Free Motion to Dismiss Case/Lack of Jurisdiction - District Court of Arizona - Arizona

Sennett v. Workhorse Custom Chassis

EXHIBIT 1

Case 2:04-cv-00161-ROS

Document 220-2

Filed 10/13/2006

Page 1 of 14

BOWMAN AND BROOKEI. V-

REcElvEÏr-

,
2
3

Marshall Meyers Krohn & Moss, L TD 111 W. Monroe, Suite 711 Phoenix, Arizona 85003
(602) 275-5588 Attorney No. 020584 .

SfP 2 U 2004 ff'
1.-... '.~. .
. '. ,- \~_. ~.

'\

..-

4

Attorney for Plaintiff
5

6
7 8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
LANE SENNETT,
) Case No,: CV 04-0161 PHX ROS ) ) )

9
10
11

Plaintiff,
vs,

) DISCOVERY PAPERS: PLAINTIFF'S

12

FLEETWOOD MOTOR HOMES OF CALIFORNIA AND WORKHORSE CUSTOM CHASSIS,
Defendant.

) EXPERT DISCLOSURE
)

) )
)

13

)

14 15 16

1.

Complete Statement of Opinions

See expeit repol1. attached hereto as Exhibit "A", Plaintiffs expert, William Trimmell

i7

("Trimmell"), will testify consistent with his expert report and Plaintiffs Initial Rule 26. i disclosure
statement. This expected testimony may include, but is not limited to, areas and issues such as defect,
Technical Service Bulletins, valuation and devaluation, substantial impairment, warranty coverage, cost

18

19

20

of repair, reasonableness of the repair attempts, any and all technical documents, all technical matters,
21

22
23

technician and expert opinions, industry customs, industry standards, diagnostic and/or repair criteria,

diagnostic and/or repair standards, matters related to Defendant's foundation for testimony of nonoccurrence of events and/or lack thereof, repair orders, repair order documentation, repair order

24
25

interpretation, technical manuals, technical manual interpretation, repair attempt related documentation,
defendant's repair agent's methods and customs.

26
27

28

J
Case 2:04-cv-00161-ROS Document 220-2 Filed 10/13/2006 Page 2 of 14

I.,,''''
\. .~,~'

/..

2.
2

Basis and Reasons of all Opinions

See expert report, previously disclosed. This report is based on Trimmell's physical inspection of
the coach, the review of the repair records, a review of valuation guides, a review of technical information

3

4

and manuals, experience and knowledge in the RV industry (as outlined in Trimmells' curriculum vitae),
5

discussions and consultations with peers in the industry, formal and informal industry training and
6

education,
7 8 9

conversation and communications with

Plaintiff,

Defendant's expert disclosures,

demonstrative charts and exhibits,

3.

Data or Other Information Considered in Forming Opinions
the repair records, a visual inspection of

10

Trimmell's opinion are based on his review of

the RV, a

11

review of various technical guides, a review of various valuation guides, informal discussions with

12
13

various peers in the R V industry, discussions with Plaintiff(s), and all other data and information
identified above,
4.

14

Exhibits

15

Trimmell may lIse pictures taken during the inspection, Trimmell may also use excerpts from
16

valuation and technical guides.
17

18

5.

List of all Publications Authored Within the Preceding 10 Years

19

None.
6.

20
21

Compensation to be Paid for Testimony

Trimmell owns and operates American Appraisals, a recreational vehicle valuation company.

22
23

Trimmell is not employed by Plaintiff(s) or Krohn & Moss, Ltd, Trimmell was paid $150.00 for his
inspection and report, a $125.00 flat fee for his deposition regardless of its duration, and if called to
testify at trial, will be paid a flat fee of$400,OO, regardless of the length of

24

the triaL.

25

7.
26
27 28

Listing of Cases in Which Witness Has Testified as an Expert at trial or by Deposition Within the Preceding 4 Years
a.

Jim Bryant v. Fleetwood Motor Homes of California, Inc., Maricopa County Superior Court # CV 2002-003 116

Case 2:04-cv-00161-ROS

Document 220-2

Filed 10/13/2006

Page 3 of 14

b.
2

Michael Dils v, Fleetwood Motor Homes of California, Inc" US District Court # CIV 03-491 PHX MHM

3

c,

Frank Howard v. Fleetwood Motor Homes of California, Inc., US District Court
# CIV 02 2516 PHX EHC

4

d.
5

Dorothy and Stanley Plagens v. National RV et. aI., US District Court # CIV-02-

1393PHXJAT
e.

6
7 8

Eloise Roche v, Monaco Coach Corporation, Maricopa County Superior Court #CV 2001-007167

f.

Richard Bailey v. Monaco Coach Corporation, US District Court Northern
District of

Georgia # I :04-CV-0040-TWT

9

g.
10

Brian Langston v. Forest River and AI Ko Kober, Yavapai County Superior
Court # CV82003-009 1

ii
12
13

h.

Joseph Monticello v, Winnebago Industries Inc, US District Court Northern
District of Georgia # i -04-CV-004 I -RWS

Plaintiff reserves the right to seasonably slipplemertZ!~is disclosure.
""".

14

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED on this
i5

, ",. ". :~ ~" I. ,
By:/' i' ~y
:...

day of'" "'. :'\ " '-'.' L, 2004,
',\ .' -)_/~-".

16 17 18

"-' ìthitshall Meyers

~ROHN & MOSS L TD A\to~ey for Plaintiff

'- \:

19

20

2\
22
23
,

\", ,/'

24 25

26

27
28

Case 2:04-cv-00161-ROS

Document 220-2

Filed 10/13/2006

Page 4 of 14

A

Case 2:04-cv-00161-ROS

Document 220-2

Filed 10/13/2006

Page 5 of 14

liT

0~!--.' "" ~~~.'3: 08 08/ 2004 i

502-853-21300. ---

BILL TRIMMELL

PAGE 02

EVALUATION REPORT

INSP.DATE: LOCATION:
ACTIVITY SHEET: # 1 OWNER: LANE SENNETT INSPECTOR: BILL TRIMMELL
N.A.DA. STATED MSRP WAS = $ J 25,734.00 WHOLE SALE VALUE is : $ 75,300.00 RETAIL VALUE is = $ 99,390.00 CLIENT PAID is:: $ J 27,081 .05 TOP BOOK RETAIL VALUE IS:= $ 100,400.00
SAL V AGE VALUE is = $ 20,080.00

DA TE: September 4,2004

This motor home with no defects would justify top book retail with full adds would a.c,v. At
= $ 100,400.00

THIS MOTORHOM.E IN ITS PRESENT DAY CONDITION AND WITH THE FACT THAT i IT is NOT KNOWN WHAT TH CAUSE OF MANY OF THESE ISSUES ARE. I COULD ¡ NOT EVALUATE IT AT ANY HIGHER VALUE THAN SEVENTY-FIVE PER-SENT OF J WHOLESALE VALVE. RETAIL VALUE
I $ 100,400.00 = TOP BOOK

NOTE .

! $ 56,475.00 = ESTIMATED PRESENT DAY VALUE
! $ 43,925.00 = LOSS OF VALUE

TH OPINIONS, ESTIMATES, AND EVALUATIONS ARE JUST THT. THESE FININGS

ARE BASED ON THE INSPECTION, SERVICE RECORDS, AND INRVIEW WITH THE i
OWNER. ESTI1\1A TES ARE BASED ON THE LA TEST REPAIR METHODS, AND EXCEPTED STANDARDS OF THE INDUSTRY. AMERICAN APPRASIAL, AND OR THE INSPECTOR CAN NOT EXCEPT LIABILITY FOR THE OPINIONS IN THIS REPORT.
By

~~.
Bill Trimmell
Filed 10/13/2006 Page 6 of 14

Case 2:04-cv-00161-ROS

Document 220-2

-.

e9/eS/2004 13: 08

602-853-2000

BILL TRIMMELL

PAGE 03

INSPECTION LOCA nON = INSPECTED BY = BILL TRIMMELL VEHICLE OWNERS = LANE SENNETT

VEHCILE INFORMATION ~ 2003 PACE ARROW by FLEETWOOD, MODEL 37A CLASS A MOTOR HOME 38ft. (2) SLIDE OUTS, on 2002 WORK HORSE CHASSIS BONDED WALL CONSTRUCTION
VIN. # == 5B4MP67G823351670 LICENSE # == N/ A

MILEAGE = 21,400 apx. DATE = August 22, 2004

Report:

Prior to conducting my interview of Ms. Sen.1ett, I first reviewed the repair orders and the service and repai.r as well as waranty work orders, my tirst impression was that the coach' 5 overall quallty these issues mayor may not have and workmanship was very poor. Even though some of this many defects been resolved in one or more attempts at them, the mere existence of
purchase docwncnts for this vehicle. After thorough review of

and problems in,a brad new motor home with the miles registered on this unit. Would

indicate a coach not in keeping with Pace Arrow's brand name nor Fleetwood's reputation, and this coach's sellng price. I did note that this motor home was a carryover unit. By that I mean that this is a 2002 chassis with a 2003 coach body built on it. As you have heard me opine in the past about carryover motor homes I can make the same observatioos about this one. It would not be unreasonable to relate some of these problems to the fact this chassis was setting around for a much longer period oftime before it was utilized into a full fledged motor home. r would make a couple of other observation before getting into the specific complaint issues. The first being that this motor home left the assembly plant wIth some of these problems. This means that the quality was sorely lacking when this coach was manufactued. The second being that it did not receive any better quality control after reaching the sellng dealer and before being sold to this owner as a new supposedly ready to go motor coach. As an example of this the first time the owner hooked up to city water after taking the coach out from the dealer he had massive water leaks and lines that were never connected. This would alone point to the fact that this coach was not water tested by the
manufacturer or their representative the sellng dealer. When the owner called back to

complain about this condition they were told, sorr we must have over looked that. This
was just the star of the problems they would experience with this coach in the next few

months. In fact, if I were looking at the repair history alone, I'd have thought this unit was used with many years and miles on it rather than new.

Compliant issues:

Case 2:04-cv-00161-ROS

Document 220-2

Filed 10/13/2006

Page 7 of 14

..

EJ9(~/~~~4 13,: EJ,,

502-853-2000

BILL TRIMMELL

PAGE 04

1 am not going to address these issues in any particular order other, than the way i discussed them with the owners,

The first problem in the coach lies within the: bedroom slide out and is most definitely the issues the motor home left the factory with, This slide out unit was a source of water leakng from day one and was worked on several times before anyone found the real issue that was causing this point of entry of the elements.
one of

The very first warranty repair order generated on this coach that I have record of .
addresses this leaking of

the bedroom slide and it goes on from there. Hopefully on their last trip in for waranty repairs this issue may have bee~ resolved,. at l~ast as t~ how the
water was making entr into the motor home structure its sdf. This still remains to be seen.

The owners were told that the screws that hold this slide out together were never sealed from the time they were installed during its manufacturer at the factory. This means that any time it was exposed to rain or any other outside elements, such as water testing f~r leaks, this slide out strcture was indeed leaking, Lets examine the last Fleetwood repair order numbered # 17532. This is the hand written repair order claim number stamped 90300. This is hand written not by the owner's or me but by Fleetwood's representative Dick Gore's RV World that actually
prefoimed these repairs for Fleetwood. It starts 'out "removed window and bottom

extrusion, placed shims under skin and drained water". They are talking about a slide out wall assembly here this is not a bathtub, this is not a holding tank. A bonded wall structure was never designed nor mea.t to hold water, not in anybody's wildest imagination was it ever built for that purose. For it to be holding water ever is a manufacturer's defect of massive proportions, and in my opinion it has destroyed this assembly for all intents and puroses, This slide out assembJy should be removed and completely replaced at the very least. For anyone who bothers to read this technician's hand wrtten job explanation it is quite clear that after perfonning all of this work he stil winds up with more of the same leaking. Now after finding he stil has leaks, does he go
back disassemble this wall stcture again dry it out once more, reassemble it and then

completely reseal the bottom extrusion? No he doesn't, it clearly states he "resealed, let set, leak test again, had no leaks this time". Welt what about the water that entered when he leak tested the time before, that was left trapped inside the wall strctue, and now its 5e~led in there wit~ no way for it to.escape. Ifhe is right about truly having it waterproof this last attempt, this trapped water 15 left there to do it~ damage with no way to escape from this walJ structure. Now lets look at what the owner's were complaining about, they had wet caipet on the bed from this very water leak that was happening in the slide out wall. both sides of What about the floor decking that this carpet and pad was setting on. As it turns out the
~aret and pad only served.t~ hold and trap this water next to the floor decking allowing it to do more damage than 1f it were to run out on the bare floor. Was this flOOT decking

ever addi:ssed, was it checked for water damage, I think not, I certainly don't find any record of it and I am sure no one did it for'free. This only reflects the shoddy quality of

2

Case 2:04-cv-00161-ROS

Document 220-2

Filed 10/13/2006

Page 8 of 14

0~/08/2004 13: 08

502-853-2000

BILL TRIMMELL

PAGE 05

this coach and also indicates the owner's can reasonably expect continuing problems as a these water-leaking Issues. result of You have heard me express my opinion on water leaking issues in the past and nothing has cha.nged to cause me to change my mind on them. Water is the number one damage causing factor a RV has facing it. RV exteriors are designed to be as waterproof as
possible robber and fiberglass and metal are all use on Ù1e outsides to keep water out

and as long as they are kept properly sealed they do an admirable job. The interiors however is a totally different story they are not designed to be waterproof. The materials usd and even the way they are put together by no means just the opposite. The materials used in water resistance, in fact it is insure any degree of RV's are mostly wood or wood products. The ceilng panels constructing the interior of and substrates, the wall panels, studs and framing, the floor decking and inlayed wood floor coverings are the most commonly used materials in RV interiors. These things are raw wood or made of raw wood byproducts they are not pressure treated, sealed, painted or in any way waterproofed. The reason for this is probably because they are not designed
to be gotten wet, water is not suppose to get to ìhese things, and in a perfect world they

don't get wet, soaked, or exposed to great amounts of moisture. What happens to these things when they are exposed to water, nothing good can come of it believe me. The things that do happen are things like warping, delaminating, soft spotting, rotting, decay, and mold to mention a few. In fact, the owner has expressed a great deal of concern over water leaking into this coach body the coach's safety and reliabilty based on this issue of the various water leaks and exposures it has been subject too. from £111 of In reviewing these waranty repair orders I see other instances of water leaks from other sources than just this slide out. The roof and its sealant seem to be an issue on a
couple of wrte-ups. There are toilet leaks, plumbing leaks, and leaks in several of

the

compartent bays noted as well. All of

these only serve to contribute to the exposure of

water to the interior of tts motor home. One last point about these various leaking issue I would like to make and addressing the roofIeaks in particular. This pace arow motor home has a rubber roof installed from the factory. How the sealant could be failing in the first couple of months of its life would make one think there either had to be contamination of some sort on this roof before it was sealed at the factory or faulty sealant was used at the time it was installed, Rubber roof sealant, which is an EPDM rubber based sealant just. does not deteriorate that quickly. For it to either open up or loose its adhesion is just not a normal occurrence. So
un1e~s:his ro~f..; seal~l1t was completely removed and re-applied I would be very suspicious ofits quallty and durability. I can totally understand the concern the owner's have expressed to me that this as well as other issues have truly been resolved. When one ioo~s at the service history of this coach it would make me have the same concerns. This again reflects the shoddy quality ofthis coach and also indicates the owner can reasonably expect continuing problems and repair issues in the future. The next complaint issue is related to several of the chassis issues the owners have experi~~ced with this coach. There have been fuel-reJated problems with the main as well as auxillary generator en~ines. Again these are well docwnented and clearly manufacturer defects having to do with a kink in the fuel Hne to bad and faulty fuel
pumps. They have as weB had problems with the leveling

jacks, belt tensioner, dash air

3

Case 2:04-cv-00161-ROS

Document 220-2

Filed 10/13/2006

Page 9 of 14

~

El9/1:8/2E104

~. .-

13:08 ¿ - i_.

602-853-2000

-

BILL TRIMMELL

PAGE 06

conditioner, and windshield wipers, and various other trim and fit problems that are as well documented. this motor home basically rons from May through September, The servce history of which is when the Sennett's for all intents and purposes parked this coach and stopped using it. When you look at the service record of this unit it is no wonder they have lost all confidence in using it. For this amount of problems to have cropped up in this short time I can honestly say I do not blame them. In fact, the owner has expressed a amount of
great deal of concern over the coach's safety and reliabilty based on all of

these warranty

repair issues.

Conclusion:

This RV does not indicate a level of quality or workmanship consistent with its brand name of Pace Arrow and Fleetwood's reputation and certainly with its price. t am not sure it is possible to cure this R V's many defects and problems aad expect that this unit will be subject to multiple and repeated repairs for a lot of these same issues and 1055 of confidence in the motor problems. The O\\l1er is ruBy justified in having a total coach and can reasonably expect a diminished :\bilty to use the R V because of its buying a five year defects and problems. In fact, the owner would probably have been off old coach and applied the savings towards repairs and maintenance rather than buying this partic\uar new vehicle. To this end. my assessment of this coach's diminished value is (see attched evaluation report,) I d,ec1are under penalty of perjury that the foregoing constitutes my expert opinion after a reV1ew of the coach's service history and an interview with the owner.

6ør

By BILL TRIMMELL

4

Case 2:04-cv-00161-ROS

Document 220-2

Filed 10/13/2006

Page 10 of 14

B

Case . .~...- ..

2:04-cv-00161-ROS

Document 220-2

Filed 10/13/2006

Page 11 of 14 . .

07/20/2064 10: 43

602-853-2000

BILL TRIMtLL

PAG 82

AI"1C AP NN- ~ Pt ".v.cm.",,'"'. I2 2O,AX

1P1 H. 1"-, LM 104''' GO.M.81 IIIL ~im

WlWA TRMMEL
... J1I.

To .. ~ V8k; ee en hilto.
18920G

~R..

AMeRIC APSA
AND

RV COSULTING

.r""'IØ1 CO-~TAA, AØ AN -4 --I ~
. I hI wr (N W hilre i1 ii l-.. . yw fo th
ve bo ln mo. I

~ fa""' i'"i- --8n lidoii1n -on on RVi, I do lC hunc dev'* ..... an nn-il øpliill

ec ~. .n CI CI wd Tru

. Ad1f ac wi fN tw rN li- CQ1p1i on RV

c: 0Y tw hund in t8 ww In ÇÇ 8n

81 Bo dltmin Io th h Unll St I i- an do

nw, nOh8id ca rn, i- nl8.

..,. ~ ~ P4 an ii ll. FOC on an tn 'M. -- i- ar. , 8) oo 1I" fe

~ 8lSI on ~ wI RVI. I do ii an ., -- cab8 ... WI.

. Im ua~. .. an co wi pr ... l- tn Iß fI

ap II ec. . C8: MM l- ~ an Ac 8I Fru In../g -. (NAVT U.S.SURVORS . USA 010711,in //C' 1891.) To pp8n IN Sl. fo Ac -- bu iM 'L,,ii Ma GQiip ør lli 8n bu Ie ~,
ta hi
1991987 C.A.S. im OKEEF & McNTE ADUSTING
COPANieS SCOTTSDE, AZ. AND PHOENIX, AZ,

~ CD"' ig'Mpt dI_ACy, I" peld co .. 8r dlll- op. For te øp

.MM"" ..
. Wr re an Ig nn pr 1I,

. $e tØlc an d8 ci.
Di ~it Ir.iilip-ii.
. E* epAli.11

Case 2:04-cv-00161-ROS

Document 220-2

Filed 10/13/2006

Page 12 of 14

07/20/2004 10: 43

&02-853-2600

BILL TRIMMLl

PAGE 03

199 -1987

III RV CO Co.
2225 ..t mIn at Me. AZ.

II.., MWI8 --TO Nf1l""

-- l-..

. '' l- b" FII an S8 ma QO c:ii. . we

. WK in CU .. an In eei-n. NerA im
In"" .~ d II", i- we. . Co fN eø on betA III RV

. CU ItI. 8d fo Ii CDi-

b: co an 'f ve ~ CcIIqu 01 . .. II sn au 81 p- ad t8 as oa

19t-1007 ARIZNA rw CONLJING GG. AZ.

. AA ff CQ1t 'M -- 88 th i- d on d th fn

DUB'" ~.ø... t"--TAN,,¡ U MII-

In It n ex In do ItI8 wo b cc Ia dd co th ., Ph mW .. to l- .. fN hi
.. fa '* -- ~r.i- E-- I hh ...

cx1e. Th It II ¡m ff 88 up in ca l-

ipl'11~.mo mI å"'.diadId nn II . .. ~- 8n dI 81 8n l\ b' 16 IW mi 1nu oa'" .,th ~ i~uØl in i- ~. RV mo .. II -- rJ th me .. .. th ti. 1h hi CO OD,

Imec CoIn 8W. .... ~. b.i." le lo r: ... pi pñ -- in k8 c:.
*1-189
DE SU RV
7; NO e8 AVE
GlENDAL, ~.

OW OPTOR
~ 0e 8m RV W81 Pa. 58. F~ te Rlr in Bo Sh
MW r- -- owi.
. It.. du Ih ti pe th I id ARIZON RV COSUTING,

fW fd. I d In in in -- 199. It 18 til op ID und

19 - teg't

AMICA SPIR RV
48 no 5181 Av..

GI, 1Z

. It.. dw this lime pe th IIC mr Bo ii in Inc øo cd of \h TI\ bU. We ma ID Ara In th Ia p8 of 198
lA i we ID WO fo Nn ss R'. i II .. . bO 8h

n .... an ew W8 ppOf m Se rn. an fi

Case 2:04-cv-00161-ROS

Document 220-2

Filed 10/13/2006

Page 13 of 14

.

e7/2ø/20e4 ie: 43
. '.

602-853-2000

BILL TRIMML

PAGE 04

Ge ~ d Ih fIil.
~ - ttDf
I l- inl oo8 d8at .. comun coe, In Me
AZ. An V.- c:ll colee, In Pr AZ. On g8 RV

rø1p1n Ru* Ro..lio, F.R,P. and Fit
i- prUI and rn.

. ~ 181 0I hlØlå. OI.IL.

. L MJ 1Q. GI Mo nï sd Io In H"",'GI-w.. --

~8dIn m8i1 SC P8 bI~
Vf ro Sc Ff8 Sc

l- pr 8c
CEFIED TRNlNG:

NM M8 lU MM M8 M8 ØV

l-TI
.."' 88M

NI Ao 8I Fra I~
FI M8

Gt Gr GG Gr Gr Gt
GrUl

Gr GG

UNITD STATES SURORS ASSOATION (US

SA) MEMBER

AMERICAN BOAT end YACHT COUNCIL (ABYC)

MEMBER

IIARTERN ORDER OF POliCE (FOP LODGE' 32 MEMBER

INTNATION ASTI aa MAINE INVSTGA TORS (!AI)

NAT1 RR ASATI (N) UFE ME II ANS SPTS SOEt (BA LIFe M£
RO MOAI EL FO11 (RF) UFE II
19 .1970

NO AMERIC HUNTNG ClUB (N) UFE MEMBR

UN STATES MAINE COPS

VI c:..

Case 2:04-cv-00161-ROS

Document 220-2

Filed 10/13/2006

Page 14 of 14