Chicago Tribune: Don't pin the blame on GM for dealer's greed

[greenrail]

Originally Posted by paulsandhu

Thankfully in Canada... its against the law for dealers to sell above MSRP for new cars.

I love my Canadian Friends dearly. I also have several wonderful employees in the North!

They may not let dealers sell over MSRP, but the Government has their hands so deep in your pockets for Taxes etc. they don't need to.

Sorry guys, but your taxes are way off the map even compared to Illinois.

[Supermans]

Franchise laws can be changed since it is the Government in control of GM so it is no longer a privately owned company.. The GM that had to follow those franchise laws went bankrupt and with that all those laws do not apply.. The Government can tell the GM dealers what to go do with themselves if they want since they don't have to send them the cars.. I'm afraid to say this since I do not believe in socialism or communism however in this case, the dealers need to stop doing this as it is hurting the American people.. The dealers need to be forced to sell at MSRP by the Government or else their contract gets pulled...THe Government in this case can do exactly what it is preaching it will do with Healthcare which is to create a Government run insurance that all our current insurance companies cannot compete with.. It will drive all privately owned insurance companies out of business eventually since the Government does not have to make a profit to survive. The same can be said with dealerships in a much smaller scale.. It would be pocket change for the Government to set up Carmax like dealerships for new GM vehicles.. Why do it for healthcare yet not do it for the car industry?

[Rodrunner]

Originally Posted by Supermans

Franchise laws can be changed since it is the Government in control of GM so it is no longer a privately owned company.. The GM that had to follow those franchise laws went bankrupt and with that all those laws do not apply.. The Government can tell the GM dealers what to go do with themselves if they want since they don't have to send them the cars.. I'm afraid to say this since I do not believe in socialism or communism however in this case, the dealers need to stop doing this as it is hurting the American people.. The dealers need to be forced to sell at MSRP by the Government or else their contract gets pulled...THe Government in this case can do exactly what it is preaching it will do with Healthcare which is to create a Government run insurance that all our current insurance companies cannot compete with.. It will drive all privately owned insurance companies out of business eventually since the Government does not have to make a profit to survive. The same can be said with dealerships in a much smaller scale.. It would be pocket change for the Government to set up Carmax like dealerships for new GM vehicles.. Why do it for healthcare yet not do it for the car industry?

[mikenmar]

Originally Posted by Supermans

The GM that had to follow those franchise laws went bankrupt and with that all those laws do not apply.

Do you have any support for this assertion? It doesn't sound right to me (and I'm a lawyer).

[Hylton]

Originally Posted by paulsandhu

Thankfully in Canada... its against the law for dealers to sell above MSRP for new cars.

That's only true for some provinces, not all. Even for provinces who have the law, there are many ways to get around. It. Trade-ins for one thing...

[Captain Awesome]

Originally Posted by mikenmar

Do you have any support for this assertion? It doesn't sound right to me (and I'm a lawyer).

Since when do they need to do anything legal?

[Supermans]

Originally Posted by mikenmar

Do you have any support for this assertion? It doesn't sound right to me (and I'm a lawyer).

Hundreds of plaintiffs have pending lawsuits against old GM that are worth nearly $2 billion. They blame automotive defaults for their injuries, which in many cases are severe and crippling. All of those have been thrown out when the bankruptcy occurred as part of negotiations. Current and future cases. If you're a lawyer you must know this. Or did you miss the memo? The plaintiffs are considered unsecured creditors in the bankruptcies.

If the Government has literally done away with all potential court cases against them. What makes you think the Government has not done away with the ability for the dealers to sue as well for breaking old franchise laws which were contracts under old GM?

[Aversion]

Originally Posted by Supermans

Franchise laws can be changed since it is the Government in control of GM so it is no longer a privately owned company.. The GM that had to follow those franchise laws went bankrupt and with that all those laws do not apply.. The Government can tell the GM dealers what to go do with themselves if they want since they don't have to send them the cars.. I'm afraid to say this since I do not believe in socialism or communism however in this case, the dealers need to stop doing this as it is hurting the American people.. The dealers need to be forced to sell at MSRP by the Government or else their contract gets pulled...THe Government in this case can do exactly what it is preaching it will do with Healthcare which is to create a Government run insurance that all our current insurance companies cannot compete with.. It will drive all privately owned insurance companies out of business eventually since the Government does not have to make a profit to survive. The same can be said with dealerships in a much smaller scale.. It would be pocket change for the Government to set up Carmax like dealerships for new GM vehicles.. Why do it for healthcare yet not do it for the car industry?

The share holders might disagree about GM being a privately owned company. I'm pretty sure franchise laws are state laws, the feds don't get too involved there. I think I'll stop there.

[Camaroyoung]

So if the dealers are GM customers how and why can Gm take away franchise licenses to profitable dealerships? Why can GM then sell those franchise licenses to a "new guy" down the street? If dealerships aren't the cause of Gm's bankruptcy, why are they shutting down dealerships in the name of "saving costs" and emerging out of bankruptcy?? It seems to me GM wants it both ways.

[Koolwip]

I do not think the bankruptcy Court or appointed Trustee can simply throw out a lawsuit. I beleive the Plaintiff in an unliquidated damages case, such as a products liability case, simply becomes an unsecured creditor after obtaining a judgment, or, as I have done in the past when a Defendant I have sued on a case files for bankruptcy, you do not violate the automatic stay pursuant to the Bankruptcy code and you simply 1. wait for the stay to be lifted afer the bankuptcy is over and poceed with your suit or 2. file a motion to have the stay lifted to proceed with your suit which will typically 100% be granted if you can show the Court that there is sufficient insurance to cover the claim.

I can understand the question from Mikenmar, especially since he is an attorney, because I cannot see all GM franchises and GM being relieved from all their contractual duties due to a bankruptcy. I must have missed the memo as well. Why don't you enlighten the listserve and post the memo for us. Anything is possible, but It just does not seem feasible.

We are talking about the government owning 60% (I think) so who knows what they have done.

Originally Posted by Supermans

Hundreds of plaintiffs have pending lawsuits against old GM that are worth nearly $2 billion. They blame automotive defaults for their injuries, which in many cases are severe and crippling. All of those have been thrown out when the bankruptcy occurred as part of negotiations. Current and future cases. If you're a lawyer you must know this. Or did you miss the memo? The plaintiffs are considered unsecured creditors in the bankruptcies.

If the Government has literally done away with all potential court cases against them. What makes you think the Government has not done away with the ability for the dealers to sue as well for breaking old franchise laws which were contracts under old GM?

[Phenicks]

Im not sure about the legality of it, but couldn't GM refuse to allocate cars to dealers that they know are over charging? Not saying they would or should just wondering.

[Supermans]

Originally Posted by Koolwip

I do not think the bankruptcy Court or appointed Trustee can simply throw out a lawsuit. I beleive the Plaintiff in an unliquidated damages case, such as a products liability case, simply becomes an unsecured creditor after obtaining a judgment, or, as I have done in the past when a Defendant I have sued on a case files for bankruptcy, you do not violate the automatic stay pursuant to the Bankruptcy code and you simply 1. wait for the stay to be lifted afer the bankuptcy is over and poceed with your suit or 2. file a motion to have the stay lifted to proceed with your suit which will typically 100% be granted if you can show the Court that there is sufficient insurance to cover the claim.

I can understand the question from Mikenmar, especially since he is an attorney, because I cannot see all GM franchises and GM being relieved from all their contractual duties due to a bankruptcy. I must have missed the memo as well. Why don't you enlighten the listserve and post the memo for us. Anything is possible, but It just does not seem feasible.

We are talking about the government owning 60% (I think) so who knows what they have done.

Now that you asked, here are some of the memo's you may have missed
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.ajc.com/services/content/...ysler0620.html

http://financialmarketweblog.com/wil...wsuits-behind/

http://www.totalinjury.com/new-chrys...-lawsuits.aspx

And here is a law firm that specializes in accident claims due to faulty vehicle equipment talking about what has happened.

http://www.seriousaccidents.com/acci...jury-lawsuits/

As car accident lawyers, we know car accidents can cause many different personal injuries. Car crashes can cause whiplash, spinal cord injuries resulting in paralysis (i.e. paraplegia & quadriplegia) as well as traumatic brain injuries like concussions. Severe car accidents can lead to wrongful death.

When a design defect causes a car accident, the car maker needs to be held responsible for the car accident leading to personal injury and wrongful death. Some personal injury can be permanent and lead to constant high medical bills.

The government’s current plan would actually prevent anyone from bringing a future products liability claim against GM or Chrysler if a car already purchased from either company is defective and results in a car accident causing wrongful death or personal injury.

Another unusual aspect to point out is the fact that the government is not setting aside money for liability claims similar to what asbestos producing companies did.

The government will guarantee warrantees issued by GM, so someone can get a broken or defective part and get that fixed. If a person gets into a car accident leading to personal injury, GM would not fix them.

Bankruptcy should not change the fact that a company whose product causes personal injury and wrongful death should be held liable.

As automobile accident lawyers, we believe this situation is completely unfair. Consumers who are in a car accident and suffer personal injury should be able to seek a settlement in a products liability lawsuit stemming from an automobile accident.

Please feel free to call us now at 1-800-655-6585 or click here for a FREE CONSULTATION with an experienced car accident attorney. We have a large bilingual staff that can assist you in either English or Spanish.

[mikenmar]

What do tort plaintiffs have to do with franchise laws??

[chevydude26]

come on guys its supply and demand...if people are willing to pay for it...then well you can't knock the dealer for getting a true market price

the market is the market...get over it and just wait or cough up the money if you want it now

there is a cost to being the first to have something deal with it