"New GM" doesn't honor repairs on "Old GM"
08-23-2011, 08:08 AM
#31
Senior Member
Join Date: 01-04-2010
Location: Imported from Detroit
Posts: 1,584
Ok, so they don't want to be effected by past issues and law suits. Fine.
Then, they should be able to use any classic, high sales, names like corvette, camero, etc.
You can't have it both ways.
Just saying...
Then, they should be able to use any classic, high sales, names like corvette, camero, etc.
You can't have it both ways.
Just saying...
08-23-2011, 02:03 PM
#32
Founding Member
Join Date: 11-23-2007
Location: Texas
Posts: 8,210
08-23-2011, 02:32 PM
#33
Platinum Member
Join Date: 05-09-2006
Location: "Upland" Mesa, Arizona
Posts: 6,805
08-23-2011, 05:25 PM
#34
Member
Join Date: 11-16-2008
Location: NJ
Posts: 68
I dont know what the issue is....GM is honoring warranties.....I work on "OLD" GM vehicles everyday covered under warranty and never have we told a customer that New GM wasnt responsible because old GM designed the vehicle.
This is, as stated simply a case of a woman suing GM because she wants to. If her tires wore excessively in 6,000 miles every dealer I have ever worked for would have simply aligned the car, basically no questions asked.
As for new GM not being able to use the heritage names because they dont assume the liabilities......thats simply not the way bakruptcy, asset sales, and corporate restructuring work. If I had bought old GMs assets I could be building 45th anniversary Camaros, 100th anniversary Chevys and getting ready for 60th anniversary Corvettes and had absolutely zero reason to fix the old ones for free under warranty. But GM does....they stand behind all their products, Saturn and Pontiac owners got free services, etc......
This is, as stated simply a case of a woman suing GM because she wants to. If her tires wore excessively in 6,000 miles every dealer I have ever worked for would have simply aligned the car, basically no questions asked.
As for new GM not being able to use the heritage names because they dont assume the liabilities......thats simply not the way bakruptcy, asset sales, and corporate restructuring work. If I had bought old GMs assets I could be building 45th anniversary Camaros, 100th anniversary Chevys and getting ready for 60th anniversary Corvettes and had absolutely zero reason to fix the old ones for free under warranty. But GM does....they stand behind all their products, Saturn and Pontiac owners got free services, etc......
08-23-2011, 05:56 PM
#35
Senior Member
Join Date: 06-07-2011
Location: SE Mich
Posts: 2,180
Agreed. There's a ton of fail in this thread.
They (GM) are still legally required to honor warranties and produce service parts (OMG, bet you hadn't thought about that!). The Impala issue is not a safety issue. There will be no recall - not now, not before. The police pkg. is different than what's on my Dad's '06 Impala. Period.
If people actually got a 4-wheel alignment once in a blue moon, there would be no issue. As a one-time racer, I urge people to stay on top of alignment if they have any sensitivity about replacing tires prematurely at all. I do my own at home, but would recommend this as a twice a year thing here in the pothole belt. Maintain the car and stop *****ing.
They (GM) are still legally required to honor warranties and produce service parts (OMG, bet you hadn't thought about that!). The Impala issue is not a safety issue. There will be no recall - not now, not before. The police pkg. is different than what's on my Dad's '06 Impala. Period.
If people actually got a 4-wheel alignment once in a blue moon, there would be no issue. As a one-time racer, I urge people to stay on top of alignment if they have any sensitivity about replacing tires prematurely at all. I do my own at home, but would recommend this as a twice a year thing here in the pothole belt. Maintain the car and stop *****ing.
08-24-2011, 08:53 PM
#36
Senior Member
Join Date: 01-04-2010
Location: Imported from Detroit
Posts: 1,584
08-25-2011, 01:30 AM
#38
Deceased
Join Date: 06-30-2010
Location: Kannapolis NC
Posts: 25,739
The deal with Chapter 11 reorganization is that its a "reorganization" under the law. Say for instance that the Amalgamated Fruit Flavored Under Britches Corporation got into a real financial bind, they file for bankruptcy under Chapter 11. Once the bankruptcy is approved, the process of reorganization begins, which means reaching settlements with creditors, vendors, and subcontractors.
When everybody is happy, or mostly everybody is happy, the "new" Amalgamated Fruit Flavored Under Britches Corporation can begin where it left off. The new corporate entity retains all the rights and patents to the products manufactured by the old corporate entity, and they also have the legal obligation to honor any and all warranties in effect at the time of the bankruptcy filing. So they can begin making the same old #77 Grape Flavored Boxers that they always have with no restrictions, its still their product...just like the Corvette, Camaro, Malibu, HHR, Silverado and the like remain the products of the entity known as the New GM.
The Impala class action was lost by the plaintiffs on a very clear basis, their attorneys screwed up in so many words. The filed suit on the Old GM, not the New GM, you can't commence litigation on a company or individual that no longer legally exists. However you can commence litigation on their legally appointed successor company, or the legally recognized estate of said no longer existent individual. Where the lawyers made their mistake was in failing to put forth a motion before the bankruptcy court requesting the assignment of liability in regards to the Impala class action to the New GM.
When everybody is happy, or mostly everybody is happy, the "new" Amalgamated Fruit Flavored Under Britches Corporation can begin where it left off. The new corporate entity retains all the rights and patents to the products manufactured by the old corporate entity, and they also have the legal obligation to honor any and all warranties in effect at the time of the bankruptcy filing. So they can begin making the same old #77 Grape Flavored Boxers that they always have with no restrictions, its still their product...just like the Corvette, Camaro, Malibu, HHR, Silverado and the like remain the products of the entity known as the New GM.
The Impala class action was lost by the plaintiffs on a very clear basis, their attorneys screwed up in so many words. The filed suit on the Old GM, not the New GM, you can't commence litigation on a company or individual that no longer legally exists. However you can commence litigation on their legally appointed successor company, or the legally recognized estate of said no longer existent individual. Where the lawyers made their mistake was in failing to put forth a motion before the bankruptcy court requesting the assignment of liability in regards to the Impala class action to the New GM.
