Random question not sure if related but not sure where else to post it. For the
lawsuit against Hyundai and KIA for the car thefts I was wondering if it has any basis?
The plaintiffs (17 cities) cite:
In this case my guess is they're talking about not having immobilizers. But I guess my thinking for why it might be baseless is because:
- Hyundai didn't promise or advertise their cars have immobilizers in the first place
- And immobilizers are not legally mandatory in the first place
I guess everyone just sort of assumed that they did have immobilizers and never really thought to look into it. But the idea of suing a company because other people are stealing their products seems a bit counter intuitive, no matter how easy they are to steal. So what do you think LOLsuit or they might have a case here?