update to First State Chevy crashing customer camaros

"Jeff-God-of-Biscuits" (Jeff-God-of-Biscuits) 01/12/2014 at 18:32 • Filed to: None

5

7

The pictures are from an EMS worker on the scene and this went up from the owner on Friday, so at least we know now that GM has decided to intervene.

"For the record, the car was a TWO-OWNER car, not a one-owner car like the dealer told us. The dealer NEVER mentioned the front end damage—my wife found that out on her own. WE paid $55 for the CarFax—the dealer never offered one. The dealer also did not mention that the car had aftermarket tinted windows, aftermarket emblems, and NO DOCUMENTATION. The car just looked like it had been run hard and put away wet. My 10K tires still had over 60% tire life remaining. The so-called replacement needed new tires at 13K miles.

If the dealer had bothered to sit down with us and offer a few options in cars, maybe we would feel differently. But THEY chose the car (a trade-in) that THEY wanted us to BUY from them. Even $4000 (feel good money) was not important to us. We would have gladly PURCHASED an equivalent replacement with no "feel good" money. Money is not everything...

At any rate, a retired GM exec called me today to let me know that GM IS involved now. It is our understanding that the matter will be resolved to our satisfaction next week. And GM will make sure that we are treated fairly and equitably.

If anyone happens to call First State Chevrolet, the receptionist is named Norma. She is a real sweetheart and does not deserve to be disrespected, so PLEASE do not give her a hard time.

Thanks,
John"

Hoorah, thanks you big series of tubes! Well, maybe anyway. More will follow, I am sure.

Dunnik > Jeff-God-of-Biscuits 01/12/2014 at 18:34

8

Lowers pitchfork and torch

Oh. Ok then. That's good.

Roberto G. > Jeff-God-of-Biscuits 01/12/2014 at 18:47

0

I had no doubts that my suggestion of contacting the Chevrolet's Customer Service was a good one. It's the first thing that a reasonable person does, whenever he (or she) has a serious trouble with a supposedly dishonest dealer. Dealers take a precise commitment of supporting and not damaging the image of the brand they sell, and the brand can revoke the dealership in an istant, should they behave wrongly. And a badly behaving dealer can also be sued by the brand for commercial damages.

With-a-G is back to not having anything written after his username > Jeff-God-of-Biscuits 01/12/2014 at 19:01

3

Might be nice if someone called Norma to offer her another job.

Jeff-God-of-Biscuits > Dunnik 01/12/2014 at 20:28

1

Keep them by the door in case it falls apart though.

Jeff-God-of-Biscuits > Roberto G. 01/12/2014 at 20:31

0

Apparently there is some pretty stiff language about GM staying hands off the dealerships, and having no responsibility whatsoever for their actions. A different dealerships GM explained it somewhere around pg 44 of the camaro forum article.

Slave2anMG > Dunnik 01/12/2014 at 21:12

1

Not until John comes back and confirms that he, and not GM and Douchebag Motors, is indeed satisfied.

And WTF is wrong with this asshole dealer? What did he expect to happen when this shit hit Teh Interwebs?

Slave2anMG > Jeff-God-of-Biscuits 01/12/2014 at 21:13

0

Then that's an absurd clause in the agreement...and dealers need to held accountable when they try to hide behind it for egregious acts like this.