executor485 Posted August 24, 2011 Share Posted August 24, 2011 Only means as much as a bankruptcy's written policy: http://www.autoblog.com/2011/08/22/gm-claims-not-responsible-for-impala-problems-from-before-bankru/ Which explains a lot of my issues with GM, and the reason I'm good with not buying any of their products ever again. If I pass you on the right, I'm flipping you off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RuskiTrombone Posted August 24, 2011 Share Posted August 24, 2011 I hope their executives die in a violent plane crash with the people that authorized their bailout. What a crock of shit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeNH Posted August 24, 2011 Share Posted August 24, 2011 They're within their rights to do that post-bankruptcy. It sucks and seems like a real crap thing to do but it's no different than any other product from a company that went bankrupt. Government does not solve problems; it subsidizes them -Ronald Reagan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
executor485 Posted August 25, 2011 Author Share Posted August 25, 2011 I hope their executives die in a violent plane crash with the people that authorized their bailout. What a crock of shit. We can only hope If I pass you on the right, I'm flipping you off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-BGTLimited Posted August 25, 2011 Share Posted August 25, 2011 Kinda sad really... I'm glad my GM is so far from warranty that I never have to deal with them. I'm also not a big warranty guy unless its something major or a big dollar item. Something small like above You waste more time/money arguing and or waiting to get it fixed than just fixing it yourself with an improved aftermarket part. Also from here on out unless they go bankrupt again, as long as you buy a new model car you should have a valid warranty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
05GT Guru Posted August 25, 2011 Share Posted August 25, 2011 Guys its not warranties they wont cover its defects. Warranties are still covered. It is items that are not covered by warranty but are still dangerous not to have fixed. That being said GM can suck it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-BGTLimited Posted August 26, 2011 Share Posted August 26, 2011 defect, warranty what the hell is the difference... If the car is under warranty and there is a mechanical defect or failure then the part should get replaced... right? I cant stand legal jargon, they will talk you in a ******* circle to get their way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BAC5.2 Posted August 26, 2011 Share Posted August 26, 2011 I'm sure a lot of car rental agencies will be very disappointed. [URL="http://legacygt.com/forums/showthread.php/proper-flip-key-interesti-159894.html"]Flip Key Development Thread[/URL] "Genius may have its limitations, but stupidity is not thus handicapped." - E. Hubbard Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
executor485 Posted August 26, 2011 Author Share Posted August 26, 2011 defect, warranty what the hell is the difference... If the car is under warranty and there is a mechanical defect or failure then the part should get replaced... right? I cant stand legal jargon, they will talk you in a ******* circle to get their way. This If there is a problem with a car that you didnt cause, and the car is under warranty, it should be fixed without question. Simple as that If I pass you on the right, I'm flipping you off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
05GT Guru Posted August 26, 2011 Share Posted August 26, 2011 This If there is a problem with a car that you didnt cause, and the car is under warranty, it should be fixed without question. Simple as that Yes if the car is under warrenty, who said this ladies was? She was probably in the powertrain warranty time period and suspension parts are not covered under powertrain. Her case is about a defect not being fixed not a warranty issue which means she was out of warranty. I am not saying by any means this is the right thing for GM to do but you gotta read and not just assume. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-BGTLimited Posted August 26, 2011 Share Posted August 26, 2011 So wait... what is this story really about, some stupid lady trying to get suspension components fixed under a powertrain warranty? If so then thats just basic end user stupidity and should mean nothing to the company going bankrupt... If the part lasted its entire bumper to bumper warranty period then failed why are we pointing fingers at GM... It lasted as long as they said they would cover it, which is typically how long they expect them to last... Warranties expire when they expect parts to begin to fail sorry its true, the warranty is simply there to cover you if it fails PRIOR to that "lifetime" they select... I hate people who can't accept that fact. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
05GT Guru Posted August 26, 2011 Share Posted August 26, 2011 So wait... what is this story really about, some stupid lady trying to get suspension components fixed under a powertrain warranty? If so then thats just basic end user stupidity and should mean nothing to the company going bankrupt... The story is about defective tie rods. They are obviously not covered under her warranty as even GM states they are still covering warranties from "old GM" but not DEFECTS. She has a 2007-2008 impala which the bumper to bumper would be up on either of those cars in 2010 or 2011. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-BGTLimited Posted August 26, 2011 Share Posted August 26, 2011 It's wording that pisses people off and confuses them I guess... If there is a defect and it causes a part to fail on something that is under warranty it will be covered, but since it failed out of warranty, Defect or not, its not covered. Which in my mind there is nothing wrong with that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
05GT Guru Posted August 26, 2011 Share Posted August 26, 2011 It's wording that pisses people off and confuses them I guess... If there is a defect and it causes a part to fail on something that is under warranty it will be covered, but since it failed out of warranty, Defect or not, its not covered. Which in my mind there is nothing wrong with that. The only thing that could be wrong with not covering defects is if they are potentially life threatening. If GM says they wont recall dangerous parts of cars from the "old GM" I have a problem with that. If its just a bad design that goes out all the time but doesnt cause deaths then most car company would not recall it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-BGTLimited Posted August 26, 2011 Share Posted August 26, 2011 Well the word recall was never mentioned and if the part fails under use by wearing that could be classified as a "defect" depending on who you ask, or if its simply failing due to bad design and not worn well then that's a different story and I could understand the anger. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guisar Posted October 3, 2011 Share Posted October 3, 2011 I'm not sure what people expect from GM- this is how they have always operated and will always operate. The only thing which matters to GM is stock price and cash flow- the vehicles and service do not interest them in the least. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.