RIP 2012 ZL1 #1635

[Sharkonwheels]

Originally Posted by Diode Dynamics

jhoop302,

When you get your new ZL1, please send me a PM with your shipping address or give me a call: (314) 205-3033 ext. 206

I will make sure you receive a free Diode Dynamics full interior LED conversion kit for your new ZL1. http://www.diodedynamics.com/store/l...o-led-kit.html

We wish you the best of luck with this situation and hope you receive the best resolution. No customer should ever have to deal with this hardship.

Thanks,

Nick C.
Sales Manager
Diode Dynamics

Lord have MERCY the vendors on here rock...

When I went through my TWO situations, I didn't get SQUAT for offers

Nick, you guys make anything for a 2013 Volt? I have a Volt Premium, all options just in case you need to know...

I'll buy stuff from ya just BECAUSE you're making that offer! Can't really buy a CAI for my Volt, which has an 84HP 4cyl driving a generator! And I can't fathom buying handling components for it either!

PM me with what ya got.

Cheers!

[smkooq]

IMO the Hoopers are 100% entitled to a new ZL1 or some sort of "extra mile".

If this accident was in some way just that, an "accident". Then I understand that the dealership made a mistake, and the Hoopers will have to deal with the blunt end of the stick.

But as stated, this was not an accident. This situation was committed with criminal intentions by this dealership. It doesn't matter that the said person went in during after hours, this criminal works for said dealership so he represents this dealership.

So in this case the dealership should be doing more than just simply replacing the car, they should be brown nosing and apologizing to the Hoopers, as well as making things right..

[PQ]

Originally Posted by Sharkonwheels

On the ass-end of this, I can't really FAULT the OP for coming here. I really can't. That's a real doozy of a predicament to be in, and I don't have the heart to scold him for not waiting more than 5 days. What's done is done, hopefully GM/Chevrolet/First State will take care of the Hoopers, they'll be happy, we'll be happy they're happy, and we'll continue talking crap about cars.

Who wants the Soap Box?

haha, I'll take the box.

It is clear to me that he wanted a brand new car and nothing short of that was going to suffice.

He came here because the dealer made the choice to want to try and find a comparable car and that the OP was not going to hear it. I don't blame him for coming here right away but I think he did so calculating and with an agenda he laid out and we ran with it. As he knew we would.

I don't think he gave them a proper chance to get under this. Let's not forget that while they are responsible, they are a victim here as well. It's just a bad shitty situation.

I do think it's dumb of him to tell you anything he would not want you saying. Even though you do respect his wishes. No way for him to know that. Can't be too damning.

Just about ALL stories that are THIS one sided are not told accurately.

[PQ]

Originally Posted by smkooq

IMO the Hoopers are 100% entitled to a new ZL1 or some sort of "extra mile".

If this accident was in some way just that, an "accident". Then I understand that the dealership made a mistake, and the Hoopers will have to deal with the blunt end of the stick.

But as stated, this was not an accident. This situation was committed with criminal intentions by this dealership. It doesn't matter that the said person went in during after hours, this criminal works for said dealership so he represents this dealership.

So in this case the dealership should be doing more than just simply replacing the car, they should be brown nosing and apologizing to the Hoopers, as well as making things right..

Criminal intentions by this dealership?

[smkooq]

Originally Posted by PQ

haha, I'll take the box.

It is clear to me that he wanted a brand new car and nothing short of that was going to suffice.

He came here because the dealer made the choice to want to try and find a comparable car and that the OP was not going to hear it. I don't blame him for coming here right away but I think he did so calculating and with an agenda he laid out and we ran with it. As he knew we would.

I don't think he gave them a proper chance to get under this. Let's not forget that while they are responsible, they are a victim here as well. It's just a bad shitty situation.

I do think it's dumb of him to tell you anything he would not want you saying. Even though you do respect his wishes. No way for him to know that. Can't be too damning.

Just about ALL stories that are THIS one sided are not told accurately.

If something negative happens to you, your going to tell everyone. Its just the way it is. Just as the saying goes, if a business does right for you, you tell a friend, if a business does wrong to you, you tell a 100 people.

There is nothing wrong, with trying to come out on the upper hand in situations like the Hoopers are in now.

Who do you think should even come out in the upper hand? The dealer who wrecked Hoopers car criminally? Do you believe that both sides should come out evenly from this situation, even though the dealer is at fault?

[smkooq]

Originally Posted by PQ

Criminal intentions by this dealership?

how is it not criminal intention? The employee went in after hours, and drove a car without permission..

[BSX_Camaro]

Originally Posted by PQ

haha, I'll take the box.

It is clear to me that he wanted a brand new car and nothing short of that was going to suffice.

He came here because the dealer made the choice to want to try and find a comparable car and that the OP was not going to hear it. I don't blame him for coming here right away but I think he did so calculating and with an agenda he laid out and we ran with it. As he knew we would.

I don't think he gave them a proper chance to get under this. Let's not forget that while they are responsible, they are a victim here as well. It's just a bad shitty situation.

I do think it's dumb of him to tell you anything he would not want you saying. Even though you do respect his wishes. No way for him to know that. Can't be too damning.

Just about ALL stories that are THIS one sided are not told accurately.

PQ, from what I have heard/read the Dealerships response right off the bat was "Not our Problem". So the OP going to social media after a few days is more than warranted IMHO.

[Devryn17]

Originally Posted by smkooq

how is it not criminal intention? The employee went in after hours, and drove a car without permission..

The dealership had no criminal intention. The dealership was wronged here too...I think we tend to forget that.

[smkooq]

Originally Posted by Devryn17

The dealership had no criminal intention. The dealership was wronged here too...I think we tend to forget that.

no, the employee represents the dealership. It does not matter if it was the CEO, or CFO that crashed the car.. An Employee is still part of the company, and this dealership needs to own up to that..

[ZoomZoom]

Ive have not posted anything in a long time, but wanted to say I hope they can resolve this soon. I met mr. hooper several years ago at a Camaro show. very nice and knowledgeable. I bet the dealership wish they would have dipped into there ad budget just a little and got him a new car. I,m sure this would have paid dividends instead of all this! I know everyone has there own opinion, but just saying its obvious this would not gotten so out of control. I sure he will get a new car in the end, as which he should. I had the same type situation with a truck several years ago and they were not going to come close to even my pay-off, I mentioned ---LOSS OF VALUE--- and they immediately sent my check (the ins company.) This is apparently the magic words. Good luck, soon!!!!!!

[HDRDTD]

I thought one of the reasons he declined the used car offer was because he was unhappy finding out it had been a two-owner car, not a one-owner as he had been led to believe, AND that the car had been involved in an accident which they failed to disclose. Also the used car was supposedly better documented than the one he had, but it came with zero documentation?
He just didn't seem to be happy with what the dealer presented the used car to be, and what it really turned out to be.

[Sharkonwheels]

Originally Posted by smkooq

no, the employee represents the dealership. It does not matter if it was the CEO, or CFO that crashed the car.. An Employee is still part of the company, and this dealership needs to own up to that..

Not entirely true. The employee is not responsible for making the Hoopers whole, the dealer is. Sure, the dealer can sue the former employee, but as has been said, he's got nothing.

I agree, both were screwed. The only one getting away without a scratch, is the freaking jerkoff who should be locked up for 3-5 minimum, working making license plates or something, and have the money go to restitution.

Calling the dealer a bad-guy because it happens, is kinda rough. Now, if what's been said is true about the initial :not our problem," calling the OP a "prick," and the other comment from a manager about them being as bad as the thief? ohhhhhh boy does that suck.


My fence-trigger is this:
If those three above items are true, I'm LEAPING on the side of the fence of getting the OP a new ZL1. Nothing else matters to me. Nothing. Don't care WHAT the OP said or did, he LOST in the situation, it was at the dealer, and they should at least tolerate a little berating/shit-talking from him all things considered. They F'd up, take a little medicine.

If they came back at him with those 3 things, sorry - unacceptable. Give him a new ZL1 - he EARNED it.

[smkooq]

Originally Posted by Sharkonwheels

Not entirely true. The employee is not responsible for making the Hoopers whole, the dealer is. Sure, the dealer can sue the former employee, but as has been said, he's got nothing.

I agree, both were screwed. The only one getting away without a scratch, is the freaking jerkoff who should be locked up for 3-5 minimum, working making license plates or something, and have the money go to restitution.

Calling the dealer a bad-guy because it happens, is kinda rough. Now, if what's been said is true about the initial :not our problem," calling the OP a "prick," and the other comment from a manager about them being as bad as the thief? ohhhhhh boy does that suck.


My fence-trigger is this:
If those three above items are true, I'm LEAPING on the side of the fence of getting the OP a new ZL1. Nothing else matters to me. Nothing. Don't care WHAT the OP said or did, he LOST in the situation, it was at the dealer, and they should at least tolerate a little berating/shit-talking from him all things considered. They F'd up, take a little medicine.

If they came back at him with those 3 things, sorry - unacceptable. Give him a new ZL1 - he EARNED it.

You proved my point...

Why does the dealer have to make things right? Because the said employee represents the dealership. So who is at fault? The dealership

If this employee did not represent the dealership, then this criminal would be the one having to pay and the dealer is off the hook..

[PQ]

Originally Posted by smkooq

how is it not criminal intention? The employee went in after hours, and drove a car without permission..

Criminal for the now fired employee. If the dealership had sanctioned this then yes. And the dealer is accepting responsibility reasonable to that. Should they implement a policy that says not more employees who live in trailer parks?

Originally Posted by BSX_Camaro

PQ, from what I have heard/read the Dealerships response right off the bat was "Not our Problem". So the OP going to social media after a few days is more than warranted IMHO.

If the dealership said that then I agree. I do not believe that happened. If it did then I'm wrong but I'll go with the odds. I'm not sure why you believe that happened?

Originally Posted by smkooq

no, the employee represents the dealership. It does not matter if it was the CEO, or CFO that crashed the car.. An Employee is still part of the company, and this dealership needs to own up to that..

Above the reasonable value? I simply disagree.

If that's their CHOICE then fine. I'd certainly have done it but they are not evil for trying to find a comparable car.