Jump to content
  • Greetings Guest!

    CheersandGears.com was founded in 2001 and is one of the oldest continuously operating automotive forums out there.  Come see why we have users who visit nearly every day for the past 16+ years. Signup is fast and free, or you can opt for a premium subscription to view the site ad-free.

William Maley

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

Recommended Posts

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)


View full article

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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:

Share this post


Link to post
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?

Share this post


Link to post
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? 

Share this post


Link to post
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.

Share this post


Link to post
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.

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
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......

Share this post


Link to post
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.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
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.

Share this post


Link to post
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.

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
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

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
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.

Share this post


Link to post
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.

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
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.

Share this post


Link to post
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. 

Share this post


Link to post
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.

Share this post


Link to post
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.

Share this post


Link to post
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/

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
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.

Share this post


Link to post
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. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"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

Share this post


Link to post
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, 

Share this post


Link to post
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.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

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

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




  • Similar Content

    • By William Maley
      Tesla and General Motors lead the pack when it comes to the sales of plug-in vehicles. Data from Automotive News says Tesla stands at 193,344 vehicles, followed by GM at 181,062, But there arises a problem; once they cross the 200,000 mark, the phaseout of the $7,500 tax credit begins. Tesla is expected to be first with some predicting it taking place next month (provided they don't run into more production troubles). GM will follow sometime next year.
      Barring some sort of extension of the program, it will put the two automakers in a bit of bind where they'll be playing on an uneven playing field due to increased costs. It should be noted that the tax credit won't disappear. The way the phaseout works is that the $7,500 credit sticks around for two more quarters after the 200,000 mark is reached. After that, the credit is cut to $3,750 for the next two quarters, then it drops to $1,875 for two more quarters before it is gone.
      "The groundbreakers, the people who forged ahead and got these products out there first, could be at a significant disadvantage now. I don't think it's fair to reward a company that hasn't been as innovative with an incentive that begins when someone else's ends," said Rebecca Lindland, executive analyst at Kelly Blue Book.
      Industry experts expect GM to take a bigger hit than Tesla due to the credit affecting decisions on "lower-priced vehicles such as the sub-$40,000 Chevrolet Volt more than a $75,000-plus Tesla Model S or X" according to research done by the Institute of Transportation Studies at the University of California-Davis.
      A study in 2016 bears this out. 40 percent of Chevrolet Volt buyers admit they wouldn't have purchased one without the tax credit. Only 14 percent of Tesla buyers say the same. 
      This likely explains why various GM executives have been pushing the White House for a possible extension of the credit.
      "At the end of the day, we think having the benefits is great for the customer, because obviously it makes the EV adoption easier and more attractive," GM North America President Alan Batey told Automotive News.
      Source: Automotive News (Subscription Required)

      View full article
    • By William Maley
      Tesla and General Motors lead the pack when it comes to the sales of plug-in vehicles. Data from Automotive News says Tesla stands at 193,344 vehicles, followed by GM at 181,062, But there arises a problem; once they cross the 200,000 mark, the phaseout of the $7,500 tax credit begins. Tesla is expected to be first with some predicting it taking place next month (provided they don't run into more production troubles). GM will follow sometime next year.
      Barring some sort of extension of the program, it will put the two automakers in a bit of bind where they'll be playing on an uneven playing field due to increased costs. It should be noted that the tax credit won't disappear. The way the phaseout works is that the $7,500 credit sticks around for two more quarters after the 200,000 mark is reached. After that, the credit is cut to $3,750 for the next two quarters, then it drops to $1,875 for two more quarters before it is gone.
      "The groundbreakers, the people who forged ahead and got these products out there first, could be at a significant disadvantage now. I don't think it's fair to reward a company that hasn't been as innovative with an incentive that begins when someone else's ends," said Rebecca Lindland, executive analyst at Kelly Blue Book.
      Industry experts expect GM to take a bigger hit than Tesla due to the credit affecting decisions on "lower-priced vehicles such as the sub-$40,000 Chevrolet Volt more than a $75,000-plus Tesla Model S or X" according to research done by the Institute of Transportation Studies at the University of California-Davis.
      A study in 2016 bears this out. 40 percent of Chevrolet Volt buyers admit they wouldn't have purchased one without the tax credit. Only 14 percent of Tesla buyers say the same. 
      This likely explains why various GM executives have been pushing the White House for a possible extension of the credit.
      "At the end of the day, we think having the benefits is great for the customer, because obviously it makes the EV adoption easier and more attractive," GM North America President Alan Batey told Automotive News.
      Source: Automotive News (Subscription Required)
    • By ccap41
      Well, pretty simple, who wore it better?  






    • By dfelt
      Honda and GM have partnered up to develop the next generation of high density extreme fast charging battery packs. Honda and GM have already partnered on Hydrogen cell and motor technology development. Now they sign a multiyear agreement to develop batteries for the next generation of auto's.
      To quote the news release:
      "General Motors Co. (NYSE: GM) and Honda (NYSE: HMC) announced an agreement for new advanced chemistry battery components, including the cell and module, to accelerate both companies’ plans for all-electric vehicles. The next-generation battery will deliver higher energy density, smaller packaging and faster charging capabilities for both companies’ future products, mainly for the North American market."
      http://www.gm.com/mol/m-2018-jun-0607-gm-honda-battery-cell.html
  • My Clubs

  • Recently Browsing

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Reader Rides

About us

CheersandGears.com - Founded 2001

We ♥ Cars

Get in touch

Follow us

Recent tweets

facebook

×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.