RIP 2012 ZL1 #1635

[heymatt]

In post #1 the OP says the area where the vehicle was stored was locked.

The dealers safeguards didn't work, ie: the car was taken without authorization.

See above: car taken by employee when business closed. Obviously aware that there were no safeguards in place.

If more facts were presented to disprove what has been shared with us by the OP and Gen-5. It would lend more support to the position you've taken.
But my opnion, based on what I've read so far lend more credence to the OP than the dealership.
If the facts change, I would have no problem saying I was wrong and you were right.
At this point it seems we agree to disagree.

[xtreme2s]

As a business owner myself, (not in auto business) but with 25 business vehicles ranging from cars to huge cube trucks, including several employees have been issued keys to enter, even not during "posted open hours" of business, create responsibility upon the insurance I have.

I believe this dealership, and its insurance is fully responsible to replace the car. I would hope EVERY dealer has some language in policies to cover these type of issues.

This dealership's future trust is at issue!

[tones2SS]

Originally Posted by 130R

Some of you are being pretty quick to judgement without all the facts and without even the most basic understanding of the law. Generally, a dealership is required to take 'reasonable care' of a vehicle while in their possession. Reasonable care would be storing the car in a locked facility Vs leaving it on the street. The dealer isn't required to ship the car to Fort Knox over the weekend.
How is a dealership responsible for what an employee does when he is not working at the dealership, or is 'off the clock'. Here the dealership exercised reasonable care by locking the car in their facility. Someone entered the facility during off-hours and took the vehicle from the locked facility without the dealerships permission.
What would you do if someone broke into your garage in the middle of the night, stole your car and say, knocked over a telephone pole, and the next day the city was asking you to pay for the telephone pole? You'd say: "Whoa, whoa, whoa. That car was locked in our garage and somebody stole it. How are we responsible???" Well, the dealer is doing the same thing…
The d-bag that stole the car is the bad guy here, not the dealership. Yes, maybe, (and I say maybe because NONE OF US know all the facts as they actually are), could have handled it better, but put yourself in their shoes before passing judgement ie: you were in possession of say a friends car, you locked the car in your garage and someone broke in and took it without your knowledge and wrecked it. What else could you have done to protect their car? Would you know immediately what to do? Homeowners insurance? Their insurance?
Just a few things to think about before you hang the owner of the dealership by his balls...

I tend to agree a bit. The d-bag that stole the car is 100% responsible. The dealership is almost like caught in the middle in this case.
Also, not sure if anyone has noticed, but the OP has only 9 posts in this forum.

[FilibustaRhymes]

The dealer should have insurance to cover these sorts of scenarios, as mentioned above. It seems like a no-brainer, to me.

Bottom line is that the car was in their care and it was destroyed.

Several years ago, the computer shop I worked in was broken into by a former employee and was cleaned out - we ended up replacing every computer there. I think it was something like two dozen of them, and in every case the customer got something newer/better than what they had before. Insurance helped some - they paid for the current appraised value, and we as a business took a loss and made up the rest to make the customers happy.

Only one guy out of 24 or so was a dick about it, and we bent even further backwards to make him happy. He was still a dick, but there is absolutely no way he can say he got screwed - he ended up with some way better equipment than he had before.

You're a business...it's what you do.

[dvision]

The employer is responsible for his employee. He didn't break into the dealership, he used his keys. Unless the laws in your state are different than ours, dealership has insurance for this. I was in the car business for many years and my insurance always included garage keepers liability. This is for test drives while you are working on vehicles and damage that might occur while driving or problems that may be a result of techs.
I also might disagree on the insurance company or the dealer giving him a new '14 ZL1. They are going to look at it like he was driving a '12 and sentimental value doesn't matter. I think they are responsible for giving him a car that is the same value or greater, or the cash including the cost involved with the purchase including sales tax and title fees. I hate that this happened and it has made me rethink how I may handle any future trips to get work done on my Z. Good luck.

[102SS]

Just out of doing the right thing that dealership should pony up for a 2014 ZL1.

All they would pay is the difference between what the insurance covers on the 12 and the cost price of the 14.

Then they need to make sure they give the keys and alarm code for the shop to someone that can be trusted.

[102SS]

Just out of doing the right thing that dealership should pony up for a 2014 ZL1.

All they would pay is the difference between what the insurance covers on the 12 and the cost price of the 14.

Then they need to make sure they give the keys and alarm code for the shop to someone that can be trusted.

[Netraa]

I'm just speculating here... but how many people think he's done this to before? Wonder if it would be worth wile for anyone with a hot ride left over a weekend to check with onstar, the alarm company, and possibly the CCTV footage and see if he's done this before.

This doesn't seem to be the kind of guy that just had this epiphany, wonder if anyone had a hot vette, or a caddy locked up over a weekend and gotten a test drive?

[Stecky]

Originally Posted by hawk02

I'm going to guess the paper you signed to have the dealership service your car has some fine print on it somewhere stating they are not liable for any loss or damages to your vehicle while it's in their possession. That's probably why they're telling you it's not their problem.

If the car is totaled, Isn't your insurance company going to reimburse you the market value of the car?

To me it's no different than if someone stole the car from in front of your house and totaled it. Your insurance company should reimburse you the fair market value of the car and then go after the dealership's insurance to get their money back.

If the dealership had any decency, it would pay the difference between what your insurance reimburses and the cost of a new ZL1.

Like others have suggested, get yourself a good lawyer and be patient. This could take a while to settle.

Even if you signed a paper about your car being stolen, that is not really what happened. It's not like someone broke into the car while it was parked outside.
The dealership had possession of the key. The key is what was stolen. They were in possession of that!

Lawer

[Padre]

Originally Posted by Netraa

I'm just speculating here... but how many people think he's done this to before? Wonder if it would be worth wile for anyone with a hot ride left over a weekend to check with onstar, the alarm company, and possibly the CCTV footage and see if he's done this before.

This doesn't seem to be the kind of guy that just had this epiphany, wonder if anyone had a hot vette, or a caddy locked up over a weekend and gotten a test drive?

That's exactly what my dealer said: who knows what else this guy has done? Not only joy rides, but embezzlement, missing parts, malfeasance? What other future disasters were waiting to happen?

The financial loss on putting John in a new ZL1 is more than made up for in future savings now that this guy is gone. Dealer should consider it a profit.

Padre

[marine_142]

Originally Posted by gen=5

The owner of the dealer personal went on the web before a insurance settlement has been offered and located a 2012 ZL1 with less mile and more options,plus offered to cover any out of pocket expenses to try to make sure the op will not have to pay anything..The OP turn down this offer,the dealer located other low mile mint ZL1 of the same yr,and the OP turned it down..The OP has made it clear that he only wants a brand new ZL1 given to him,with no out pocket expense to himself...
............
The dealer would have to sell 4 to 6 ZL1's to cover the cost of giving him a 2014 ZL1 less the settlement..

What can ya expect?

Mr. Hansen is a 'used car salesman' at heart and doesn't really give a rats azzz about Mr. Hooper or his ZL1. Offering a similar car that may or may not be better is a typical "used car salesman" attitude and should be quite offensive to Mr. Hooper. It's all about the bottom line isn't it. A business pinching penny's and calling it good enough all the while screwing over the Hoopers.

If he really did care He would go above and beyond! Take care of Mr. Hooper with a new car, cut his losses, then sue the piss out of Mr. Peterson.

But like I said.. It's all about the bottom line!

[CamaroSCG]

Yes, I don't post a lot here because I own a 2002 SS, but I'll add my thoughts on this. My girlfriend takes her car to 1st State, but it's a Cobalt, so I don't think she has to worry. Unless..... someone takes her car out to pick up lunch.

Between the guy who wrecked the ZL1 and 1st State, I think both of them should pay to make it 100% right by the ZL1 owner. I think most would agree that a large portion of the blame goes to the guy who took the Camaro out for a joy ride (aka "a good beating"). Let his insurance cover most of it and let his rates skyrocket! I would hope that the police come back with some more serious charges against him later on.

For future reference, when I had my M6 trans rebuilt under warranty years ago by Tom Oats Chevy in PA, I signed on the waiver and also wrote down "no test rides unless I'm in the car". I'm pretty sure they followed my request because the mileage hadn't changed and the mechanic went with me for a drive when the car was done. My thinking was, this is my contract (waiver) as well and I can modify it. If they didn't agree with what I had added, then we could talk it out or I could choose to take it somewhere else.

[jm88]

How about a BRAND NEW Leftover 2013 and call it a day ?
OP gets a New Car, one year newer and Dealer doesn't shell out
the cash for a 2014... win / win.

[Jay_LHD3]

From what I understand both parties agree that the dealership tried to settle on a deal that did not work out. Now the dealership is saying let the insurance companies straighten it out and the OP is saying that his insurances company, GEICO, is not getting any information.

I would have to say this sucks for both parties, but the dealership has to be accountable in the end. The car was in their possession and used by their employee.

I’m interested to see how the rest of this story unfolds.