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

[GTAHVIT]

Originally Posted by jackr67

My intent here is to ensure I'm being reasonable, and to build as complete a picture as possible.

I want to make sure that the evidence I've collected is sound and complete. I want to be sure I'm interpreting the evidence in as reasonable and conservative a manner as possible. I want to be doubly sure that I am arriving at reasonable conclusions, and asking for reasonable things from GM.

I don't want to be perceived as trying to bicker, or create conflict. I'm here so that if I've missed something, or jumped to an incorrect conclusion - I find out among friends, and not at arbitration across the table from a bank of GM attorneys.

I appreciate everyone's help - especially those folks who disagree with me. If there's a fault in my logic or the conclusions I've reached, let's find it.

It seems there is majority consensus around the conclusion that some paint work was done to the car after its initial robot paint job. Are there any remaining reasons why that conclusion might be inaccurate?

Is there any way we can get at the history of my car's first 8 miles?

I have the "PDI" paperwork from John Miles which shows an "Invoice Date" of 10/30/2009 and 8 miles on the odometer. It shows a PDI, Vehicle Check-in and Nitrogen into the tires - nothing out of the ordinary. I've already asked John Miles to look up my vehicle's Build Date but have not yet heard back.

Something else to consider... Your car may have been damaged durring the shipping process... Maybe the trucking company tired to fix some unreported damage...

FWIW...

But damn, It would be so hard to prove that.... I'm really sorry you're in this position.... I agree, your car has been painted.... and someone is trying to hide it.... Will your insurance company litigate on your behalf?

[Russell James]

I'd compare the paint thickness to another black Camaro. That's the only way to know if it is way out of whack thickness wise. A little variation across the panels is normal. Even though it is a robot, it's just a robot making a movement that mimicks the human programmers arm movement.

I've never seen a spray gun that can lay down the exact thickness over an entire car, robot or human. Hope all works out for you. Next car, don't get black - it's a nightmare color.

Get a nice bright color like orange, red, white.... they are so bright, the little defects aren't noticeable. I had one black car in my lifetime, never again.

[Inspector 17]

Originally Posted by jackr67

My intent here is to ensure I'm being reasonable, and to build as complete a picture as possible.

I want to make sure that the evidence I've collected is sound and complete. I want to be sure I'm interpreting the evidence in as reasonable and conservative a manner as possible. I want to be doubly sure that I am arriving at reasonable conclusions, and asking for reasonable things from GM.

I don't want to be perceived as trying to bicker, or create conflict. I'm here so that if I've missed something, or jumped to an incorrect conclusion - I find out among friends, and not at arbitration across the table from a bank of GM attorneys.

I appreciate everyone's help - especially those folks who disagree with me. If there's a fault in my logic or the conclusions I've reached, let's find it.

It seems there is majority consensus around the conclusion that some paint work was done to the car after its initial robot paint job. Are there any remaining reasons why that conclusion might be inaccurate?

Is there any way we can get at the history of my car's first 8 miles?

I have the "PDI" paperwork from John Miles which shows an "Invoice Date" of 10/30/2009 and 8 miles on the odometer. It shows a PDI, Vehicle Check-in and Nitrogen into the tires - nothing out of the ordinary. I've already asked John Miles to look up my vehicle's Build Date but have not yet heard back.

My guess is that if the dealer or shipping company or anyone else did anything to your car in those first 8 miles, it is not going to show up on any history anywhere. Unless the dealer made a claim to GM for warranty work, it wouldn't show up in GM's system. Did you notice anything out of the ordinary about the paint when you first picked it up from the dealer? Again, if the dealer is trying to get something over on you here, I doubt they would have made any legitimate paperwork trail. I too am sorry you are in this position.

[BICHN CAMARO]

Originally Posted by 2010 2-Tone

IMHO it looks as though the dealership or someone repainted the car. I think anyone can see that. With that being said it also looks as if the prep work wasn't done properly. Up to almost 10 mills of paint in some locations makes me believe that the legal action that you have taken and the documentation will result in a judgement going your way. If they made you an offer of about half of what your estimates are then they admitted some sort of guilt and that will also hurt them if it gets nasty. Those extra mils of paint that you got were left off of alot of other Camaro's!!! Good Luck.

Are you sure how many MILs you have? I have tested 5 camaros and they all have over 8 MILS of paint! I have not seen a test come in at 4 or 5 YET! We need mil test data!!! Something is not right here!

[Supermans]

Originally Posted by GTAHVIT

Something else to consider... Your car may have been damaged durring the shipping process... Maybe the trucking company tired to fix some unreported damage...

FWIW...

But damn, It would be so hard to prove that.... I'm really sorry you're in this position.... I agree, your car has been painted.... and someone is trying to hide it.... Will your insurance company litigate on your behalf?

If it's not the dealer and it isn't GM, it has to be the shipping company if we are to believe the owner didn't have it repainted a month later and isn't telling the truth and is now trying to get something out of this situation. Difficult to prove, especially if cash was used to pay for the after the fact paint job by the dealer or the carrier. In either case GM should hold the dealer or carrier accountable if it was messed up before it reached the consumer. This is what warranty's are for. I do not agree with anyone saying GM should have nothing to do with this situation if it was a dealer or carrier issue..

[redZ28]

I had an issue once where I ordered a BMW from a dealership. I went to the dealership on the day it was to arrive, but it was taking them forever to prep it. They told me they would deliver it to my house. When it arrived at my house, it had the smell of fresh paint. On closer inspection, I noticed paint on the door and roof gaskets/rubber. After an ugly confrontation, I told the dealership to order another car. I learned later that the trucking company had lowered one of the upper ramps onto my car. The dealership was just hoping that I wouldn't notice the new paint.

While rare, this kind of stuff happens.

[BA-Jackpot]

Originally Posted by jackr67

I bought my Black 2010 Camaro SS new, with 8 miles, in November of 2009 from John Miles Chevrolet in Conyers, GA. It is now July of 2010, and I have paint cracking and peeling all around the car. Marty Claypool, the Regional Representative for GM in Georgia, has looked at it twice and decided that GM will not repair the car. He has offered me a token cash settlement – less than half the cost estimates I’ve received from independent shops to perform the work – to have the car repainted myself, with the stipulation that no GM dealership do the work and that my warranty would be voided. This is entirely unacceptable.




The spots pictured are on the roof and trunk lid of the car; however there are dozens of spots like these as well as significant amounts of “trash” in the paint all over the car. Marty Claypool actually accused me of “parking under an acid truck”.

As a part of my research, PPG was kind enough to send a representative to my home to measure the thickness of my Camaro’s paint with a digital gauge. A typical factory paint job will be between 3.5 and 6.0 mils, with variation of no more than 0.5 mils all around the car. He took 60 individual readings with results between 6.7 and 9.5 mils. This is about twice what would be expected, and suggests that part (or all) of the car may have been painted more than once. It was his opinion that the observed variations in thickness would not be consistent with a robot factory paint job.

For clarity, I created a map of the paint thickness around the car. Notice the roof, which has 2.8mils of variation across the surface. Notice too that each side of the trunk lid was painted separately, resulting in overlap in the center – rather than in one side to side pass.

Furthermore, the PPG representative pointed out what appears to be overspray beneath the clear coat on the rear passenger quarter panel. Again, this would not be typical of a robot factory paint job.

Since my purchase, the Camaro has been washed fully and by hand every two weeks, with spot-washing in between for any bird or bug spots. It has also been hand waxed monthly. It parks among five other late model and classic cars, all of which are used regularly and experience the same general environmental and driving conditions. None of these vehicles shows any signs of issues seen on the Camaro.

As GM will not repair the paint, I am forced to use the Lemon Law. In Georgia, that involves offering GM a “Final Opportunity to Repair” which I have done, and which they declined. Then, I must send them a “Request to Repurchase or Replace” which I have done, and which they also declined. Following that, there is an arbitration process run by the Governor’s Office of Consumer Affairs that mediates – I have just requested arbitration from the state, and am waiting to hear back. The OCA here in Georgia has been very helpful, and I have consulted with them at each step to ensure their support, and the strength of my case. Still, having GM put me through this has been an enormous hassle and expense.

If you are considering purchasing a Camaro, I encourage you to wait. In the past ten years, I have purchased five new cars and have never been treated this poorly. The Camaro is an awesome car, and is well designed and generally well built – however, GM has not honored its warranty obligations to me. GM has done everything it can to avoid taking responsibility for problems in my car, and my experience with a GM vehicle has been miserable.

My GM case number: 71-841168110
My GM case representative: (866) 790-5700x41480



I’ve included a summary of my case below:

1. 11/12/2009. I purchased the vehicle new from John Miles Chevrolet in Conyers, GA with 8 miles showing.
2. 11/24/2009. Brought vehicle to John Miles at 813 miles for “gurgling” noise within dashboard, malfunctioning windows, burning smell and inspection of “trash” in paint by service manager. No loaner is provided. Vehicle returned 11/24/2009.
3. 12/23/2009. Brought the vehicle to John Miles for follow-up inspection of “trash” in the paint. Repair of these areas was scheduled for January. Vehicle is also repaired for “gurgle” per TAC and inspected for clunking in the front suspension when reversing. After a two hour wait, a Hyundai Accent is provided as a loaner. Vehicle returned 12/31/2009.
4. At the recommendation of service manager at John Miles, scheduled paint repairs were cancelled – in his opinion, work performed would be worse than what was already on the car.
5. 4/26/2010. Brought the vehicle to Rick Hendrick Chevrolet in Duluth, GA for inspection of “trash”, excessive paint chipping and etching patterns in paint. Mark Henderson (service manager) personally inspects and concludes that observed chipping and etching is abnormal, and we agree to watch the situation and take action should it get any worse. Vehicle is also repaired for low air conditioning refrigerant levels and poor A/C performance. No loaner is provided. Vehicle returned 4/26/2010.
6. Paint begins to crack and blister on multiple panels; large chips are observed on the roof.
7. 5/17/2010. Brought the vehicle to Rick Hendrick at the request of Mark so that Marty Claypool, regional GM representative, may inspect. Vehicle air conditioning performance is still poor. Marty “does not see” any cracking of the paint. No loaner is provided. Vehicle returned 5/21/2010. While at Rick Hendrick, both passenger wheels are curbed by dealership.
8. 5/21/2010. Created case #71-832593974 with General Motors. Ariel is my representative. Requested escalation.
9. 5/25/2010. Ariel calls back, tells me Marty considered it again, and still will do nothing. I ask again for escalation.
10. 5/27/2010. Ariel calls, tells me she’s escalating the case and will call back on 5/28/2010.
11. 6/07/2010. Having not heard from Ariel, I call and leave her a message.
12. 6/10/2010. Having still not heard from Ariel, I call and leave another message.
13. 6/17/2010. Having still not heard from Ariel, I call and leave yet another message.
14. 6/17/2010. I call the GM line and get Angela. She informs me the case is closed and that GM will not repair the defective paint. I inform that I plan to pursue the Lemon Law.
15. 6/17/2010. “Final Opportunity to Repair” sent to GM in accordance with the Georgia Lemon Law.
16. 6/18/2010. Ariel calls to tell me the case has been closed.
17. 6/18/2010. Mark and Marty call and request a re-inspection on 6/21/2010.
18. 6/21/2010. Brought the vehicle to Rick Hendrick for Marty Claypool to re-inspect. Mark produces signed vehicle check-in paperwork from 5/17/2010 on which is noted (in different color pen and handwriting) that wheels were curbed at the time when I dropped the car off on 5/17/2010. After some argument, he admits to having added that note after the fact. Commits to repair the wheels. Loaner is provided. Vehicle returned 6/24/2010.
19. 6/21/2010. Sonia from GM calls with a new case number #71-841168110, identify the service visit of 6/21/2010 as their “final opportunity to repair” under the Georgia Lemon Law.
20. 6/23/2010. Sonia called, she cannot reach the dealership or Marty – wants to know if I have heard anything? She commits to call back on 6/25/2010 to discuss outcome of inspection.
21. 6/23/2010. Marty this time does see cracking in the paint and suggests I “parked it under an acid truck”. In his opinion, entire car will need to be repainted and this is not a manufacturing defect. He is “very reluctant to offer anything at all”. Does offer a total of $3,500 as a settlement for repaint of car and repair of wheels – with stipulation that vehicle warranty is voided and I release GM from arbitration, lemon law and buyback. Also stipulates that no GM body shop will repaint the car.
22. 6/24/2010. Vehicle inspected by Decatur Paint and Body
23. 6/25/2010. Vehicle inspected by Kelly Auto Body
24. 6/26/2010. Vehicle inspected by Sentry Auto Body
25. 6/28/2010. PPG sends their regional expert to perform a visual inspection of the vehicle.
26. 6/29/2010. PPG sends their regional expert to my home with a digital paint thickness meter. More than 60 readings are taken, all of which are individually photographically documented and then placed on a flat diagram of the vehicle (attached). Photos of each reading physically being taken are available as well.
a. Readings are between 6.7mils and 9.5mils, with significant variance of 2.8mils – equivalent almost to a full paint job – across the roof.
b. Overspray seen over several square feet of the rear passenger quarter panel.
c. Overlapping bands seen in spray pattern on trunk, with high points along the center of the surface.
d. Four significant pieces of trash observed in upper/roof portion of the vehicle alone.
27. 7/14/2010. Still have not heard from Sonia.

Just what I would expect from the people that deal with the public. These people could be in the whitehouse.
And alot others. Warranties are just something fake to entice you into thinking you are really getting a good product.

[Inspector 17]

Originally Posted by Supermans

If it's not the dealer and it isn't GM, it has to be the shipping company if we are to believe the owner didn't have it repainted a month later and isn't telling the truth and is now trying to get something out of this situation. Difficult to prove, especially if cash was used to pay for the after the fact paint job by the dealer or the carrier. In either case GM should hold the dealer or carrier accountable if it was messed up before it reached the consumer. This is what warranty's are for. I do not agree with anyone saying GM should have nothing to do with this situation if it was a dealer or carrier issue..

Huh? So you're saying if the dealer did something to the car to damage it that GM should be responsible for it? Am I reading what you posted correctly? That's like saying Whirlpool delivers a refridgerator to Lowe's. It arrives as expected, but when one of the workers goes to move it out onto the floor they drop it and completely destroy it. So you're saying that in this case Whirlpool is responsible? I don't think so.

[David79z28]

I've recently had problems with a metal building contractor that made some major errors on a small shop I had built in Nov of 09. They made 8 return trips from Nov of 09 to Feb of this year. They ignored letters from my lawyer, etc. I finally contacted a few local TV stations and provided them with a link to this slideshow:

These issues existed AFTER their 8th return trip.

http://s259.photobucket.com/albums/h...=Building2.flv


The TV stations started calling the owner of the company for an interview. The owner freaked. They have paid for a portion of the repairs and have agreed to pay the rest.

Find some simlar threads here and on other forums and call the local media. Someone will get something done, whether GM or the dealer is at fault....

[Supermans]

Originally Posted by camaropete

Huh? So you're saying if the dealer did something to the car to damage it that GM should be responsible for it? Am I reading what you posted correctly? That's like saying Whirlpool delivers a refridgerator to Lowe's. It arrives as expected, but when one of the workers goes to move it out onto the floor they drop it and completely destroy it. So you're saying that in this case Whirlpool is responsible? I don't think so.

In these types of situations where everybody is denying blame, then the master company of the product needs to step in and not leave their customer dry. The master company has to reprimand the dealer or carrier responsible and get them to pay for their mistakes. If they leave their customer out to dry and force them to sue while they wipe their hands clean seems to me a mistake and the wrong business move.

The customer in this case bought and took home an item that left the factory perfect but was mishandled, fixed up improperly and sold to him without a mention to what they did. We are dealing with a car not a refrigerator here. A car that has all these safety issue's involved with it. What if in the process of painting the car, they messed something else up which could in turn cause the driver to get into an accident. Should GM look away? Like I said before, GM needs to make sure they have honest dealerships working under them. This type of behavior should not be acceptable. At the very least GM should send somebody to investigate the dealer and carrier involved and not let it be up to the customer to hire the investigators and legal team. GM should send someone to test the paint of the vehicle for example and get to the bottom of this working with their customer, not looking the other way. my opinion of course..

[Berean]

Originally Posted by camaropete

Huh? So you're saying if the dealer did something to the car to damage it that GM should be responsible for it? Am I reading what you posted correctly? That's like saying Whirlpool delivers a refridgerator to Lowe's. It arrives as expected, but when one of the workers goes to move it out onto the floor they drop it and completely destroy it. So you're saying that in this case Whirlpool is responsible? I don't think so.

I understand your point, but you're missing one component.

Lowes may sell Whirlpool, but the sign on the building says Lowes.

The sign where he bought the car says GM.

[BA-Jackpot]

Zactly!
All GM cares about is getting your money. And thats has become the norm for the good ole USA with all the regulations and laws and permits. I will not buy a car again where they tell me tell me I have to sign an arbitration agreement . I was told that I could not purchase my last motorcycle without signigning. I had just bought a new pontiac weeks before and I didnt sign the arbitration agreement. Still got the car.

[Mr. Wyndham]

I would humbly suggest all the "big mean company" accusations get stowed until we have a full story....which may never happen, but.....it might.

"Better to be silent and thought a fool, then to open your mouth and confirm it."

[Inspector 17]

Originally Posted by Supermans

In these types of situations where everybody is denying blame, then the master company of the product needs to step in and not leave their customer dry. The master company has to reprimand the dealer or carrier responsible and get them to pay for their mistakes. If they leave their customer out to dry and force them to sue while they wipe their hands clean seems to me a mistake and the wrong business move.

The customer in this case bought and took home an item that left the factory perfect but was mishandled, fixed up improperly and sold to him without a mention to what they did. We are dealing with a car not a refrigerator here. A car that has all these safety issue's involved with it. What if in the process of painting the car, they messed something else up which could in turn cause the driver to get into an accident. Should GM look away? Like I said before, GM needs to make sure they have honest dealerships working under them. This type of behavior should not be acceptable. At the very least GM should send somebody to investigate the dealer and carrier involved and not let it be up to the customer to hire the investigators and legal team. GM should send someone to test the paint of the vehicle for example and get to the bottom of this working with their customer, not looking the other way. my opinion of course..

Point taken. I don't agree, but I hear what you are saving. Think about it as if you owned the business and now you were responsible for all the cost associated with getting to the bottom of something like this.

Originally Posted by Berean

I understand your point, but you're missing one component.

Lowes may sell Whirlpool, but the sign on the building says Lowes.

The sign where he bought the car says GM.

Last time I checked, every dealer has a name. Take the OP's dealer for example:



The building says "John Miles" in giant letters and then just has a listing of all the manufacturers they carry. So like your example, the dealer is "Lowe's" and they should therefore be responsible.