What Do You Think? GM Says It Is No Longer Liable For Issues With "Old GM" Products

General Motors Co. says a class-action suit complaining that GM fixed rear-end problems on police versions of 2007-08 Impalas, but not those owned by some 400,000 other drivers, should be thrown out.

The Detroit automaker said in court papers that it cannot be held liable for damages relating to vehicles produced before the "new" GM was created after the "old" GM filed for bankruptcy in 2009, as part of a $49.5 billion government bailout.

The suit filed by a Pennsylvania Impala owner in U.S. District Court in Detroit in June should be thrown out because it attempts "to hold new GM responsible for old GM's liabilities," GM lawyer Benjamin Jeffers said in a court filing.

Joe_Limon - 8/18/2011 2:43:33 PM

+7 Boost

Bad move, not worth the negative press this stunt can/will generate.

g2ok - 8/18/2011 2:49:13 PM

+4 Boost

GM needs to fix those Impalas and not go down this path. All the advertising with classic models is false under this view.

LexSucks - 8/18/2011 3:00:17 PM

+5 Boost

So much for standing behind what they sell.

Yonder7 - 8/18/2011 3:56:30 PM

+3 Boost

GM is not Toyota, the government will protect them, nothing to be worry about. 400,000 is nothing, again, cause is not Toyota.

veyron1001 - 8/18/2011 4:09:07 PM

+1 Boost

Woman logic

MBCLS07 - 8/18/2011 7:15:34 PM

+4 Boost

Between ripping off taxpayers and now ripping off past GM customers, I have two reasons why my family will never buy another GM product again.

1BadMan - 8/18/2011 10:33:35 PM

+3 Boost

Old GM and New GM, one will still get horrible customer treatment. I have hated GM since my last car that I purchased with cash. I took delivery with 6 miles on the odometer and was broken down at 56 miles on the odometer. And one salesman told my brother and I to come back when we had money. A terrible company. No GM for me ever!!!!!!!!!!!

Shredmo - 8/19/2011 10:47:48 AM

+1 Boost

Not to get political, how is this different from when Obama guaranteed "old" GM and Chrysler warranties?
IMO, we the US government should be held accountable if GM is not.

Eyecarehawaii - 8/20/2011 5:14:46 PM

+1 Boost

That's what bankrupcy laws do for you. It's leaglese for you're screwed unless you can hire better lawyers than we can.

Mustang953 - 8/20/2011 11:30:26 PM

+2 Boost

So, let me get this right, we, the taxpayer, give GM 49.5 Billion Dollars to bail them out, and then they tell 423,000 customers, AKA: Taxpayers, to get bent. Sounds fair to me. GM, send your lawyers to camp, and make this right. The bad press will cost more then the repairs. I know, I just bought a Ford Mustang (No bail out money) instead of a Camaro (which I consider a foreign car since it is built in Canada) after reading this article. Not another dime!

ParryMurphyAndAssociates - 8/21/2011 12:19:45 PM

+1 Boost

My firm helps clients to develop winable strategies. This one is pretty simple. Ask GM two quaestions. The first requires a simple yes or no answer 1. Did the New GM honor any warranties of any of the vehicles sold by the Old GM (including Impala's)? I think we all know the answer to that question. Once that question has been answered then the second question is "So on what grounds does GM suddenly think that it is not liable, when it honored the warranties of old GM vehicles". Any unexpected answers should be able to be substantiated by a paper trail.