazy opportunists trying to cash in on it.

And since the odds of a remote in Tokyo being able to control US cars are fairly slim, I'm going with the latter option.

[jayfish]

20. But Are They Suddenly Going Rouge, Or...

are we just paying more attention to the issue because it's gone public in a big way? There are folks in prison for vehicular homicide who claim this phenomenon was responsible for their accidents. BTW, this isn't an anti-Toyota thing for me either. I'm against drive-by-wire systems and have been since I first read of them. ...precisely because of this scenario.

Jay

[Pithlet]

32. Never heard about it because they weren't in the news. It doesn't mean they didn't happen.

There actually were plenty of documented incidences that were completely ignored by Toyota. It was that grizzly death of that family in San Diego that brought media attention.

[Saturday]

17. I heard the 911 tape and he appeared to be clueless.

If I had a Toyota and heard all the publicity I would have been more informed so I didn't believe him. Just my opinion though.

[la_chupa]

19. or it could be a smear campaign to discredit him

So people who are broke cannot hold anyone else legally liable for anything, ever?

just checking

[LostInAnomie]

23. After all the bullshit Toyota has been doing to try to cover their asses...

... there is no way I'm going to believe anything that comes out from them for a very long time. They were effectively murdering people.

[Pithlet]

33. Agreed. And I can't believe that smart DUers are jumping on the Faux News Fakers bandwagon.

Come on, people. You're smarter than that.

[Bluerthanblue]

24. hate to admit this, but that was my first thought after seeing

him on TV. He was asked why he didn't try shifting the car into neutral and he said something like "it isn't easy to think straight in that kind of situation" yet, he had the presence of mind to CALL 911????

And the officer who helped him stop told him to apply the brakes & the parking brake... ??? seems like simple common sense, and it is what stopped him... :shrug:
sorry... his story just doesn't jibe imo.

[greyl]

37. He also said he was afraid it might rollover, and afraid he'd get rear-ended.

The OP expose is a little ugly, nevertheless, I don't think it can be ruled out that he faked it.

[TorchTheWitch]

48. it's surprising how many drivers have no idea what neutral IS

Why? They never drove a manual transmission and they never had a reason to use neutral. I only know what neutral is and what it has to do with a transmission because I learned to drive on a manual transmission and was well taught about driving and cars. I HATE automatic transmissions but unfortunately have been forced to drive one for about 8 years now. Most drivers have never driven a manual transmission and have never used neutral or know what it is and does. Most drivers can't remember damn near anything from driver's ed if they took it at all. I'm in my early 40's and never took driver's ed and it wasn't necessary to and as far as I know still isn't. Very few people I went to school with took driver's ed since they had a parent or sibling or friend to teach them how to drive.

Even though I've been driving a despised automatic transmission for about 8 years now, I wouldn't have known that neutral functioned the same way that it does in a manual transmission, and honestly don't know if it really does. I wouldn't have known if I could just throw it into neutral while driving or not since there's no clutch, and like most drivers of automatic transmissions have never had the occasion to use neutral at all ever. I only recently discovered by accident that in order to unlock the gear shift you have to depress the breaks all the way. I had to get out the manual to figure out why the gear shift was stuck... says right in the manual that if for some odd reason the gear shift locks to release the break peddle and depress it again all the way to the floor (which thankfully worked). Never in all these years did I have a clue that you couldn't move the gear shifter without depressing the breaks all the way. I guess it's just habit that makes me put my foot on the break peddle before starting the car and never realized I automatically did that.

No doubt in my mind that long time drivers of nothing but automatic transmissions not only don't really know what neutral is and have never had occasion to use it for anything, and it would not occur to them that they could shift gears while driving anyway since the reason they drive an automatic transmission is so they don't have to deal with gear shifting.

In total honesty I admit that in an automatic transmission vehicle it may not occur to me to use neutral or that I COULD use neutral while driving. In a manual transmission vehicle, should I have a situation where the car was accelerating without my permission I know I would try throwing it into neutral since I am much more comfortable driving a manual transmission vehicle and know I can use neutral while driving, had many occasions to use it while driving and knew how it worked and what would happen.

I KNOW I'm far from the only one here who did not think first of puting the car in neutral in an unintended acceleration incident since there were MANY threads on what to do in such an instance and most peoples' first thought was to turn the car off. Most people here did NOT first think to put the car in neutral, so no, it's NOT common sense, and would be even less common sense for drivers who have never driven a manual transmission. And none of us who answered the question on what to do in such an instance were flying down the road with no control to their car terrified for their lives and the lives of others on the road and possibly also in the uncontrollable vehicle but sitting comfy in front of our computers perfectly safe with plenty of time to ponder the question.

And let's be honest here... people always think they know exactly how they will react in a certain horrible situation, and most of the time they're wrong. Blind panic effects people in ways that they have no idea of until a situation happens and common sense goes right the hell out the window. One thing I'm grateful of with these Toyota incidents is that at least now I DO know what to do if it should ever happen to me (and no, I don't have a Toyota) and I'd just hope that I wouldn't pass out or freeze and could keep my head enough to do what I've since learned.

[sammytko]

49. Thank you! I took drivers ed in the 70s and do not remember being taught

about putting the vehicle in neutral etc blah blah blah.

Some people don't even know about the runaway Toyotas. My niece had no clue what I was talking about and she works for a large insurance/finance company. The finance part, but still. She says she NEVER watches the news or any tlevision at all.

[Fumesucker]

53. It's interesting and illuminating that the reason you have to push the brake pedal to shift..

An automatic is due to the safety interlock being added after the last unintended acceleration scare with the Audi 5000 in the 1980's.

Audi patented the brake/shifter interlock and made the patent available to other manufacturers at no charge as a safety feature.

Here is an article in the New York Times giving details..

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/11/opinion/11schmidt.html?pagewanted=1

[doc03]

25. I said he was a gold digger when I first heard the

story. Anyone that could drive a car 94MPH for 20 minutes and not have the brains to shut it off or put it in neutral shouldn't have a license period.

[JBoy]

36. Or they should star in a movie

[closeupready]

34. Wait, this 'tip' doesn't make sense. I thought bankruptcy discharges debts, so how can they have $7

$700k of debt?

[JTFrog]

71. Not if you want to keep your stuff.

Under a Chapter 13 bankruptcy, you file a plan with the bankruptcy court proposing how you will repay your creditors. You must repay some debts in full; others may be repaid only partially or not at all, depending on what you can afford.

[Romulox]

39. They could've broken the Prius contract in bankruptcy; OP is rubbish. nt

[Midlodemocrat]

42. Doesn't discount the other $693,000. Just sayin'

[Romulox]

60. Basic tort law: one must demonstrate an INJURY to recover money.

Without looking at his Schedules, I can tell you one thing that relieves him of that debt: Bankruptcy.

Without going into lecture mode, the dude is obviously in a Chapter 13 (restructuring) bankruptcy. That's the one in which you can keep your car and home, e.g., so long as you make payments and make up arrearages.

He could convert the case to a Chapter 7 at any time and be done with it--with the car, with the home (which is almost certainly the bulk of his debt) and with any debt to Toyota.

So, in short, the argument doesn't make sense. Calling 911 in an out of control Prius doesn't net anyone any tort damages, or allow the man any extra ability to get out of debt that he doesn't already have in BK. The only way the conspiracy angle works is if this was an aborted suicide-by-Prius. :hi:

[greyl]

65. Do you think he'll have an easier time getting out of his lease for that Prius? nt

[Romulox]

74. Not really.

He may have been asked to reaffirm his debt to Toyota, which means that he will remain indebted to them irrespective of any BK discharge.

Even so, that's weak motive to pull such a hoax--and such a scheme does not solve the guys problem as to the other $690,000 of debt. So the BK stuff is pretty weak evidence, one way or the other. More like character assassination than anything, imo. What if the guy was indicted for a felony, for example? What conclusion could be drawn?

Bottom line is that everybody involved has a financial motive.

[Hepburn]

76. He could do that now by going 7 or a mod of the 13. n/t

[Midlodemocrat]

92. I know. My argument with this guy, even before hearing about the bankruptcy

was that turning the car off apparently never occurred to the guy. That I don't get. What was his end game here? Trying to get out of the lease?

Lots of people in CA have had the misfortune of losing their homes, declaring bankruptcy, however, they aren't resorting to fraudulent claims like this guy.

And, if he is lying like I think he is? He jeopardized that CHiP officer and that's not right. :hi:

[Hosnon]

80. And if the bankruptcy is a Chapter 13, it's likely he was no longer behind on the payments. nt.

ETA: It was a 7. Unless there was a reaffirmation, his financial liability regarding the car was discharged (i.e., he has no financial incentive to lie).

[county worker]

44. I heard the 911 call and the operator asked him a couple of times if he put the car in neutral.

He never answered that question and it seems to me he could have if he wanted to stop.

[Brickbat]

47. Note to self: Clear all debts before something bad happens to you.

[Name removed]

51. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Dappleganger]

57. +1 nt

[Political Heretic]

66. Seriously. Sometimes, especially when it comes to class issues, there's really little difference

Between DU and freeperville. And whether its shown to be faking at some point in the future isn't the point either.

It's the assumption of guilt based on the fact that he's poor and in debt. He's in poor and in debt, therefore he's more likely to be a thief, a criminal, a liar, etc.

[joeybee12]

58. The guy says he's not gonna sue, because when you sue, there's

a process called discovery, and this "runaway" will be investigated very, very thoroughly.

Bankruptcy aside, this whole story sounded fishy to me from the start.

[sufrommich]

63. When did he say that? nt

[JTFrog]

79. In the email pictured in the OP for starters.

:shrug:

[joeybee12]

64. It was on a different thread...he was saying it on CNN...

pretty empathetically.

[Romulox]

89. I think a lot of our Junior Attorneys are overlooking the INJURY element of a tort lawsuit...

:shrug:

[Political Heretic]

62. POVERTY IS NOT A CRIME AND POOR PEOPLE ARE NOT AUTOMATICALLY CRIMINALS

For fucks sake people.

[Fumesucker]

68. How does a poor person accumulate $700,000 in debt?

I never could get the bank to loan me jack shit when I was poor before..

Now that I'm poor again I'm right back to not being able to borrow a damn thing.

[Political Heretic]

69. Poverty is not a permanent identity. He accumulated it by once being not-poor.

[Fumesucker]

70. Didn't I imply that with my post?

But we have no idea whether or not the man is poor now, just because you have discharged a $700,000 debt in bankruptcy doesn't mean you are poor, bankruptcy is a common business technique for lots of non-poor people.

Most poor people aren't driving a car that's only a couple of years old.

[JTFrog]

75. Who said the debt was discharged?

Usually when you have secured debt, such as a car loan, you do a Chapter 13 reorganization not a Chapter 7.

I'm thinking since he still had the vehicle, it's more than likely a Chapter 13.

[Hosnon]

81. Did you read the article? They got caught up in the housing boom and bust. nt.

[Political Heretic]

96. and?

[Democat]

73. And poor people commit crimes as often as rich, right?

So what's your point?

[Midlodemocrat]

95. He's not poor. Not in the least.

If he's lying? He's giving credence to the story out there that every. single. person who actually did experience a problem with Toyota is lying.

That's what sucks about this. I have a 2004 Toyota Camry that my son drives. It's not involved in the recall. If, however, the recall were expanded and it was included and by some horrendous accident the car did the same thing, *I* would have a more difficult time trying to prove that there was a problem.

Probably not explaining that well, but you get what I mean.

[TexasObserver]

67. Meanwhile, Toyota is suing its former attorney to hide secret documents he has.

While Toyota is spending millions to hide from their liability, what are we hearing nonstop in media?

"But what if this is just owners faking it?!"

If that happens, it will be found out, because the evidence won't match the real incidents. But why the urgent need to find some owner with bad intent and fraud?

There are hundreds of thousands of people in bankruptcy. If they keep their cars, they have to pay for them.

This smells like yet another propaganda piece from Toyota. What is it about Toyota that would cause anyone to think it's NOT their fault and they're not behind these anonymous attacks on owners whose Toyota has crashed on its own?

[Hepburn]

78. So if he filed a BK in 2008, there is no case number?

See what you posted, OK? Where is the case number?

[Hosnon]

82. That's the petition. A case number is only assigned after it is filed. nt.

[Hosnon]

83. Sorry - this doesn't fly. The car was included in the Chapter 7 and, unless reaffirmed, he

no longer is financially responsible for it.

In other words, he would not have had the incentive alluded to in the OP/article.

ETA: It looks like he reaffirmed the debt (although I can't be certain). Tsk tsk...

[Romulox]

87. He obviously reaffirmed on the debt if there was money owing on it and he retained it... nt

[Juneboarder]

85. All this talk of Toyota...

Has anyone given thought to the fact that MSM is drooling over reporting about Toyota. Usually when this happens, they are reporting nonsense while trying to hide the true news that is currently happening. I NEVER trust MSM and NEVER will. I stand behind both of my toyotas and don't believe the hype that MSM is trying to dish out.

[Romulox]

86. That website is engaged in character assassination, as far as I'm concerned...

Oooh. The guy had a saxophone stolen once. Stop the presses! :eyes:

UPDATE: We're now hearing rumors that Sikes has a history of items in his possession being stolen and him filing for insurance claims. We found at least one case of this in his bankruptcy documents, which we've included below. We're told we should know more about a second incident shortly.

[Mike 03]

88. Hopefully the Event Data Recorder will shed clues.

I believe that Toyota vehicles have sudden unintended acceleration issues, but I also knew that there would be fake reports in the wake of the Congressional and Senate Hearings. It will be easy to make this determination once the information from the EDRs are retrieved.

[onenote]

94. Some posts in this thread have the faint smell of the old "welfare queen" argument