GM says bankruptcy excuses it from Impala repairs

[FZ1]

Originally Posted By: Win
I think they should as well on a car that recent.

But I don't run their company, and don't know the particulars of their reorganization plan.

I do know it's not very realistic to expect any litigant to turn a potential absolute defense into a potential open ended liability. That's not just a bad legal plan, it's a bad business plan.

It may cause them some PR damage, and that may or may not turn into lost sales. I'm pretty sure most of the people that are here feigning outrage were not potential customers to begin with.

Oh,puhleeze! Stop the spin and projection,if,you know what that is. Most posters say what they mean:and mean what they say. Spare us your "evaluation" of honest posters on this thread. Btw,nice selection of cars on your footer. Lol.

 

[Ursae_Majoris]

Originally Posted By: Win
Originally Posted By: Ursae_Majoris
Why couldn't GM have fixed cars at the dealerships back when customers complained? Why deny repairs under warranty only to be sued later and have to assume such a ridiculous, PR-loosing stance?


Well, how do you know that they haven't fixed many of them, or for that matter, virtually all of them (save Drew99GT's parents, of course)?

It only takes ONE person to file a lawsuit seeking class certification for an entire class of something that is claimed to be affected. ONE person.

I don't know whether or not it is a whole bunch of disgruntled Impala owners, or a relative handful. No facts have been presented in this regard.


Because I googled "Impala Rear end suspension problems" and came up with threads dating to 2007 talking about this problem and GM refusing to cover it under warranty.

But you can continue putting lipstick on the pig, if you want to.

 

[LS2JSTS]

Many did get this repaired under warranty on a case by case basis. Did you notice that the OP in that thread said he found a dealer willing to work with him on the repair under warranty and a pro rated tire? Did you notice the GM Master Tech who acknowledged the problem and said that his dealership has repaired a number of them under warranty? Curious that the OP never followed up, guess the assumption is that the second dealer followed through?

I'm not saying that many people werent denied coverage, and that you can find them on the net. I'm just saying that many did get covered under warranty and this class action suit will only slow the process for those still affected.

IMO, the dichotomy you can find in application of the warranty or denial of the claim is where the mistake was made. It seems that many got repaired, yet many didnt, why the difference?

 

[Drew99GT]

Originally Posted By: Win

Well, how do you know that they haven't fixed many of them, or for that matter, virtually all of them (save Drew99GT's parents, of course)?



What utter bull [censored]. This is a well documented problem and it's well documented that GM hasn't fixed any affected cars under warranty. They have the TSB out for the police versions only.

Impala TSB for police cars only

Go read all the stories of GM dealers telling owners the problem only affects police cars and the TSB is only for police cars when in fact the problem affects ALL 07/08 Impalas. GM and it's dealers flat out lied to people, AGAIN.

Don't insinuate that my family is the only family being shafted by GM, because that is a flat out lie at face value.

 

[Drew99GT]

Originally Posted By: LS2JSTS
Many did get this repaired under warranty on a case by case basis.


"Many"? Certainly not the majority. I brought ours to 3 different Chevrolet dealers with the news articles printed out, the TSB for police cars, and the receipts for the tires we've had to buy and they told be to take a hike.

 

[LS2JSTS]

Unfortunately, like you say many have had their claim denied.

But Drew it is just as true to claim that many, or at least some did get the repair done under warranty.

The thread that UM linked to clearly stated that. In fact the OP of the thread said in his next to last post that he had found a GM dealership willing to work with him on the repair and new tire under warranty. I guess thats why UM so quickly removed the link...lol

 

[LS2JSTS]

Originally Posted By: Drew99GT
Originally Posted By: LS2JSTS
Many did get this repaired under warranty on a case by case basis.


"Many"? Certainly not the majority.


Certainly, neither of us has any clue whether it's the majority or the minority.

 

[LS2JSTS]

From the thread that OM posted and then so quickly removed:

Posted by a GM dealer ASC Master Tech,

"We have instaled several camber bolts.It all depends on how many miles to justify tire replacement.If it is under 20k you should at least get 2 new rear tires.If your dealer gives you some nonsense find another one that will help. "


Posted by the OP who owned the Impala in question'

"I talked to the service manager at another local dealer today, and it sounds like this dealership is more willing to work with me and go to bat for me as far as getting warranty coverage (and pro-rated tires) for the work."

 

[mechanicx]

Sounds like pretty standard procedure in warranty repairs for most all automakers. It depends on your dealer as much as the manufacturer. How many threads could you find of Hyundai owners complaining about the dealer not making repairs under warranty? I guess those don't count because it's not GM. It goes back to what was said awhile back, all automakers have issues, can be reluctant fixing things under warranty, and have class actions filed against them. I'm not saying it's always right. But if it's GM some people want to hold it to a different standard. Their justification for this seems to change over time. Having said that, I do think GM is to blame for not issuing a TSB. A lot of dealers are reluctant to repair some issues under warranty that don't have a TSB. It's not clear why they haven't. But still GM is not the only one that does this. There is a customer service line to call, what are they telling them?

 

[Win]

Originally Posted By: Drew99GT


Don't insinuate that my family is the only family being shafted by GM, because that is a flat out lie at face value.



Sorry, I meant that to be tongue in cheek humor - my apology for it coming across in an offensive manner, that's not how I intended it.

 

[Win]

Originally Posted By: LS2JSTS
IMO, the dichotomy you can find in application of the warranty or denial of the claim is where the mistake was made. It seems that many got repaired, yet many didnt, why the difference?



+1.

That is bad business not to have a clear standard of when it is allowed as a warrantable claim, and when it gets denied. But I don't think that's unique to GM.

 

[Ursae_Majoris]

I removed the link because it was dated 2009. I've read about issues with Impalas on the treads dating to 2007. I did not want to waste my time looking for 2007 links, and I knew that Win or somebody else would accuse me of lying had I left the 2009 link in place.
sarcasm on/ I guess you are a mind-reader now, since you know why I do what I do. Do not forget to apply with NSA, they could use your talent there /sarcasm off.

PS I enjoy many of your post here, but you've got to stop putting words in people's mouths.

 

[Ursae_Majoris]

Originally Posted By: mechanicx
How many threads could you find of Hyundai owners complaining about the dealer not making repairs under warranty? I guess those don't count because it's not GM.

A lot, and that's why me and other Kia/Hyundai owners tell people to stick with SPIII ATF while under warranty, even though it is an awful fluid. I do annual drain/refills with SPIII, until the warranty is over, even though Maxlife is a much better fluid.
But this thread was not about Hyundai, it was about terrible customer service by GM, what resulted in a class-action lawsuit.

 

[ls1mike]

Bailout aside, how is it any different then this...
http://www.consumeraffairs.com/news04/2007/01/toyota_sludge_settlement.html
or this
http://www.girardgibbs.com/hondabrakes.asp
or this which I remember laughing at my buddy for having the problem
http://www.carkb.com/Uwe/Forum.aspx/ford...intake-manifold
Ford is currently fighting a very large Mod Motor spark plug class action lawsuit.
This list goes on and on.
I get it, a lot of you don't like GM because of the bailout, or you had a bad car or experience with them, but there a bunch of folks who have had very good experiences with GM. I am one of them. Do I like the Bailout? Nope, was it a penny in the pot? Sure. If you want to stay mad you can. The guys who fall into the mad, bailout and bad experience category will dismiss me as being a goof, GM lover, a guy who dosen't understand a class action lawsuit or maybe even a guy who likes to bash other car companies. But facts are facts,
ALL CAR COMPANIES FIGHT CLASS ACTION LAWSUITS.

 

[Shannow]

What on Earth does anything that any other automaker does/did have to do with this particular issue, in this particular thread ?

Or are people only allowed to complain about the nett difference between manufacturers ?
Each manufacturer gets one free goal Per Annum ?
OP has to do a statistical analysis of number of people affected and cost, and comments are only valid when one Standard Deviation from the mean ?

 

[GMBoy]

Originally Posted By: ls1mike
Bailout aside, how is it any different then this...
http://www.consumeraffairs.com/news04/2007/01/toyota_sludge_settlement.html
or this
http://www.girardgibbs.com/hondabrakes.asp
or this which I remember laughing at my buddy for having the problem
http://www.carkb.com/Uwe/Forum.aspx/ford...intake-manifold
Ford is currently fighting a very large Mod Motor spark plug class action lawsuit.
This list goes on and on.
I get it, a lot of you don't like GM because of the bailout, or you had a bad car or experience with them, but there a bunch of folks who have had very good experiences with GM. I am one of them. Do I like the Bailout? Nope, was it a penny in the pot? Sure. If you want to stay mad you can. The guys who fall into the mad, bailout and bad experience category will dismiss me as being a goof, GM lover, a guy who dosen't understand a class action lawsuit or maybe even a guy who likes to bash other car companies. But facts are facts,
ALL CAR COMPANIES FIGHT CLASS ACTION LAWSUITS.


Thank you for your post. You hit the nail on the head.

 

[FL_Rob]

Originally Posted By: Nick R
Originally Posted By: KrisZ
Someone at GM must be going, SWEEEET!!!!.
Public thinks the "loans" are paid back, losses from the old GM are carried over as tax credits, and now they don't have to honor their warranties, what else can a corporation ask for?

Originally Posted By: urchin
I can't find anything that indicates that Honda got any sort of bailout, while it seems that Toyota got loans.

Neither of these are the same as a "bailout".

Bottom line is that the US taxpayer gave GM and Chrylser a life preserver and they never have to pay it entirely back. Toyota and Honda received no such deal.
Originally Posted By: urchin
Originally Posted By: OVERK1LL



My recent threads about my experience with Honda transmissions don't get anywhere near as heated, though I would say that problem is just as serious, if not moreso than any of GM's problems in recent years.

There just isn't the emotional attachment there it seems.


Probably because the GM customer that bought these cars also by way of their taxes helped to bail them out so they could profit another day.


Nice way to "pay back" that bailout!

Love it ,so will my daughter ,she's 12 ,and she thinks she's a cat.

 

[KrisZ]

Originally Posted By: Shannow
What on Earth does anything that any other automaker does/did have to do with this particular issue, in this particular thread ?


It appears that it is a common thing between car manufacturers to go bankrupt every once in a while and deny warranty claims for models produced under the "old" company, hence the comments that GM is no different, or in other words

 

[CBR.worm]

I don't think it would have been such a big deal if the reason for denial was not that the New GM is not responsible for Old GM issues.

If Infiniti told me that my cooling fans were not covered because I was 35K out of warranty I would have been ok with it. If they told me they were not responsible because that was 'Renault-Nissan', it would have been a totally different story. As it is, they replaced my 5 year old cooling fans for free at 105K. Not a safety issue, and since one of them still worked, not even a performance issue.

This is different, and much cheaper than spindles, but so much depends on how the message is conveyed. And the fact that many 2008 Impalas are still under warranty.

 

[Racerjk]

Originally Posted By: GMBoy
Originally Posted By: ls1mike
While I don't agree with GM's Decision, I do think they should do fix the cars, but it is part of business to fight a class action law suit.
Go to google and type in Ford, Toyota, Honda etc fights class action law suit or appeals class action law suit. There are tons of pages of stuff they have tried to fight or appeal, oil sludge, fires the list goes on for alot of car companies.
I could come on here and bash Ford, Honda and VW all day long when they screw up because everything I ever owned made by them was issues or in the case of my Jetta was just plain [censored] compared to stuff I am driving now. I don't because ones person's experience does not make the rest of the stuff bad.

We get it Drew your parents Impala sucks. My paretns 07 has 120,000 miles on it, brakes, tires and a steering shaft. Sorry your parents got a bad one. My parents got their Impala after their Taurus the [censored] the engine due to a headgasket failure at 76,000 miles. Does it make the Taurus [censored]. Absolutely not. Did my parents have bad luck or maybe just get a bad one? Probably.

This is just another thread for the typical GM bashers to come out and slam it to them. Won't stop me from buying their product.
Bash away.



Agreed. Good post.

I agree also!!!