"mr_gofast" (jake_berenshteyn)
06/30/2014 at 10:17 • Filed to: RECALLOPNIK
1
8|
"mr_gofast" (jake_berenshteyn)
06/30/2014 at 10:17 • Filed to: RECALLOPNIK | 1
| 8 |
so interesting tidbit from GM's head counsel - he has stated that GM will pay for dmges for any recalled car even if the damages are from being drunk and or texting when the accident happened. as long as the car has the fault covered under the recall as well.
GM will pay money to drivers, passengers, pedestrians and occupants of other vehicles involved in a crash with an eligible vehicle. It covers about 1.6 million model-year 2003-2007 recalled vehicles manufactured with an ignition switch defect and about 1 million model year 2008-2011 vehicles that may have been repaired with a recalled ignition switch. Claimants with a newer model will be eligible only if the accident occurred after getting a replacement switch, Feinberg said in an FAQ document.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-06-3…
what do you think? too little too late or is this just what GM needed to get back some decent reputation??
Zipppy, Mazdurp builder, Probeski owner and former ricerboy
> mr_gofast
06/30/2014 at 10:23 |
|
I find it a bit unnecessarily stupid in a way. If the people had an accident while under the influence, or not wearing their seatbelt, they're the ones responsible for their damages. If it's the car losing control due to a system failing, then that's why recalls are done.
|
mr_gofast
> Zipppy, Mazdurp builder, Probeski owner and former ricerboy
06/30/2014 at 10:26 |
|
how easy is it for GM to prove that a accicdent DIDNT happen? thats the issue for them..all it takes is for some idiot who was drunk to say that their airbag didnt go offf and boom - its GM's fault - drunk or not..
thebigbossyboss
> mr_gofast
06/30/2014 at 10:33 |
|
I should crash my GM car. I need money.
Jayhawk Jake
> Zipppy, Mazdurp builder, Probeski owner and former ricerboy
06/30/2014 at 10:35 |
|
Welcome to 2014, where no one accepts blame for anything and they get away with it.
This case is a bit odd though, the incidents being referred to did involve a key shutting off and then a car crashing with no airbag deployment and death, but many of them also had occupants with no seatbelts and drivers under the influence of alcohol.
What can GM really do? If they try to claim that the victims would have died anyways due to their disregard for safety and negligence people will just claim GM is dodging their hand in it and denying that their cars had a failure. Basically GM has to accept the blame and fix it because the alternative would be so much worse.
|
Zipppy, Mazdurp builder, Probeski owner and former ricerboy
> mr_gofast
06/30/2014 at 10:39 |
|
It could be tricky to determine that, although I'm sure that the ECU has some info stored for the crash, such as determining if the occupants were wearing their seatbelts or not, then GM should be in the clear for those cases, if the evidence says so.
I could also ask a friend who works at a GM dealer's service dept. for his input.
|
mr_gofast
> Zipppy, Mazdurp builder, Probeski owner and former ricerboy
06/30/2014 at 10:47 |
|
do that im curious now what they say at dealership level.
|
Zipppy, Mazdurp builder, Probeski owner and former ricerboy
> mr_gofast
06/30/2014 at 10:57 |
|
I already asked him about the original recall way back when, and he said media blew it way out of proportion, and that the original ignition cylinders aren't that bad.
DarrenMR
> mr_gofast
06/30/2014 at 20:02 |
|
What if I hurt myself while kicking the car because it was such a POS?