GM employee crashes customers ZL1, refuses to pay

[Berzerker]

Originally Posted by Great68

While the dealership/insurance might not be financially obligated to upgrade them to a new 2014, the $15,000 difference is going to seem like pittance compared to the negative publicity the dealership is getting and loss of future sales.

Who is going to want to buy cars or service cars at a dealership that hires people who take unauthorized joyrides and total customers' cars?

If the dealership knew what's good for them, they'd just buck up, take the hit, and look like good guys in the eyes of the public.

That 15K difference would be made up easily if they A) Fired idiot who crashed and condemn his actions and B) Made a big show of how good they are in offering a NEW car to replace the one that was totaled. You can't buy that kind of publicity. You also can't get rid of the kind of the tarnished relationship and bad publicity that has already happened as a result of their inaction.
If I were the Car Owners I would be having everyone I know go in there for a "test drive" and then calling back and saying "Sorry I read in the paper about that car that got crashed, I don't feel comfortable dealing with your dealership anymore"

[westopher]

I don't understand why GM corporate wouldn't step in at this point before it becomes a REAL problem.

[white rocket]

Originally Posted by Great68

While the dealership/insurance might not be financially obligated to upgrade them to a new 2014, the $15,000 difference is going to seem like pittance compared to the negative publicity the dealership is getting and loss of future sales.

Who is going to want to buy cars or service cars at a dealership that hires people who take unauthorized joyrides and total customers' cars?

If the dealership knew what's good for them, they'd just buck up, take the hit, and look like good guys in the eyes of the public.

My guess is that the dealer would rather endure a few months of bad press then shell out $15k right from bottom line. In a few months, people will have forgotten about this incident and business will carry on as usual for them. Just a calculated risk.

Originally Posted by westopher

I don't understand why GM corporate wouldn't step in at this point before it becomes a REAL problem.

Dealerships are franchise stores with independent owners. If this client complained to GM corporate they would just tell them that they have to deal with the dealer themselves and give them some promo swag for there troubles. How this process is handled is solely by the discretion of that dealership owner. It will be HIS bottom that gets affected(bad press, consumer loss of faith, etc) by how he handles it, not GM's. It's not like it was a product malfunction.

[snails]

Originally Posted by white rocket

My guess is that the dealer would rather endure a few months of bad press then shell out $15k right from bottom line. In a few months, people will have forgotten about this incident and business will carry on as usual for them. Just a calculated risk.



Dealerships are franchise stores with independent owners. If this client complained to GM corporate they would just tell them that they have to deal with the dealer themselves and give them some promo swag for there troubles. How this process is handled solely by the discretion of that dealership owner. It will be HIS bottom that gets affected(bad press, consumer loss of faith, etc) by how he handles it, not GM's. It's not like it was a product malfunction.

it would be in the dealerships best interest to bite the bullet.. 15k isnt alot of money to a large dealership, the money they spend on advertising alone in a month is probably close to 15k, and this is going to do alot more harm to the company in the long run, if they bit the bullet it would maybe benefit the rep of the company as people would trust them to do the right thing..

eg. the company i work for just donated $100,000. to Langley Memorial hospital... obviously some of that was for publicity..

[westopher]

Originally Posted by white rocket

Dealerships are franchise stores with independent owners. If this client complained to GM corporate they would just tell them that they have to deal with the dealer themselves and give them some promo swag for there troubles. How this process is handled is solely by the discretion of that dealership owner. It will be HIS bottom that gets affected(bad press, consumer loss of faith, etc) by how he handles it, not GM's. It's not like it was a product malfunction.

Car enthusiasts know how that works, but your average Joe doesn't. If GM doesn't stand behind their dealers, it looks like not standing behind your products. Public perception is more important than reality.

[jasonturbo]

Originally Posted by white rocket

Dealerships are franchise stores with independent owners. If this client complained to GM corporate they would just tell them that they have to deal with the dealer themselves and give them some promo swag for there troubles. How this process is handled is solely by the discretion of that dealership owner. It will be HIS bottom that gets affected(bad press, consumer loss of faith, etc) by how he handles it, not GM's. It's not like it was a product malfunction.

It's all about representation, I can asure you GM Corp. is aware of this and will step in, privately or publicly.

Dealerships selling GM vehicles are supposed to operate in a manner which is representative of the brand, not in accodance with the preferences of a specific franchise owner.

[white rocket]

$15k to keep one client happy isn't the same as $15k spent on advertising. I guess they could write it off as "promo" but it still goes against bottom line. Again, it's just a calculated risk. They are obviously willing to endure bad press and hope the problem gets rectified without very much(or any) money out of their pocket.

[snails]

Originally Posted by white rocket

$15k to keep one client happy isn't the same as $15k spent on advertising. I guess they could write it off as "promo" but it still goes against bottom line. Again, it's just a calculated risk. They are obviously willing to endure bad press and hope the problem gets rectified without very much(or any) money out of their pocket.

thats the thing, this 15k will go much further than keeping 1 client happy, looks like its making many potential clients very unhappy.. if the markup of an average vehicle is lets call it $2000... thats pretty average.. well they just easily list at least 20-30 serious buyers to another dealership.. like it or not this is advertising.. most car enthusiasts are waiting to see how this pans out.. if this dealership dosnt step up.. thats going to hurt them alot..

they would be smart to pay the money, then charge the employee/ex employee and go after him for the cash.

when people total cars on our lot "it has happened" that employee gets fired and the situation gets dealt with quickly and quietly so these things dont happen.

[white rocket]

^^^While I completely agree that that is how it should be handled and why, the dealer clearly has a different view on his exposure.

[T4RAWR]

its on jalopnik now

Dealership Totals Customer's Camaro ZL1, Owner And Dealer At War

[lowside67]

"The Hoopers didn't just buy their show-worthy black ZL1 for $60,000. They had to trade in a 2011 Camaro SS and also sell their pristine 1969 Camaro SS as well to get the new car. By all appearances, they loved their ZL1."

How that in any way makes this any different than somebody who sold RRSPs or just saved $60,000 cash is beyond me. These articles are so brutally slanted to generate sympathy it's unreal.

The dealership informed my wife and I on Monday morning at 9:00 a.m. of our loss. Yes, they waited over 16 hours to tell us about our car. I am sure they discussed the incident with their attorneys prior to calling us.

More like that was the absolute first moment that somebody senior in the dealership was in the office... do they seriously expect the assistant-junior-manager-in-training Sunday guy would be able to do anything with this on his own?

And I love how they keep talking about the new car having "34% more mileage" seeing as it doesn't sound like a story when they say that his car had ~10,000 miles and the replacement had ~13,000 (If the replacement car had an accident then I truly don't think it's nearly a substitute for the first one, but I'm just saying the biased reporting in this article is unreal).

Mark

[snails]

Originally Posted by lowside67

How that in any way makes this any different than somebody who sold RRSPs or just saved $60,000 cash is beyond me. These articles are so brutally slanted to generate sympathy it's unreal.


More like that was the absolute first moment that somebody senior in the dealership was in the office... do they seriously expect the assistant-junior-manager-in-training Sunday guy would be able to do anything with this on his own?

And I love how they keep talking about the new car having "34% more mileage" seeing as it doesn't sound like a story when they say that his car had ~10,000 miles and the replacement had ~13,000 (If the replacement car had an accident then I truly don't think it's nearly a substitute for the first one, but I'm just saying the biased reporting in this article is unreal).

Mark

i think its different if the guy crashed his own car and ICBC would give him the value of his car.

but seeing as it was stolen from people who had taken the car into their care.. these people have every right to get the exact same car back if not better on the dealers dime, if not the stupid cunt that stole it.

[lowside67]

Originally Posted by snails

i think its different if the guy crashed his own car and ICBC would give him the value of his car.

but seeing as it was stolen from people who had taken the car into their care.. these people have every right to get the exact same car back if not better on the dealers dime, if not the stupid cunt that stole it.

No it's not any different and it wouldn't be any different from a legal perspective whether it was a technician who was doing a required road test and got t-boned by a semi truck or what actually happened.

The dealership's insurance (not the dealership themselves) is responsible to pay out a fair market value on the totalled car. No more, no less. They are not responsible to actually find a new car - if it's an incredibly rare 1/1 car that there isn't another, they aren't going to build you one, you get paid the price, and that's that. The dealership is trying to find a car to help smooth the process over but this is an insurance dispute plain and simple. The dealership's insurance can then sue the guy who totalled it to try and recover their damages that they've paid out.

Mark

[Zedbra]

The dealer's facebook page has been taken down - they are also taking a beating on Google. You have to wonder if the bad press is worth the $15k.

I hope the guy gets a similar car, though. Then remind him that a new Camaro is not an "investment"

[freakshow]

The owner should get his payout. His payout will include the final price of the vehicle after taxes (state, gas guzzler, etc).

Once that is settled, anything more that the dealer does is good will, like helping him find a similar car. If the car has 13K vs 10K miles, that's pretty similar, 2 previous owners and an accident is not, but I think they also offered him $4K on top.

Either way, if they've paid him out and are actively trying to find him a similar car, he should stop the internet crusade of bashing them every chance he gets.

[T4RAWR]

As someone who's worked in the service industry for a long time, most major companies will bend over backwards to maintain customer service and retain good publicity.

I understand where you're coming from Mark but atleast for myself, if this were to have happened to me I would be livid and wanting heads to roll left right and center.

If I were the owner of first state chevy I would have taken the assessed insurance value ($44k) and paid the difference out of pocket for a brand new 2014 ZL1 Camaro. These guys are suffering heavy losses in regards to reputation and publicity. The 10-15k difference that the dealer would have to fork out is a pittance in comparison to whats happening to them right now. They could have even used this incident to their advantage; gather a small press conference, apologize publicly for the negligence of one of their employees and present the hoopers a brand new 2014 camaro zl1. This sort of action would show accountability to their customers and IMO drive up sales.

Now their reputation is tarnished and this stain probably wont go away for a long long while.

[ae101]

im sorry & not sure if this has been mentioned before, but why i cant the dealership sue the guy that "stole" the car (or is that not what they want)

[Zedbra]

Originally Posted by ae101

im sorry & not sure if this has been mentioned before, but why i cant the dealership sue the guy that "stole" the car (or is that not what they want)

i read in the article that: the car was in the possession of the dealer, and it was a dealer employee that was driving, there is no crime in doing such

[snails]

Originally Posted by Zedbra

i read in the article that: the car was in the possession of the dealer, and it was a dealer employee that was driving, there is no crime in doing such

you need to go re read the article.. to the point that the employee went in after hours and stole the car

[Zedbra]

Originally Posted by snails

you need to go re read the article.. to the point that the employee went in after hours and stole the car

I did read that, but in some parts of 'Murica, that tidbit of information is irrelevant. I was just paraphrasing the article

[Sunfighter]

I found this entire story astounding.

From a business and customer service perspective, the owner of the dealership should INSTANTLY and without hesitation have offered to pay the difference for a brand new model... attempt to salvage the relationship with the customer and save face with the community.

In the process, the owner has destroyed the dealership's reputation and trust with their customers. I found this entire story astounding. This instance is so black and white as to be mind-boggling.

In my business, if we damaged a customer's product we would INSTANTLY replace it with a brand new one... the cost to the business would be irrelevant because NOT doing so could result in a social media backlash that could cost us 10-100 times more than replacing the unit to begin with.

This story is simply astounding.

[radioman]

I wonder if this story would be as big as it is if the dealership simply took the car out on the road to see if something has been repaired properly and in turn totaled the car by simply making an error in everyday diving. No wreckless joyride and the proper personal taking the car out on the road.

[T4RAWR]

Originally Posted by radioman

I wonder if this story would be as big as it is if the dealership simply took the car out on the road to see if something has been repaired properly and in turn totaled the car by simply making an error in everyday diving. No wreckless joyride and the proper personal taking the car out on the road.

I think the difference in the scenarios is the willfull negligence of the employee and in turn the dealerships response. If the accident had happened as a result of a road test after repairs or to determine some sort of mechanical issues then I think I wouldnt be as mad. The fact that there was nothing mechanically wrong with the vehicle and it was crashed while being joyriden is whats causing the uproar.

On another note, the companies yelp page and google+ is taking a beating, their youtube channel is being hammered and their article on yahooauto and jalopnik have 4000+ and 300+ comments respectively. In the day of the internet and social media, word of mouth is a powerful tool that can go for or against someone. Im sure most people in the immediate area would be exposed to this story and shop elsewhere considering this is in the local news and on the radio stations in the area.

Again. Owning up and forking over the difference should have been the first thing on these guys minds.

[BoostedBB6]

Originally Posted by snails

it would be in the dealerships best interest to bite the bullet.. 15k isnt alot of money to a large dealership, the money they spend on advertising alone in a month is probably close to 15k, and this is going to do alot more harm to the company in the long run, if they bit the bullet it would maybe benefit the rep of the company as people would trust them to do the right thing..

eg. the company i work for just donated $100,000. to Langley Memorial hospital... obviously some of that was for publicity..

Donating money is not purely from a place of giving and warm fuzzes. Keep in mind that these dealers get to write off the money for donation.

Yet another reason I am glad I have the schooling and knowledge to service my own cars.

Would sue these people into non-existence....its in America after all. Can tank a dealer that pulls stuff like this.

[lowside67]

Originally Posted by BoostedBB6

Would sue these people into non-existence....its in America after all. Can tank a dealer that pulls stuff like this.

Seriously, give me a break tough guy - what EXACTLY do you think you would be able to sue for? Even if the dealership had to pay for a brand new car with no insurance coverage (which would never happen), they'd be on the hook for like $55k. Definitely a shitty day for the dealership but if you think you are going to bring a GM dealership to its knees for $55k, you're not being realistic.