GM Volt Forum banner

1 - 16 of 16 Posts

·
Administrator
Joined
·
20,583 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
The only key models not among the list of 54 recalls this year are:

  • Chevrolet Equinox crossover;
  • GMC Terrain, which shares the same basic crossover platform; and
  • Chevrolet Volt plug-in hybrid.
A few product variants, such as the battery-electric version of the Chevy Spark minicar, also have been exempt so far.



Nice "so far" qualifier there NBC news.



http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/gm-recall/nearly-every-gm-model-touched-recalls-year-n145961


I remember all the early naysayers calling the Volt a piece of junk and worse. Some still do, not that the stat above will change their mind.


On another note, I think GM went too far by agreeing to pay huge sums to people who were injured or died regardless of whether the car was at fault, and this includes pedestrians. So a drunk teen driving three times the speed limit who crashes into a tree and dies will reward her family with millions. If they also killed or injured a pedestrian, they to will have a big payday. There are accident attorneys now scouring the country for jackpot clients. Can the TV "have you been injured" commercials be far behind? Every low-life scumbag is now trying to figure out how to scam the system.


And yet, unbelievably some say GM has not gone far enough. I guess only executing hundreds of GM employees would satisfy these miserable people.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,942 Posts
So a drunk teen driving three times the speed limit who crashes into a tree and dies will reward her family with millions. And yet, unbelievably some say GM has not gone far enough. I guess only executing hundreds of GM employees would satisfy these miserable people.
My new Signature!
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
4,871 Posts
Will they really award a single family millions for something that's not GM's fault? Ridiculous.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,942 Posts
Will they really award a single family millions for something that's not GM's fault? Ridiculous.
Duh! Of course. You know the loser in a lawsuit is the one with the deepest pockets right?

It cant just be a "$hit Happens", someone MUST be at fault!

The whole recall thing on GM stinks to high heaven. Court of public opinion is a cruel mistress.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
438 Posts
Stupidity takes place whether its the driver or another driver causing an incident that may result in death or injury. That is why cars must have safety devices to protect us from our own or someone's else's stupidity. Car manufacturers have claims that they make cars safer by putting in airbags. The airbags did not work not because of the the stupidity of the driver but because of stupidity of GM. The fact is GM is at fault. Should the drunk driver died even with the airbag deploying I would agree with you on cause and effect, but regretfully the victim died and the airbags did not deploy so however one wants to say be fair to GM that ended with any crash where airbags didn't perform as expected. The Fact is GM did not recall the cars though there were memos germinating in GM that the car should be recalled. GM did not want to pay in the front end so they are now paying on the back end, which is always going costs more in the long run. There is no reason to exculpate GM from from their shortsightedness for whatever the reasons. And to blame those as you say scamming the system would not have been possible if it weren't for GM not doing the right thing. In the end like king lear, gm brought the troubles into its own house, let's just hope that there will be a better outcome for gm than it was for lear and his family.

And on a side note, would anyone on this forum buy a car that they knew that the airbags did not deploy in a crash.


On another note, I think GM went too far by agreeing to pay huge sums to people who were injured or died regardless of whether the car was at fault, and this includes pedestrians. So a drunk teen driving three times the speed limit who crashes into a tree and dies will reward her family with millions. If they also killed or injured a pedestrian, they to will have a big payday. There are accident attorneys now scouring the country for jackpot clients. Can the TV "have you been injured" commercials be far behind? Every low-life scumbag is now trying to figure out how to scam the system.


And yet, unbelievably some say GM has not gone far enough. I guess only executing hundreds of GM employees would satisfy these miserable people.[/QUOTE]
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,942 Posts
And on a side note, would anyone on this forum buy a car that they knew that the airbags did not deploy in a crash.

I have bought, and will continue to buy cars that have ONLY seat belts. Thats right, NO AIRBAGS!


The driver was killed in the commision of a Felony (That level and Speed and Drunk Driving). Tough luck for them!

Ever wonder what "SRS" means stamped on Airbags.... SUPPLIMENTAL restraint system. The air bags were the last line of defense in a crash. The most important safety device in any vehicle is the Pilot In Command.


Judge Elemental rules in favor of GM, and requires the plantiff to pay lawyer costs.
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
20,583 Posts
Discussion Starter #7
Claims for people who died or sustained a catastrophic injury -- such as being left paraplegic or with permanent brain damage, double amputation or pervasive burns -- could get an immediate award based on national averages, or a “tailored” award. In addition to payments for economic losses, each eligible claim will receive money for non-economic loss, such as emotional distress and pain and suffering. Those payments include $1 million for the decedent and $300,000 for the surviving spouse and $300,000 for each surviving dependent. The award for a killed 17-year-old -- single, without dependents, unemployed and living at home -- could be $2.2 million. Lawyers say GM's payout will be in the billions.
  • GM will pay money to drivers, passengers, pedestrians and occupants of other vehicles involved in a crash with an eligible vehicle.
  • “There are really two key elements: Is it the right type of automobile and, two, did the air bag not deploy? If it’s the wrong auto or if the air bag deployed, it’s ineligible on its face,”
  • People with extenuating circumstances — i.e. drivers who were drunk or speeding — can still apply for compensation.
  • Claimants with one of the newer models will be eligible only if the accident occurred after getting a replacement switch
  • COMPENSATION LIMITS: None for deaths or extreme injuries such as permanent brain damage, loss of limbs, paralysis and serious burns.
  • "Victims of accidents before GM’s 2009 bankruptcy are eligible, even if they already have been compensated"
  • "Anyone taking money from GM will have to give up the right to sue"
  • "GM is starting at a minimum of $1 million for non-economic loss in any fatality, based in part on consultation with plaintiffs’ lawyers. The average such settlement is $750,000."
  • GM also will pay only for crashes involving one of the eligible cars in the recall. People filing claims must also offer evidence that the ignition was a “substantial cause” of the accident"
  • “If the police report says the air bag deployed, the power was on at the time of the accident -- the ignition switch did not fail.”
  • Property damage claims and claims of psychological injury won't be included.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-...gal-claims-from-faulty-ignition-switches.html
http://abcnews.go.com/Business/wireStory/glance-gm-ignition-switch-compensation-plan-24364158
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,521 Posts
Nice "so far" qualifier there NBC news.
To be fair
(1) There's a very thorough ongoing process and the process has led to a gradual addition of recalls.
(2) They used "so far", which really just implies that they don't yet know the full extent. If they'd written "The following models haven't been recalled, yet..." then it'd be a different matter. :p
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
4,871 Posts
Claims for people who died or sustained a catastrophic injury -- such as being left paraplegic or with permanent brain damage, double amputation or pervasive burns -- could get an immediate award based on national averages, or a “tailored” award. In addition to payments for economic losses, each eligible claim will receive money for non-economic loss, such as emotional distress and pain and suffering. Those payments include $1 million for the decedent and $300,000 for the surviving spouse and $300,000 for each surviving dependent. The award for a killed 17-year-old -- single, without dependents, unemployed and living at home -- could be $2.2 million. Lawyers say GM's payout will be in the billions.
  • GM will pay money to drivers, passengers, pedestrians and occupants of other vehicles involved in a crash with an eligible vehicle.
  • “There are really two key elements: Is it the right type of automobile and, two, did the air bag not deploy? If it’s the wrong auto or if the air bag deployed, it’s ineligible on its face,”
  • People with extenuating circumstances — i.e. drivers who were drunk or speeding — can still apply for compensation.
  • Claimants with one of the newer models will be eligible only if the accident occurred after getting a replacement switch
  • COMPENSATION LIMITS: None for deaths or extreme injuries such as permanent brain damage, loss of limbs, paralysis and serious burns.
  • "Victims of accidents before GM’s 2009 bankruptcy are eligible, even if they already have been compensated"
  • "Anyone taking money from GM will have to give up the right to sue"
  • "GM is starting at a minimum of $1 million for non-economic loss in any fatality, based in part on consultation with plaintiffs’ lawyers. The average such settlement is $750,000."
  • GM also will pay only for crashes involving one of the eligible cars in the recall. People filing claims must also offer evidence that the ignition was a “substantial cause” of the accident"
  • “If the police report says the air bag deployed, the power was on at the time of the accident -- the ignition switch did not fail.”
  • Property damage claims and claims of psychological injury won't be included.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-...gal-claims-from-faulty-ignition-switches.html
http://abcnews.go.com/Business/wireStory/glance-gm-ignition-switch-compensation-plan-24364158
I'm speechless. It's distorted thinking like this that makes me disappointed to be a citizen of the United States.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,431 Posts
I am extremely happy that the Chevy Equinox had no recalls, and that includes my 2009 MY. In five years it had only two problems, and both were serviced by my new GM dealer at no cost:
1. Bad speed sensor, which causes Stabilitrak error messages. It seems to be common for this vehicle because after I picked up my Equinox, a black 2009 GMC Terrain (very rare here in Puerto Rico) came in for the same problem.
2. Failed spark plug at cylinder 1. I saw the error code and deciphered the problem, but I cannot reach that plug in the engine bay because my hand was too big to grab the plug!

GM built over 100 Fuel Cell Equinox vehicles in 2008, which have an electric power train (making it the FIRST CUV with an electric motor), and they are still running. If GM took that design, removed the H2 tanks and the fuel cell, then add a range extender and a bigger battery, they will have the best EREV CUV and sell them by the thousands!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,579 Posts
I think that Mary Barra has become a shrewd CEO. Knowing that there is a potential economic loss looming, she is making sure that ALL the "at-risk" issues are being dealt with in her first year. Get it all dealt with now and then move forward. She won't be held responsible for the sins of her predecessors. After the first year, and s**t happens, it is on her watch and she will be held responsible by the board and the media.

Actually, I think that her attitude is being perceived as honesty and forthrightness by the buying public... sales are up. Would you rather drive a car made by a company that owns up to its mistakes and will treat its buying public fairly, as opposed to the old "hide it under the rug" - "don't own up to anything" mentality of yesteryear? Yes, I think that she is doing the right thing for everyone.
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
20,583 Posts
Discussion Starter #12
I think that Mary Barra has become a shrewd CEO.
I agree, but I think she also has few other choices. I just think she agreed to be too lenient on who gets a payout, plus she and GM will still be dragged through the mud almost the same as if she said, "stuff it, go after the old GM". On the plus side, if there is anyone at GM who thinks cutting corners on parts safety is ok, that person will be swiftly shown the door. It's not worth billions in payouts, and that's the main change we will see. I think GM will become (already becoming?) the model for others to follow.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
609 Posts
Finally some good news about the car that can only help jump start sales again.

Ian B
 

·
Senior Member
Joined
·
602 Posts
Volt hasn't been recalled - YET, because GM is sweeping the issues under the rug. Fixing them with 'secret' TSBs.
How many have had a steering rack replaced? Plenty of members- Recalled - NOPE. The fix is hidden in a tsb that talks about Cruze wiring.
How many Volts have randomly shut down while in motion? I've read of them, and had it happen. Recalled - NOPE.

But yet GM recalls Express vans to screw a plastic cover over part of the dash just in case a passenger doesn't have a seat belt on and hits their head on the dash - like its some kind of human bumper bowling inside my van. I'm pulling the cover off, it looks like crap. If I have a victim, I mean passenger, they will be properly secured or I shouldn't even own a van that says free candy on the side.


This whole 2014 recall craze is going a bit overboard.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,785 Posts
I agree, but I think she also has few other choices. I just think she agreed to be too lenient on who gets a payout, plus she and GM will still be dragged through the mud almost the same as if she said, "stuff it, go after the old GM". On the plus side, if there is anyone at GM who thinks cutting corners on parts safety is ok, that person will be swiftly shown the door. It's not worth billions in payouts, and that's the main change we will see. I think GM will become (already becoming?) the model for others to follow.
Failing air bags don't cause accidents, they turn accidents into fatalities.

Are you suggesting that families of accident fatalities should have no claim if the victim caused the accident?

BTW, what do you think of that GM training course in language rules so that the feds don't investigate incidents? I'd love to see the PowerPoints for that one.
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
20,583 Posts
Discussion Starter #16
Failing air bags don't cause accidents, they turn accidents into fatalities.

Are you suggesting that families of accident fatalities should have no claim if the victim caused the accident?

BTW, what do you think of that GM training course in language rules so that the feds don't investigate incidents? I'd love to see the PowerPoints for that one.
I am saying that contributory negligence is a well understood way to determine fault and apportion blame and punishment. Fault is not always 100% on one party. The other party may have done things that contributed to the end result or made it worse. For example, most people would say it's reasonable to assign some fault and blame to a driver who was drunk, or driving at excessive speed or was not wearing a seat belt, or all three. They would also assign blame to a product that malfunctioned. It's not always an either or, both parties can be to blame. That affects the payout.

It's extraordinary to hold one party responsible regardless of the reckless actions of the other, which is how this fund is being administered. I'm saying GM is going above and beyond what I would call reasonable. I'm also saying Mary Barra will get little credit for doing that and will continue to be vilified no matter what she does.
 
1 - 16 of 16 Posts
Top