GM says bankruptcy excuses it from repairs on 400K cars - chicagotribune.com
"New GM's warranty obligations for vehicles sold by Old GM are limited to the express terms and conditions in the Old GM written warranties on a going-forward basis," wrote Benjamin Jeffers, a lawyer for GM. "New GM did not assume responsibility for Old GM's design choices, conduct, or alleged breaches of liability under the warranty."
It's kind of a pick and choose argument in a way, IMO. And while it might be found legal, it sounds pretty lame. 'We want to flaunt our heritage, but we can't be held liable for what was done in the past in pre-bankruptcy if something goes wrong.' All this talk about taking care of customers through/after the bankruptcy turned out to be pretty much hot air. Had they actually done a proper bankruptcy, I could see it. But it was a bailout bankruptcy, and smelled bad at best. And now they want to wave their bankruptcy protection around. I understand it, but the way it's being done is pretty sad. Those with early production Camaros prior to the bankruptcy...hope like heck nothing like this surfaces for you guys or they'll tell you to piss in the wind as well.
From now on, IMO, the 45th editions and 100th year stuff isn't really a 45th or 100th. They're technically a 3rd edition in both cases according to our good buddy Ben, right? If they're not responsible for any designs they've done in the past, they only have essentially a 3 model year heritage according to their lawyer.
This, coming from a GM fanboi, is telling me GM has a lot to do to convince me to continue to defend them. This tells me a whole lot about what they really think about customers who buy their products. And my opinions are not a knock on all the good men and women who work for the company. These decisions are made in the boardrooms and THOSE are the guys/gals I am losing respect for. I, for one, keep looking for a comparison that they're making strides in getting better in customer service. So far, I ain't seein' it.