backtop


Print 49 comment(s) - last by Masospaghetti.. on Dec 6 at 9:40 AM


Volt side impact crash
GM is going to great lengths to make Volt owners happy

GM and its extended range EV called the Volt have been under fire lately for vehicles that caught fire after crash testing. GM has so far pointed out that it hasn't received any reports of the Volt catching fire in an actual accident despite the incidences in crash testing. The drama surrounding the Volt started in the middle of November when the NHTSA conducted a side impact crash test on a Volt and then parked it in the parking lot.
 
The Volt sat there for three weeks before catching fire and burning hot enough to damage other vehicles nearby. The resulting fire after three weeks was linked to the battery packs used in the Volt and the NHTSA kicked off an investigation into the Volt. Three more Volts were obtained and out of those three subjected to the same side impact crash tests with simulated rollovers; two of them had more issues. One of the cars caught fire within seven days of the test and the other started smoking and throwing sparks immediately after the test.
 
GM has been upfront with buyers so far and has even offered loaner cars until the investigation is complete to any Volt owner that is worried about the risk of fire. GM has now sweetened the deal with GM CEO Dan Akerson saying in a recent interview that GM would purchase back any Volt from an owner that requested it. So far, none of the Volt owners has asked GM to buy their car back.
 
GM did note that out of the roughly 6,000 Volts sold it had received about 230 calls from concerned owners and that so far 33 Volt owners have asked for loaner cars. GM spokesman Selim Bingol has said, "We're going to do what it takes to make every consumer completely satisfied."
 
Despite the issues with the Volt and possibility of fire, the car still has the highest satisfaction rate in the automotive market at 93% of owners saying they would buy the car again. That is higher than the 91% satisfaction that owners of the Dodge Challenger and Porsche 911 have expressed.

GM has also noted that it will not hit its 10,000 unit mark for the Volt this year. GM has sold 6,142 Volts so far. Even with the battery fire publicity the Volt sold more than 1,108 units in November for its best month ever. The Volt is selling so well now that some in Washington are wanting to end the $7,500 tax credit the Volt offers.

Source: The Detroit News



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

For what price?
By lightfoot on 12/2/2011 12:16:29 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
GM would purchase back any Volt from an owner that requested it.

Yes, but for what price?? The price that the customer paid for it, what they currently owe on it, or the price that it is deemed worth now that it is a used vehicle.




RE: For what price?
By KentState on 12/2/2011 12:36:10 PM , Rating: 1
The only reasonable amount would be a fair market value of the car. GM should not be liable for a customer over paying or owing more than what it is truly worth. The customer also did benefit from ownership so refunding the purchase price is not reasonable IMO either.


RE: For what price?
By Piiman on 12/2/2011 12:42:19 PM , Rating: 2
It should be the "pay off" amount of the loan.
But whats the big deal ? Are you going to sit in your car for weeks after an accident waiting for it to catch fire? Its not like its a Pinto that exploded on impact.


RE: For what price?
By KentState on 12/2/2011 12:47:00 PM , Rating: 3
So GM is liable for an someone that rolled a trade-in car payoff amount into the Volt loan? It should be one amount, pro-rated by the number of miles driven.


RE: For what price?
By vol7ron on 12/2/2011 1:27:45 PM , Rating: 2
Waiiit.. so for those of us that pay straight cash, we're out-of-luck?

I vote either to pay out cost, or suggested retail price minus calculated depreciation (not standard new-to-used depreciation + miles + time) minus time-value-money increase between purchase date and buyback date.


RE: For what price?
By LRonaldHubbs on 12/2/2011 1:46:59 PM , Rating: 5
quote:
Waiiit.. so for those of us that pay straight cash, we're out-of-luck?

That's what you get for not being in debt. You should strive to be more normal.


RE: For what price?
By seamonkey79 on 12/2/2011 5:09:51 PM , Rating: 2
0% loan ftw


RE: For what price?
By Ringold on 12/2/2011 8:51:46 PM , Rating: 2
There's still interest on that loan, GM or the dealership is simply paying it for you, and passing it along embedded in the price. ftw.


RE: For what price?
By callmeroy on 12/5/2011 11:19:27 AM , Rating: 2
Who gives a s**t?

If I'm paying a lower price on something than the "average" going price is that most people are paying for it -- do I really care about all the "behind the curtain" tricks on what got my price there.....no...not really.


RE: For what price?
By kfonda on 12/2/11, Rating: 0
RE: For what price?
By Mitch101 on 12/2/2011 1:06:13 PM , Rating: 2
Ive kind of been down this road before with a lemon and was told they would pay back everything except any payments on the vehicle that were made. They told us it was because they are not in the business to rent cars. To which I replied had the vehicle been of the quality that you like to advertise and had it not been through 3 repairs in under 2 months and still continues to blow blue smoke I would agree. The car was in our possession 2.5 weeks of the 6 weeks owned. The 3.5 weeks it was in repair we were driving the loaner vehicle from the dealership. I challenge you to deny 100% reimbursement. Id add the dealership attempted on two occasions to not give a receipt for the repairs saying we didn't owe anything.

This example is not oranges to oranges but if you have a valid reason and explanation that would hold up in court they should certainly give back 100% which they did. Court and attorney fees are not cheap its financially better for them to make you happy and avoid the litigation and bad publicity. Amazingly we got the two payments made back on top of it from the finance company. I figure its the cost they pay for putting us through the BS.

My thought is GM will have to meet people in the middle and probably offer an incentive on making it right and getting you into another GM vehicle. GM is in no position to not make right with a customer on compromising safety.


RE: For what price?
By kfonda on 12/2/2011 5:03:04 PM , Rating: 3
Also, what becomes of the $7500 tax credit when GM buys the car back?


RE: For what price?
By tng on 12/2/2011 5:21:12 PM , Rating: 2
Interesting question, would Uncle Sam come after you for that? Or since none of these cars are even a year old and most have not filed their 1040s yet, I bet the IRS has a minimum time of ownership to qualify for it.


RE: For what price?
By YashBudini on 12/4/2011 7:45:29 PM , Rating: 2
Well it's the government, you really believe whatever they did they actually thought it through?

The $7500 is probably why GM was willing to buyback the car in the first place. Add a customer loss of $5000-$7500 and you get a tidy sum plus the car for sale to some other fool.


"The whole principle [of censorship] is wrong. It's like demanding that grown men live on skim milk because the baby can't have steak." -- Robert Heinlein














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki