• Sign in to follow this  
    Followers 0

    U.S. Appeals Court Rules GM Has to Face Some Claims Dealing with the Ignition Switch


    • General Motors gets a major blow in terms of the ignition switch scandal

    One of the groups that haven't been able to take any legal action against General Motors over the faulty ignition switch were those who bought the affected vehicles before the company announced bankruptcy in 2009. Last year, a bankruptcy judge said that New GM was shielded from liabiliites over the actions taken by Old GM.

     

    But today, the U.S. Second Circuit Court of Appeals in Manhattan reversed that decision. In the ruling, the court stated that New GM must face some of the claims from owners that arose from their actions before their bankruptcy.

     

    “We are reviewing the ruling and its impact. Even if some claims are ultimately allowed to proceed, the plaintiffs must still prove their cases," said GM spokesman Jim Cain in an email to the Wall Street Journal.

     

    This decision could expose GM to additional costs as it tries to move away from this mess. According to the ruling, the protection given to GM shielded them from up to $10 billion of liability claims.

     

    Source: Automotive News (Subscription Required), Wall Street Journal (Subscription Required)

    0


    Sign in to follow this  
    Followers 0


    User Feedback


    yes.

     

    Let us start comparing this to Tesla. Shall we?! :explode:

     

    So...is GM Hitler in this scenario? :closedeyes:

     

    Or how about more bad press and still loving it? :scared:

     

    I know. I know.

    I could be a stinker of a troll when I wanna be. :wavey:

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    :killitwithfire:  :fryingpan:  :killitwithfire::fryingpan:

     

    This is what should be done to the stupid judges. If others can dodge the bullet with a bankruptcy, then GM should be able to also. Are they going to go back and allow all the other companies who have declared Bankruptcy to have to deal with their mistakes of the past?

     

    I think GM needs to appeal this as this just reeks of stupid idiot liberal extreme and he probably drives a non american brand and loves consumer reports crap.

     

    If this is allowed to stand then I should be able to sue for money Apple who built and sold me my elisa and then dropped support less than 6 months later and came out with the stupid mac crap. I was stuck with a boat anchor with no support or software use all due to the idiot jobs. So where is my money then?

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    :killitwithfire:  :fryingpan:  :killitwithfire::fryingpan:

     

    This is what should be done to the stupid judges. If others can dodge the bullet with a bankruptcy, then GM should be able to also. Are they going to go back and allow all the other companies who have declared Bankruptcy to have to deal with their mistakes of the past?

     

    I think GM needs to appeal this as this just reeks of stupid idiot liberal extreme and he probably drives a non american brand and loves consumer reports crap.

    Do they have the same leadership group(s)? Do those other companies have the same leadership groups prior to and post bankruptcy? 

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

     

    :killitwithfire:  :fryingpan:  :killitwithfire::fryingpan:

     

    This is what should be done to the stupid judges. If others can dodge the bullet with a bankruptcy, then GM should be able to also. Are they going to go back and allow all the other companies who have declared Bankruptcy to have to deal with their mistakes of the past?

     

    I think GM needs to appeal this as this just reeks of stupid idiot liberal extreme and he probably drives a non american brand and loves consumer reports crap.

    Do they have the same leadership group(s)? Do those other companies have the same leadership groups prior to and post bankruptcy? 

     

    Many companies who do what GM did, do have the same board, executives as they dump their debt and rebuild. Trump did this 5 major times on destorying other companies just for his own personal wealth building. So people should be able to go after his money then. Just like they are allowing here now.

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

     

     

    :killitwithfire:  :fryingpan:  :killitwithfire::fryingpan:

     

    This is what should be done to the stupid judges. If others can dodge the bullet with a bankruptcy, then GM should be able to also. Are they going to go back and allow all the other companies who have declared Bankruptcy to have to deal with their mistakes of the past?

     

    I think GM needs to appeal this as this just reeks of stupid idiot liberal extreme and he probably drives a non american brand and loves consumer reports crap.

    Do they have the same leadership group(s)? Do those other companies have the same leadership groups prior to and post bankruptcy? 

     

    Many companies who do what GM did, do have the same board, executives as they dump their debt and rebuild. Trump did this 5 major times on destorying other companies just for his own personal wealth building. So people should be able to go after his money then. Just like they are allowing here now.

     

     

    Per your Trump analogy. Donald has never declared personal BK. His corporation are all that has ever filed for Chapter 11. Therefore no court in the world would ok going after his personal wealth.

    -1

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I sadly expected this.....they never backed down from that fight. I expect more lawsuits from the pre BK issues on other stuff as well.

     

    This opens a very big door......

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Over ruling bankruptcy protection establishes a very questionable precedent for future cases. Even if you want to see GM punished, this is a double edged sword that may cut harder the other way.

    2

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    :killitwithfire:  :fryingpan:  :killitwithfire::fryingpan:

     

    This is what should be done to the stupid judges. If others can dodge the bullet with a bankruptcy, then GM should be able to also. Are they going to go back and allow all the other companies who have declared Bankruptcy to have to deal with their mistakes of the past?

     

    I think GM needs to appeal this as this just reeks of stupid idiot liberal extreme and he probably drives a non american brand and loves consumer reports crap.

    Do they have the same leadership group(s)? Do those other companies have the same leadership groups prior to and post bankruptcy?

    Many companies who do what GM did, do have the same board, executives as they dump their debt and rebuild. Trump did this 5 major times on destorying other companies just for his own personal wealth building. So people should be able to go after his money then. Just like they are allowing here now.

     

    Per your Trump analogy. Donald has never declared personal BK. His corporation are all that has ever filed for Chapter 11. Therefore no court in the world would ok going after his personal wealth.

    His point is still valid. They can't go after bankrupt GMs money anymore than they could go after Trumps corporations.

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    :killitwithfire:  :fryingpan:  :killitwithfire::fryingpan:

     

    This is what should be done to the stupid judges. If others can dodge the bullet with a bankruptcy, then GM should be able to also. Are they going to go back and allow all the other companies who have declared Bankruptcy to have to deal with their mistakes of the past?

     

    I think GM needs to appeal this as this just reeks of stupid idiot liberal extreme and he probably drives a non american brand and loves consumer reports crap.

    Do they have the same leadership group(s)? Do those other companies have the same leadership groups prior to and post bankruptcy?
    Many companies who do what GM did, do have the same board, executives as they dump their debt and rebuild. Trump did this 5 major times on destorying other companies just for his own personal wealth building. So people should be able to go after his money then. Just like they are allowing here now.
     

    Per your Trump analogy. Donald has never declared personal BK. His corporation are all that has ever filed for Chapter 11. Therefore no court in the world would ok going after his personal wealth.

    His point is still valid. They can't go after bankrupt GMs money anymore than they could go after Trumps corporations.

    He didn't say go after Trumps corporations. He said go after his wealth.

    -1

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

     

     

    :killitwithfire:  :fryingpan:  :killitwithfire::fryingpan:

     

    This is what should be done to the stupid judges. If others can dodge the bullet with a bankruptcy, then GM should be able to also. Are they going to go back and allow all the other companies who have declared Bankruptcy to have to deal with their mistakes of the past?

     

    I think GM needs to appeal this as this just reeks of stupid idiot liberal extreme and he probably drives a non american brand and loves consumer reports crap.

    Do they have the same leadership group(s)? Do those other companies have the same leadership groups prior to and post bankruptcy? 

     

    Many companies who do what GM did, do have the same board, executives as they dump their debt and rebuild. Trump did this 5 major times on destroying other companies just for his own personal wealth building. So people should be able to go after his money then. Just like they are allowing here now.

     

    If they have the same board that ran them into the ground then I feel no mercy for any company like this. Go back and take everything from them again. You live and learn. If you don't learn and make the same mistakes you deserve nothing with a side order of jack $h!.  :D

    1

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I sadly expected this.....they never backed down from that fight. I expect more lawsuits from the pre BK issues on other stuff as well.

     

    This opens a very big door......

     

     

    GM, in a sense, opened the can and set the precedent themselves when they recalled the 2007/8 Police Impalas for the faulty spindle rods, then shun the civilian models of the same yrs claiming GM has no responsibility as those cars where built by old GM.

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    :killitwithfire:  :fryingpan:  :killitwithfire::fryingpan:

     

    This is what should be done to the stupid judges. If others can dodge the bullet with a bankruptcy, then GM should be able to also. Are they going to go back and allow all the other companies who have declared Bankruptcy to have to deal with their mistakes of the past?

     

    I think GM needs to appeal this as this just reeks of stupid idiot liberal extreme and he probably drives a non american brand and loves consumer reports crap.

    Do they have the same leadership group(s)? Do those other companies have the same leadership groups prior to and post bankruptcy?

    Many companies who do what GM did, do have the same board, executives as they dump their debt and rebuild. Trump did this 5 major times on destorying other companies just for his own personal wealth building. So people should be able to go after his money then. Just like they are allowing here now.

     

    Per your Trump analogy. Donald has never declared personal BK. His corporation are all that has ever filed for Chapter 11. Therefore no court in the world would ok going after his personal wealth.

    His point is still valid. They can't go after bankrupt GMs money anymore than they could go after Trumps corporations.

    He didn't say go after Trumps corporations. He said go after his wealth.

    I know that and acknowledged that. It doesn't change the end result is my point. Good grief.

    -1

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I sadly expected this.....they never backed down from that fight. I expect more lawsuits from the pre BK issues on other stuff as well.

     

    This opens a very big door......

     

     

    GM, in a sense, opened the can and set the precedent themselves when they recalled the 2007/8 Police Impalas for the faulty spindle rods, then shun the civilian models of the same yrs claiming GM has no responsibility as those cars where built by old GM.

    Fleet contracts supersede that (hence the reason for the recall) and make it completely unrelated to civilian models. Apples to oranges.

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

     

     

    I sadly expected this.....they never backed down from that fight. I expect more lawsuits from the pre BK issues on other stuff as well.

     

    This opens a very big door......

     

     

    GM, in a sense, opened the can and set the precedent themselves when they recalled the 2007/8 Police Impalas for the faulty spindle rods, then shun the civilian models of the same yrs claiming GM has no responsibility as those cars where built by old GM.

    Fleet contracts supersede that (hence the reason for the recall) and make it completely unrelated to civilian models. Apples to oranges.

     

     

    I'd be interested in seeing the clause in a fleet contract that supersedes GM's bankruptcy. The GM of '07/'08 no longer legally exists, so any contract someone may hold with that company would be null and void. 

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I sadly expected this.....they never backed down from that fight. I expect more lawsuits from the pre BK issues on other stuff as well.

     

    This opens a very big door......

     

     

    GM, in a sense, opened the can and set the precedent themselves when they recalled the 2007/8 Police Impalas for the faulty spindle rods, then shun the civilian models of the same yrs claiming GM has no responsibility as those cars where built by old GM.

    Fleet contracts supersede that (hence the reason for the recall) and make it completely unrelated to civilian models. Apples to oranges.

     

    I'd be interested in seeing the clause in a fleet contract that supersedes GM's bankruptcy. The GM of '07/'08 no longer legally exists, so any contract someone may hold with that company would be null and void.

    Very true. Didn't consider that. It does not change the fact that you can't use their fleet deal to make a case for going after them.

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    There have already been dismissals as well for those Impala spindle suits for same reasons already mentioned, prebankruptcy GM. The courts that dismissed a few of those cases did that specifically for that reason.

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    " The court said that because GM didn’t notify customers about the ignition switch recall before its bankruptcy that stopping them from suing the automaker would violate their right to due process protected by the constitution."

    http://www.motortrend.com/news/court-rules-old-gm-defense-ignition-switch-cases/

     

    Not only did GM not notify customers about the flawed ignition switch before bankruptcy. During the BK proceedings, GM didn't even notify and make it aware to the courts.

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I never did understand why the ignition switch scandal happened after bk. I would have thought there would have been an entire company-wide audit.

     

    There's been documented proof that employees had requisitioned for a parts change in design but not number for the detent plunger with a supplier. One of the signing employees testified under oath that he was not aware of any change in design, despite his signature on the document. 

     

    Anyways, I don't know if that was just a business as usual kind of deal - you know, parts bins do get changed all the time. And it would even make sense to make the new detent plunger to be legacy vehicle compatible, to have only one part do the job for many vehicles.

     

    Anyways, with VW paying $15 dollars in fines and compensation, what GM got off, and Toyota got off with were much less. 

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    smk4565

    Posted (edited)

    "New" GM should be responsible for anything done by "old GM". Bankruptcy filings don't mean you are not responsible for breaking the law in the past.

    To put VW in this scenario, they could split Porsche, Audi, Lambo and Bentley into "new VW" and file bankruptcy with "old VW" and say they can't pay the fines. Doesn't work that way.

    These companies are responsible for their past. They chose to cut corners or cheat or break laws to drive profits. So If you do that and get caught you pay up.

    Edited by smk4565
    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    There is a lot of thing that need to be done here. 

    Companies need to be held responsible for thing they did do wrong. 

    Customers should be held responsible or in part in cases where they played a big part in their demise or injury. Too many cases are brought knowing they would never win out right but they know companies will settle just because it is cheaper to pay 3 Million to settle vs 20 million to win. 

    Legal black mail is not kind to the consumer as we all pay in the end and the lawyers take most of it. 

    I would love to see the loser pay when cased are brought and that way it would cut down on the bogus cases. 

     

    As for what GM did here it was totally legal and used often as when many companies have a major legal issue it is the only way they survive. As to if it is right or not that is for each of us to decide. I see it as right or wrong depending on the case involved. Some times companies are not always the evil one as they are often made out to be and some times they are, 

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites


    Your content will need to be approved by a moderator

    Guest
    You are commenting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
    Add a comment...

    ×   You have pasted content with formatting.   Remove formatting

    ×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

    ×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor




  • Popular Stories

  • Today's Birthdays

    1. 2005 EquinoxLS
      2005 EquinoxLS
      (41 years old)
    2. Shaula
      Shaula
      (36 years old)
  • Similar Content

    • By William Maley
      Every Chevrolet Bolt that will be rolling off the assembly line will lose General Motors close to $9,000 once they are sold. This seems like madness, but according to a report from Bloomberg, there is some method to it. 
      Thanks to new regulations done by California Air Resources Board, automakers have to sell a certain amount of zero-emission vehicles if they want to sell other vehicles - primarily crossovers, SUVs, and trucks - in the state. These new regulations say by 2025, zero-emission vehicles need to make up 15.4 percent of the market. Since then, nine other states including New York have adopted these regulations. All told, these ten states make up 30 percent of the total U.S. auto market.
      Take for example Fiat Chrysler Automobiles. CEO Sergio Marchionne revealed a couple years back they take a hit of $14,000 on every Fiat 500e sold. But if they wanted to sell Ram pickups and Jeep SUVs in California, they need to take the hit.
      How does Bloomberg get the $9,000 figure? That's due to a source at General Motors who revealed the estimate is based on the Bolt's $37,500 base price. A GM spokesman declined to comment.
      If General Motors is able to sell enough Bolts, they'll be able to gather enough credits to not only sell other vehicles which will make up for the Bolt's loss, but also be able to sell extra credits to other automakers. Tesla has taken advantage of this to great effect. In the third quarter, Tesla made $139 million from selling credits.  
      Source: Bloomberg
       
       
       

      View full article
    • By William Maley
      Every Chevrolet Bolt that will be rolling off the assembly line will lose General Motors close to $9,000 once they are sold. This seems like madness, but according to a report from Bloomberg, there is some method to it. 
      Thanks to new regulations done by California Air Resources Board, automakers have to sell a certain amount of zero-emission vehicles if they want to sell other vehicles - primarily crossovers, SUVs, and trucks - in the state. These new regulations say by 2025, zero-emission vehicles need to make up 15.4 percent of the market. Since then, nine other states including New York have adopted these regulations. All told, these ten states make up 30 percent of the total U.S. auto market.
      Take for example Fiat Chrysler Automobiles. CEO Sergio Marchionne revealed a couple years back they take a hit of $14,000 on every Fiat 500e sold. But if they wanted to sell Ram pickups and Jeep SUVs in California, they need to take the hit.
      How does Bloomberg get the $9,000 figure? That's due to a source at General Motors who revealed the estimate is based on the Bolt's $37,500 base price. A GM spokesman declined to comment.
      If General Motors is able to sell enough Bolts, they'll be able to gather enough credits to not only sell other vehicles which will make up for the Bolt's loss, but also be able to sell extra credits to other automakers. Tesla has taken advantage of this to great effect. In the third quarter, Tesla made $139 million from selling credits.  
      Source: Bloomberg
       
       
       
    • By dfelt
      G. David Felt
      Staff Writer Alternative Energy - www.CheersandGears.com
       
      Europe's 400 Ultra-Fast Charging Network by 2020

      Europe like America has the 3 basic charging standards in play in their fragile network of 2016. These is what we know as the 110, 220 and 440, level 1, 2 and 3 chargers. Yet Europe is not standing by waiting for Tesla or American Auto companies to drive EV auto's. Instead Europe has built the following consortium of Auto companies who have all chosen to contribute an equal amount to building the next generation charger network. VW, GM, BMW, Daimler, FORD, FCA, Hyundai, Volvo and Jaguar Land Rover have choosen to build 400 locations over the next 3 years that will sense and charge up to 350 kW in the period of a quick Coffee break. This is significantly faster and higher than the Tesla 120kW fast charging system. The goal by the European Government is to offer road trip worthy auto's with fast charging to bring less noise and cleaner air to European cities by 2020 and to make the bulk of inner city auto's EV's within 10 years of the fast charging system going live, so by 2030.

      Diamler is wanting to lead the European charge with their 300+ kilometer EV-CUV

      This would seem to show that Tesla has had the desired effect of making a market changing revolution of how companies and governments see the future of transportation.
      Source PM
  • Recent Status Updates

  • Who's Online (See full list)

    There are no registered users currently online