Forum Discussion
BenK wrote:
Unfortunately...honesty is so lacking these days, or has that been the case forever?
Like on another thread where a guy admits putting in urea into his diesel tank
so many folks recommended to not tell his OEM and so many wonder why OEMs are
so reluctant to provide warranty
It has always been that way. The worst lying in my mind is playing the grey areas or intentionally omitting something you know the other person is relying on. That is the main reason I got out of the industry. I sleep much better knowing the decisions I make no longer hinge on the bad intentions or the "I will fix it if someone finds out" mentality. You will always have those that believe the end justify the means. Just part of life I guess.- Unfortunately...honesty is so lacking these days, or has that been the case forever?
Like on another thread where a guy admits putting in urea into his diesel tank
so many folks recommended to not tell his OEM and so many wonder why OEMs are
so reluctant to provide warranty - Meh. I wouldn't sweat it if I were them. They are bullet proof. Too big too fail. Sew them till they are broke, the various governments will bail them out and life will continue. No worries.
- There are probably all types of deceptive activities that go on behind closed doors with all manufacturers that most of us will never know. All I know is that I am glad the cars are being recalled because I drive one of them every day.
- I'm not hoping GM gets slammed either, but it would be nice if they (management) told the truth. Will be interesting to see what happens tomorrow with Barra and Congress, but I wouldn't expect much. I have said this before that what I find very interesting is that these recalls came about right after the govt sold their last stock and completely exited GM. Don't know if it was coincidence or not but the timing was interesting. You have to wonder if it was postponed until after the last stock was sold so the govt could get out prior to any hit to the stock.
- ibrjet the fact that GM lied during their bankruptcy proceedings will end up removing their liability shielded.
As part of the bankruptcy, GM agreed to a deal that shielded it from liability for any accidents that occurred before July 10, 2009, when it emerged as a new, leaner company. But evidence turned over to federal safety regulators by GM shows that the company had discovered problems with the ignition switches and knew of crashes linked to them well before it filed for Chapter 11 protection LINK.
This may or may not help GM, I bet it will not. The fact that GM changed the part without changing the part number or even an engineering level change notation shows, they where hiding the the fact that they knew there was a defect.
When Chrysler announced a recall for a Jeep air bag recall Fiat/Chrysler was facing a sule of suits.
In Chrysler’s court-approved sale, the new company assumed liability for recalls after taking ownership and eventually repaired the air bags.
After the air-bag recall was announced, a class action, or group lawsuit, was filed against new Chrysler in federal district court in Detroit seeking monetary damages for owners of the Jeeps. The suit didn’t seek damages for personal injuries.
U.S. District Judge Patrick J. Duggan tossed out the case on March 13. Because Chrysler had repaired the cars and promised to reimburse anyone who fixed the vehicles before the recall, the owners had no right to make any further claims against new Chrysler, the judge said. LINK GM's blunder was hiding the facts and will cost them greatly.
BTW I'm not in any way hopping GM gets slammed. My father is a GM retiree and GM has shown many times times over (as ALL corporations have) their willingness to renege on their deals with salaried employees. IMO the Management team that made these decisions should be sued and put in jail. Until this starts happening, we will keep seeing these kinds of decisions being made. It's the "If it's good for GM, it's good for the Country" mentality, true arrogance IMO.
Don - GM has called all dealers that showed stock of the old switch, and requested their return. The recall part number is totally different, but all orders must be vin tagged and will not start shipping until 4/7. There is a flurry of bulletins being emailed to us, with rep followup to make sure that we saw them and read them. They are on this, believe me. The horse is out of the barn however.
- Don't worry the Attorney General (E H) will take care of em.
Perrysburg Dodgeboy wrote:
lbrjet wrote:
They are absolved of liability claims, not warranty claims. Do some research before you blast me.
Well do you think this guy would do all this work if he could not sue GM
Mr. Hood’s work in the Melton case was a turning point in solving the mystery of the faulty switches, and led to the first depositions by G.M. engineers that confirmed years of internal studies of ignition problems in the Cobalt. G.M. settled the wrongful-death suit brought by the Melton family last year.
So if GM is absolved of liability claims why would they pay out? Remember this claim was filed after they came out of bankruptcy.
Don
Anyone can sue anyone. Have you ever heard the term neither confirm or deny? Many companies settle to keep it out the public eye. Do a little research on the liability shield part of the bankruptcy.- BenK - I'm with you.
I was also a CCB member, although we called them configuration control boards. I would love to have a talk with the chairman of the CCB who reviewed that particular change document.
