GM not honoring my Camaro paint warranty; paint cracking and peeling all over the car

[Maxhenry]

Originally Posted by jackr67

Either way, I agree - given how inconsistent paint jobs on Camaros are compared to other GM vehicles, I do not think my car was repainted .. it is simply a stand-out among already inconsistent paint.

Thoughts?

One thought seems to pop out: break out the lawyers. Or at least the local "investigative reports" journalist.

[thespymaster]

Originally Posted by motorhead

you beat to the same conclusion.


You only seemed to prove that your car doesn't have a factory paint job.

Thats his point..............

If a GM dealer represented the C5 as brand new from the GM Plant, and not repainted due to delivery damage , and the GM Dealer tried to conceal it, then through this due deligence investigation he's conducting will reveal the truth.


I had a slight issue, I bought my C5 new from a dealer, who installed aftermarket wheels.........The wheels were rubbing the front springs.....Dealer at first said not thier issue, called to GM and GM defended me by instructing the Dealer to fix the problem and made the dealer fix it................ Got new KW V1's for free....................

[Mr. Wyndham]

Originally Posted by jackr67

3) The GM settlement offer allows for 22.8 hours of labor to paint my car. I took the car to two other Chevrolet dealerships and received estimates of 75 to 100 hours to perform that same work. The independent estimates I've received include as many as 124 hours. No way is the settlement offer adequate even for completing repairs, much less offsetting the drop in value of having a repainted car.

Thoughts?

Then why not let the "other Chevy dealerships" do the work?

[jackr67]

Because Marty offers only $3,500 to repair the wheels ($500) and repair the paint. Unfortunately $3,000 does not pay for 100 hours of paint work. And because if I do have the work done using Marty's "good will" money, then my GM Paint Warranty will be void, which will have a big negative impact on resale should I ever decide to sell the car.

This needs to be a warranty action on GM's part.

[Mr. Wyndham]

Originally Posted by jackr67

This needs to be a warranty action on GM's part.

Which is why I asked why you don't have one of the other dealerships cover the work under warranty? I believe you said they think its a coverable factory defect?

[jackr67]

Both Chevrolet dealerships have indicated that since Marty has gotten involved and decided it is not a warranty repair, in order for them to be reimbursed by Chevrolet, that decision would have to be reversed. Otherwise they run the risk of not geting paid for the work.

Really though - let's take a step back from my particular problem and ask an obvious question. If you explained to prospective (and current) Camaro owners that the paint on the car they were about to purchase was 35% thicker and 50% less consistent in application than anything else GM makes - would they still buy the car? How about if you showed them defect (trash in paint) counts of Camaros vs. other GM vehicles?

Maybe this is only an indicator of poor quality control to me, but I sure wouldn't have bought the car had I known the numbers on it beforehand.

Regardless of how bad the paint on #56954 may be, GM is not going to repair it under warranty. If indeed there is a larger problem with the materials/application of paint to Camaros, that would set a precedent and open them up to warranty claims from every other Camaro owner out there. I understand that a "good will" settlement offer is as close as they'll get.

I'd like to understand why the paint on Camaros is so different in thickness, consistency of application and defect (trash) count than everything else GM makes.

[Inspector 17]

Originally Posted by jackr67

...
Maybe this is only an indicator of poor quality control to me, but I sure wouldn't have bought the car had I known the numbers on it beforehand.

...

I'd like to understand why the paint on Camaros is so different in thickness, consistency of application and defect (trash) count than everything else GM makes.

I posted this in another thread:

Originally Posted by camaropete

Everyone keeps talking about GM "figuring out how to make the paint more durable" or talking about paint chips on their car as if it is a paint or process problem. The GM Oshawa plant has won award after award for being one of the best auto production plants in North America and the world (below is from Wikipedia). This is one of the reasons it was chosen as the birthplace of the Camaro.

"The plant won the J.D. Power Gold Award for initial quality in 2006, 2005, 2003, 2002; as well a numerous other individual awards for the specific models it produces. In 2007, the plant won silver for initial quality, and a Gold Best in Segment award for the Pontiac Grand Prix, and Bronze Best in Segment for the Monte Carlo. In all, the plant has won 19 J.D. Power awards for quality since 1999. In recognition of that achievement, J.D. Power awarded the Founder's Award to the Car Plant in the summer of 2008; it is an award that has been presented only six times in the lengthy history of J.D. Power & Associates. Harbour Consulting rated Oshawa #1 (building the Impala and Monte Carlo) as the second most efficient in North America, the top-rated in the study was Oshawa #2 (building the LaCrosse and Grand Prix)."

The paint used on the Camaro is the same paint used on just about every other GM vehicle and specifically ones produced out of the Oshawa complex.

I go back to my points made above regarding the design of the Camaro. It just exposes points on the car to road debris differently than any other car out there.

As I said, if you are driving this car on gravel roads or heavily cindered roads, take precautions to protect your car. The same would happen with any car in those conditions. Stop blaming paint or production as I feel they have nothing to do with the chipping that some people are seeing.

I am just curious as to why people keep concluding that there is a "paint problem" and it's unique to the Camaro. How many other cars are produced out of Oshawa and why are they not seeing any issues if there is indeed a "paint problem"?

Besides the above, why do you assume a negative impact on resale? Have you ever purchased a used car? Did you ask the seller if the paint was under warranty?

[Broncos78]

Okay so I have been reading this post from the beginning, and I generally on Camaro5 just about everyday. It just seems like sooooo many people on here are having problems with there paint from GM. However in this instance it is most probably the dealer at fault either way this guy payed top dollar for a new car and should recieve a flawless new car in return!! Quick story, I am at my friends shop in Nassau county Long Island just last Wednesday, (I will not say the name or the Dealers name) and I see 3 Brand spanking new $48,000 each suv's getting various parts of eack truck repainted and I asked him is this common. He said "Ron you have no Idea what goes on from these Dealers". So I believe it is a very common practice for this to go on, right or wrong, it goes on, and IT SHOULD NOT!!! I would be pretty PO'd if it happened to me! So please sir whoever you are seek what you payed for, it is only fair!

[Mr. Wyndham]

Originally Posted by jackr67

Both Chevrolet dealerships have indicated that since Marty has gotten involved and decided it is not a warranty repair, in order for them to be reimbursed by Chevrolet, that decision would have to be reversed. Otherwise they run the risk of not geting paid for the work.

Bring that up to Marty the next time you speak with him. Seriously. This COULD be the window out of this charade.

Originally Posted by jackr67

I'd like to understand why the paint on Camaros is so different in thickness, consistency of application and defect (trash) count than everything else GM makes.

There is nothing out of the ordinary going on. I'm afraid you're grasping at air, here. Thickness is not standard across the entire industry, and it certainly isn't standard from car to car built at different plants. Everything is relative to the people developing the vehicle.

As far as the Camaro's paint vs "every other GM car"...there's no proof of lower quality. In fact, for every complaint I've read on here, there are many more saying they have no problems. The only two conclusions I can come to is that:

• The Camaro attracts MUCH pickier and perfection-sensitive buyers than a Malibu or Equinox....or maybe the buyers are less sensitive and take their cars down gravel or dirt roads at 55 (or highways at 120).
• And that the design of the Camaro may just be a little more prone to chips than other "slab-sided" vehicles. But there is nothing anyone can do about that short of designing a whole new car....

I'm fairly certain the company is aware of the complaints, too. But they see a big picture that we cannot (all 120,000+ cars)...so if there was something really WRONG with the paint process -- it'd get fixed just like anything else has.

[RB43TD]

Wow. This thread is very eye opening. Even with all kinds of documentation this guy can't seem to get this problem fixed on a car that is only a few months old. I hope I don't have to look forward to any kind of issues like this and a perceived lack of customer service. If the paint on my car after a few months looks anywhere near as bad as what you've encountered, I'd be extrememly pissed too. I know there's three sides to every story, but just reading this it sure sounds like in the end the customer is going to get the shaft and for me, a person that just bought his first Chevy, that's very discouraging.

[Supermans]

Originally Posted by Dragoneye

Bring that up to Marty the next time you speak with him. Seriously. This COULD be the window out of this charade.

There is nothing out of the ordinary going on. I'm afraid you're grasping at air, here. Thickness is not standard across the entire industry, and it certainly isn't standard from car to car built at different plants. Everything is relative to the people developing the vehicle.

As far as the Camaro's paint vs "every other GM car"...there's no proof of lower quality. In fact, for every complaint I've read on here, there are many more saying they have no problems. The only two conclusions I can come to is that:

• The Camaro attracts MUCH pickier and perfection-sensitive buyers than a Malibu or Equinox....or maybe the buyers are less sensitive and take their cars down gravel or dirt roads at 55 (or highways at 120).
• And that the design of the Camaro may just be a little more prone to chips than other "slab-sided" vehicles. But there is nothing anyone can do about that short of designing a whole new car....

I'm fairly certain the company is aware of the complaints, too. But they see a big picture that we cannot (all 120,000+ cars)...so if there was something really WRONG with the paint process -- it'd get fixed just like anything else has.

Yeah it might get fixed on future models, however people with actual real problems like this will be ignored. Especially since this isn't a safety issue..Look how long it took Toyota to acknowledge the gas pedal sticking problem..And that was a real danger.. This paint issue is not life threatening and the blame is being shifted around.. I'm still hoping the OP gets what he deserves when buying a new car.. And that is a NEW car without any major defects..

[Mr. Wyndham]

Originally Posted by Supermans

Yeah it might get fixed on future models, however people with actual real problems like this will be ignored. Especially since this isn't a safety issue..Look how long it took Toyota to acknowledge the gas pedal sticking problem..And that was a real danger.. This paint issue is not life threatening and the blame is being shifted around.. I'm still hoping the OP gets what he deserves when buying a new car.. And that is a NEW car without any major defects..

There are only two parties with any authority to claim 'problem' or not. One is jackr67, and the other is the dealer he chooses to get service at. Any ambiguity between the two have to be either settled amongst themselves, or with third-party intervention via the lemon law or an arbitration process. It's far above any of us to claim one side is right or wrong and "demand" anything.

And I said that as a hypothetical regarding the big picture. I don't believe there is a problem to be fixed.

[Supermans]

Originally Posted by Dragoneye

There are only two parties with any authority to claim 'problem' or not. One is jackr67, and the other is the dealer he chooses to get service at. Any ambiguity between the two have to be either settled amongst themselves, or with third-party intervention via the lemon law or an arbitration process. It's far above any of us to claim one side is right or wrong and "demand" anything.

And I said that as a hypothetical regarding the big picture. I don't believe there is a problem to be fixed.

The problem to be fixed is how GM handles this type of situation. I am not in the belief that once the car leaves the GM parking lot and is taken by a carrier, that everything that happens to the vehicle is the fault of the everyone else and that GM is not responsible at all. That is where our opinions differ here.

The buyer in this case bought a brand new car from GM... Ultimately it is GM that is responsible for the behavior or misbehavior of everyone else that handles the car up until it reaches the buyer... The fact that they wash there hands and are able to look the other way is what I disagree with.

[Mr. Wyndham]

Originally Posted by Supermans

The problem to be fixed is how GM handles this type of situation. I am not in the belief that once the car leaves the GM parking lot and is taken by a carrier, that everything that happens to the vehicle is the fault of the everyone else and that GM is not responsible at all. That is where our opinions differ here.

The buyer in this case bought a brand new car from GM... Ultimately it is GM that is responsible for the behavior or misbehavior of everyone else that handles the car up until it reaches the buyer... The fact that they wash there hands and are able to look the other way is what I disagree with.

You're already assuming things.