RIP 2012 ZL1 #1635

[CamaroJoe96]

On the topic of who's at fault here, I believe that the dealership shares partial fault along with their former employee. Here's a scenario:
If I forget to lock my garage door one night, and later found out in the morning my car was stolen, I would most definitely feel at fault for not locking the door. Granted, I don't want anyone to steal my car, but I didn't take protective measures to prevent it from happening. In this case, it would be an accident on my behalf. However, with first states situation, they didn't have any protective measures AT ALL for keeping the keys out of the hands an an employee who shouldn't have ANY business with driving any customer cars. As a result of that, they should claim responsibility for being partially at fault. Again, granted they never asked the service writer to steal the car, but yes, it could have been prevented.
On the topic of whether OP is entitled a new car or not, I personally believe he isn't. However, if it was my business, yes, I would give him one to prevent everything that's going on right now. Any smart business owner would agree with that.
To me, I do not blame OP to refusing their offer on the other Z. They were trying to be slick with pushing it, hiding the accident and what not. To me, it seems the dealer is trying to come out on top of this whole scenario, which is obviously impossible since they didn't give him a new car from the get go. Theyre in shits creek, and will NOT find any way out now.

[PQ]

Originally Posted by eodtech72

How is a non- original, 2 owner car with PREVIOUS DAMAGE ON THE CARFAX (which was not disclosed and a trade in the dealer has on hand) a comparable replacement for the original totaled ZL1? Making an effort to find a replacement might take a little more than looking out the window. And don't forget they were trying to SELL this car to him not give it to him with a $4k discount. I'd wager to say they have a lot less than $44k into that car so they were still going to make money on that insulting offer......

Originally Posted by BSX_Camaro

The dealer offered a $43k car, told them it was a one owner and it wasn't. Didn't check or disclose the car had been in an accident, minor, but still shows on the car history. Didn't have the same options or the options he wanted. The $5k wasn't enough to offset all the negative and the "lack of truth" by the dealership.

Working with the customer to get this resolved is one thing. Force feeding a trade in and not disclosing the history properly shows the dealer isn't on the same level as most. They should have to "eat" something to make it right.

If its a new car, fine. If it should be at least equal to, if not better than what he had. Its all up to what the OP will accept.

You guys got the vin to that car? Ya, neither do I. We have conflicting reports here.

But you try and find a car comparable. Not easy to do.

Does not matter, it is clear that nothing but a new car was ever going to be good enough.

[01pewterz28]

Originally Posted by GT500guy

That is absolutely not the case! Let me first say that what happened to Mr. Hoopers car was extremely unfortunate, if my Shelby were to meet its end at the hands of a dealership employee on a joyride then I'd be upset beyond words.

I know the people at First State Chevrolet, some of them on a personal level, my family has done business with them for over 25 years and to say that they are unreputable or more specifically, that Mr. Robert Hansen isn't trying to make things right for the Hoopers, is simply not the case.

I've been following this thread for several days and it amazes me that people on social media are so quick to judge, without knowing all of the facts. Bob Hansen has and still is, doing everything within his power to secure a replacement car for the Hoopers. Finding an exact match to the their ZL1, especially one with comperable mileage, isnt all that easy, we're not talking about some run of the mill SS for goodness sake!

I read another forum members response that stated how we probably don't know all of the facts in this case, believe me, you don't. I'm not going to get into a pissing contest with other people over this but all of the information relevant to this issue have not been laid out on the table. As I stated earlier, I feel for the Hoopers but truth be told, all this talk of them deserving a brand new ZL1 simply doesn't hold water, sorry folks, insurance companies don't see things that way.

True and Bottom Line is ONLY the Hooper’s and Mr. Hansen know what really happened and no matter what we think or what we believe, we were NOT in the room with them so in the end it's all speculation. It does not matter if we know either party in the end WE WERE NOT THERE.

This is an unfortunate event that took place I am sure any one of us would feel the same way if our vehicles were destroyed like the Hooper’s vehicle was whether it's a ZL1 or a Chevy Malibu.

[boondocksaint]

[cdjnight]

Originally Posted by smkooq

Well i guess that is where we differ in opinion.

I believe this would be a fair transaction if this situation was an accident. "Sorry Hoopers but here is what we will do."

But with what has actually happened, I believe the Hoopers should receive an extra mile, and the dealership should justify the criminal action of their employee.

[hognutz]

honeslty the way this should work is the following.

1. Insurance should pay fo the car.
2. the dealership should kick in something to offset the finacial loss. maybe not all of it but some of it.

If you total a car on you own you take finicial loss. period.

the fact it happened at the dealership I think they are morallly liable to offset that a bit as it is hard to stay in business if you hire retards and mess up peoples property.

Do they deserve a brand new car on the dealerships dime????? no that is not the way the world works unfortualty.

If your car is stolen out of the driveway and totalled no car fairy comes along and give you a brand new car with no loss to you.

Those are the facts. anybody who thinks different has not had a car solen or paid for suplemental insurane.

I have had one car stolen, 1 car I totalled driving over my head. I took some loss on both those deals.


insurance does not = brand new replacement unfortually. any loss breaks down into an insuracne claim most of the time.

[GT500guy]

Originally Posted by RallySS

Why does the dealer sit idle and not bring this to light? This is likely a detail they could release and immediately put out the fire, and at a minimum pay the note on the car until one is found. The last detail that was heard was a take it or leave it offer.

Things are in play as we speak to make things right for the Hoopers and there was never a take it or leave it offer made by the powers that be at First State Chevrolet, that's all I can say at this time. Whats disgraceful is that a bunch of idiotic morons have taken it upon themselves to call First State and say things to their employees that I don't care to repeat on here!

[PQ]

Originally Posted by RallySS

Has anybody else been rubbed wrong by a warranty claim on their Camaro? The reason why I ask this is that it is entirely up to the first person who reviews the issue as to what response the customer gives and how much they are willing to accept depending on how the review is delivered as well as the response/resolution. I had wheel etching. My initial response was that they fix (not replace, fix) the wheels. My local dealer tried to say the Adams car wash caused the etching...at less than 7500 miles and maybe 8 washes. Long story short, the dealership replaced all 4 after I found every imperfection I could to justify replacement.

Fast forward to now, with this issue. Ops car is wrecked, he is immediately having a horrible day. First thing dealer says is it isn't their problem (forget the insurance yada yada). At that point, they put themselves behind the 8 ball. The next thing they could have done was ask the Op to find 2-3 cars he is willing to check out and own. Dealership arranges details for inspection and buys the right car for him plus some small extras for time spent and hassle. Done deal. Instead, they trade in a car that is damaged and make false claims about the details of the car. At this point Op should be livid and rightfully so he goes to the media knowing where the situation is going. First he got on car forums like we all would. At this point the pitchforks and torches are up and new car is expected/demanded in most cases.

All I'm saying here is the majority of us have had a bad experience at a dealership and can easily relate to the details the Op has provided and the response the dealership has given, and based on said experiences really feel the dealership is being run by a weasel much like our personal poor experience(s) of past, with exception of a couple people based on their responses. It seems more believable to me at this point that the dealer is so set in his ways that he is not willing to go the extra mile at any point and would rather crash and burn in an epic temper tantrum or will be forced to grit his teeth just to make it right to salvage his livelihood. Based on his initial responses, I believe he deserves everything that is coming to him.

I do not believe they were told it's not their problem. As unlikely as it is that they'd say that I'll ask you the same as everyone else. Why do you believe that he dealer told them that?

Originally Posted by GT500guy

That is absolutely not the case! Let me first say that what happened to Mr. Hoopers car was extremely unfortunate, if my Shelby were to meet its end at the hands of a dealership employee on a joyride then I'd be upset beyond words.

I know the people at First State Chevrolet, some of them on a personal level, my family has done business with them for over 25 years and to say that they are unreputable or more specifically, that Mr. Robert Hansen isn't trying to make things right for the Hoopers, is simply not the case.

I've been following this thread for several days and it amazes me that people on social media are so quick to judge, without knowing all of the facts. Bob Hansen has and still is, doing everything within his power to secure a replacement car for the Hoopers. Finding an exact match to the their ZL1, especially one with comperable mileage, isnt all that easy, we're not talking about some run of the mill SS for goodness sake!

I read another forum members response that stated how we probably don't know all of the facts in this case, believe me, you don't. I'm not going to get into a pissing contest with other people over this but all of the information relevant to this issue have not been laid out on the table. As I stated earlier, I feel for the Hoopers but truth be told, all this talk of them deserving a brand new ZL1 simply doesn't hold water, sorry folks, insurance companies don't see things that way.

Originally Posted by RallySS

Why does the dealer sit idle and not bring this to light? This is likely a detail they could release and immediately put out the fire, and at a minimum pay the note on the car until one is found. The last detail that was heard was a take it or leave it offer.

There was no 'Take it or leave it' offer. Why do you believe that?

But as far as the dealer coming on here to 'Clear things up', that would be most unwise. And they know it. THis lynch mob has made up their minds.

I am simply pointing out that they are believing an unlikely story put out by the OP and are willing to ruin someones business over it and I'm getting flack. NO WAY should they come on here right now. It would NOT go well. Which is predictable but interesting. How so many would do this with one hard to believe side of a story.

[Dupo24]

Ive been following this as a fellow car lover (2006 Pontiac GTO with 42K) and I can say is this: they dont owe him a new ZL1 off the bat. They do owe him more than what the insurance offered. They owe it to step up a bit more and resolve the issue. This dealership did not. Now....they owe him a new ZL1 to make up for it. Good luck to you sir. You spent money for your dream car. Anything less than your dream car is unacceptable imo.

[RallySS]

People do have to remember there are other employees there that had absolutely nothing to do with any decisions made or in the making and really need to quit being idiots. How would they like it if their boss took out someone's car, house, or child in the act of a crime and they had to field baby killer/home wrecker phone calls all day? They need to find better things to do with their time...agreed.

[Brian52682]

All I know is the dealership took possession of the car and it was wrecked while the car was in their possession. It does not matter what an insurance policy dictates when a wreck occurs when a car is in your possession.

The car was in the dealerships possession and it was totaled while in their possession. Giving this guy a brand new ZL1 is the only morally right thing to do in this matter. You don't total a car that someone owned since it was brand new and not get off. Think about accidents.. If someone totals your car you sue them for the cost of the car + replacement cost. So if this goes to trial this guy is going to get 80k+ due to being out of a car for this long.

[cdjnight]

I'd like to see them come on here...owning they're mistake of giving a parts guy access to 100's of thousands of dollars in not only their vehicles, but their customers vehicles too! And with owning their mistake what they are doing to make it right! And by making right I mean going above and beyond whatever the insurance companies settle on. The Hoopers may not have a certain law that requires the dealer to do so but I'm pretty confident that a lawsuit in civil court probably wouldn't pan out too well for the dealership and the managers that gave the parts boy access. It shows a severe lack of negligence and thank god nobody got killed in the car or on the street.

[cam62]

Originally Posted by GT500guy

Whats disgraceful is that a bunch of idiotic morons have taken it upon themselves to call First State and say things to their employees that I don't care to repeat on here!

I sure hope these morons art not members here. Since it's gone viral there's no telling though

I've been watchin this since day one. There are valid points to both arguments.
I'll just continue to watch this thread to see how it all plays out

[PQ]

Originally Posted by Brian52682

..... if this goes to trial this guy is going to get 80k+ due to being out of a car for this long.

That would be a travesty of justice.

Of course they owe him. But a brand new car should be their choice. Maybe they should have. But just because they didn't, and tried to start finding him a comparable replacement does not justify them getting this blasting that they have.