Edmunds Members - Cars and Conversations (Archived)

Mr_Shiftright

Well I get to start up my '66 Triumph motorcycle for the first time tomorrow..we got spark, we got fuel, (pure-gas from an outlet in San Jose), we got compression---so we'll see if we have lift off.

Once she runs for a few minutes, I'll shut it down and tighten everything up. I still need a few little pieces before any road test. Bike looks GREAT!

driver100

Good move saying the 30 days or more repair automatically makes it a lemon.

I guess they never found out this was the 3rd attempt?

Did you get a chance to tell them you had picked the car up before when it was supposedly fixed the first time?

You have unlimited number of words to continue the story GG, I am anxious to find out the rest of the story, JM is still limited to 150 words.

I am hoping for the best, but, I am suspicious of the BBB/Cadillac relationship!

fintail

Wow gg, what a questionable use of resources on their part.

"it makes no financial sense for them to irritate (and lose) a customer this way."

You should say "ex-customer". The loss of potential future business from you and anyone you talk to will exceed the value of settling this the right way.

Shifty, you have more guts than I to take a bike out on Bay Area streets. I've lost my desire to do it in Seattle.

jmonroe

driver100 said:

This is good.....can't wait for the next installment.....

Me too.

How comes you never said that about my stories. :@

jmonroe

berri

Graphic - litigation and arbitration aren't over until the decision is issued. Be prepared that you might get a settlement offer from GM before the Tuesday decision. Good luck however it turns out.

imidazol97

I feel like Mackabee's ghost has returned to our forum. The telling of the story in chapters is great.

So only 3 cars involved. I wonder how the other two were repaired in that they must not
have needed a replacement exhaust system?

But that's far from the vast sea of defective Cadillacs a few have surmised. Do I recall some poster said they wouldn't buy any GM?

But 30 days is 30 days. I was done after 3 weeks. Time for replacement or refund.

jmonroe

berri said:

Graphic - litigation and arbitration aren't over until the decision is issued. Be prepared that you might get a settlement offer from GM before the Tuesday decision. Good luck however it turns out.

Now all of us get to speculate what the settlement will be or the final decision from the arbitrator.

I hope I'm wrong but I doubt it will be as fare as what @graphicguy and the rest of us think it should be.

Fare to me is a buy-back less miles and maybe I shouldn't even consider the miles thing. Chalk that part up to the aggravation with this whole mess.

Now we wait.

jmonroe

imidazol97

I suspect it will not be as favorable as it should be. This should have been taken care of months ago.

The only thing I can think of after reading between the lines like in politics and noticing what's omitted is that there are only 3 cars because that's all they have found in the silent recall. They are using the silent recall so successfully used by some foreign cars in the 90s. There may be more Cadillacs out there just waiting to burst into flames like an old Volvo and Cadillac did not want to set a precedent of buying back one of the group.

andres3

imidazol97 said:

I feel like Mackabee's ghost has returned to our forum. The telling of the story in chapters is great.

So only 3 cars involved. I wonder how the other two were repaired in that they must not
have needed a replacement exhaust system?

But that's far from the vast sea of defective Cadillacs a few have surmised. Do I recall some poster said they wouldn't buy any GM?

But 30 days is 30 days. I was done after 3 weeks. Time for replacement or refund.

Keep in mind where that figure of 3 is coming from though; consider the source. Also, they were specific in talking about this particular defect, only God knows how many other related and similar (but different) defects exist.

The mis-allocation of resources is astounding. They really should fire these Cadillac reps and hire some factory quality control managers and engineers.

In my experience cases and decisions "taken under advisement" for a future decision has never resulted in particularly good news, although sometimes it results in an outcome you can at least live with.

graphicguy

Yeah...sorry to leave you hanging. But, the arbitrator has up until two weeks after the hearing to render a decision. He said he'd do it within 3 business days (which makes it Tuesday).

If I'm reading the law correctly, he's only allowed to decide between Cadillac's complete denial of the claim (which means they didn't really keep my car for two months to rectify a defect), or rule in favor of my request for full restitution. There are no "partial" decisions.

I'm not a lawyer. If I had known Cadillac would have had what I'll assume is legal representation present, I would have brought a lawyer. If anything, I may not have presented the correct verbiage in strict legal terms. Then again, neither is the arbitrator a lawyer. So, who knows.

Obviously, knowing what I know now, I would have tweaked a few things. But, I went in prepared. I felt I clearly and consisely plead my case.

I don't think I lost based on the facts. And, I'm cautiously optimistic.

Funny, at the beginning of the hearing, in an attempt to keep myself civil as well as the Cadillac Rep, I thanked the arbitrator, the BBB rep, and finally the Cadillac Rep for his time. Arbitrator made an off the cuff remark to me stating...."remember, he's your adversary". Didn't think much about it until later in the hearing, when I became more demonstrable and less "Mr Nice Guy"

Mr Shiftright....I'm kind of hoping you'll chime in.....

andres3

fintail said:

Wow gg, what a questionable use of resources on their part.

"it makes no financial sense for them to irritate (and lose) a customer this way."

You should say "ex-customer". The loss of potential future business from you and anyone you talk to will exceed the value of settling this the right way.

Shifty, you have more guts than I to take a bike out on Bay Area streets. I've lost my desire to do it in Seattle.

Maybe they hire arbitrators that are used to owning a lot of junk automobiles. For them, 30 or more days in the shop might not seem that outrageously bad or deviate from the norm of their experience by much.

My world-view would have been much more tolerant of Chysler in the latter part of the 20th Century (and early part of the 21st Century) if I hadn't seen first-hand how truly reliable automobiles function.

Another example is my child's daycare got written up for licensing violations; some serious, most minor. It's hard for me to judge if this is a bad report as I haven't seen how many violations other centers get cited for.

cdnpinhead

roadburner said:

I wonder i Cadillac realizes that stories like gg's take on a life of their own on the internet?

They may realize it, but whether they care or not is an entirely different question. They are in danger of going the way of Sears, but mid and upper management of many large U.S. companies can't find any orifice on their bodies with both hands and a magnifying glass.

Ask me how I know.

graphicguy

jmonroe said:

berri said:

Graphic - litigation and arbitration aren't over until the decision is issued. Be prepared that you might get a settlement offer from GM before the Tuesday decision. Good luck however it turns out.

Now all of us get to speculate what the settlement will be or the final decision from the arbitrator.

I hope I'm wrong but I doubt it will be as fare as what @graphicguy and the rest of us think it should be.

Fare to me is a buy-back less miles and maybe I shouldn't even consider the miles thing. Chalk that part up to the aggravation with this whole mess.

Now we wait.

jmonroe

J...berri....IMID.....you're all absolutely right. It ain't over until it's over. What appears to be cut and dry to me, doesn't begin to touch on what the arbitrator is thinking. To me, there is no grey area.

I suppose Cadillac could come to me before the arbitrator's decision, with a deal. They haven't so far, and this has gone on now for over 3 months. So, don't know why they'd change their mind, now.

But, why would the arbitrator want to inspect the car if he thought he was going to deny my request?

imidazol97

graphicguy said:

Yeah...sorry to leave you hanging. But, the arbitrator has up until two weeks after the hearing to render a decision. He said he'd do it within 3 business days (which makes it Tuesday).

My Mackabee reference was not in any way complaining about not having a final result today. I liked getting the story in chapters.

Mr_Shiftright

A good arbitrator covers all bases. There have been cases where the arbitrator's decision has been overturned in the courts--which is a very interesting turn of events.

Arbitration is a bit of a crap shoot, as they say, but if the arbitrator is following the rules, then he must make his decision solely upon the facts presented to him in the hearing. He is not supposed to roll up his sleeves and start a new investigation.

I can't say how it will go without having been there, but if I was there, I could make a guess--based upon who is making the stronger case.

GG's type of arbitration is a bit different from what I do---we generally do not allow the petitioner to the hearing--but then we are only trying to reach a dollar amount, not an entire refund of a purchase.

This case is quite a bit more complicated---it's almost "automotive forensics", really.

andres3

graphicguy said:

jmonroe said:

berri said:

Graphic - litigation and arbitration aren't over until the decision is issued. Be prepared that you might get a settlement offer from GM before the Tuesday decision. Good luck however it turns out.

Now all of us get to speculate what the settlement will be or the final decision from the arbitrator.

I hope I'm wrong but I doubt it will be as fare as what @graphicguy and the rest of us think it should be.

Fare to me is a buy-back less miles and maybe I shouldn't even consider the miles thing. Chalk that part up to the aggravation with this whole mess.

Now we wait.

jmonroe

J...berri....IMID.....you're all absolutely right. It ain't over until it's over. What appears to be cut and dry to me, doesn't begin to touch on what the arbitrator is thinking. To me, there is no grey area.

I suppose Cadillac could come to me before the arbitrator's decision, with a deal. They haven't so far, and this has gone on now for over 3 months. So, don't know why they'd change their mind, now.

But, why would the arbitrator want to inspect the car if he thought he was going to deny my request?

Now that's a loaded question that last line there.

1) To make it appear the "fix wasn't already in"
2) This guy might just always want to see the lemon in person as SOP

Things could be worse. Imagine if your car would have burnt down into a total loss and your insurance company denied the claim and pointed the finger to grossly negligent faulty engineering on GM's part. Then you'd have your insurance company blaming GM, GM blaming your insurance company, and you'd be stuck in the middle.

Anyone here sure they want to do business with a company like this?

graphicguy

imidazol97 said:

graphicguy said:

Yeah...sorry to leave you hanging. But, the arbitrator has up until two weeks after the hearing to render a decision. He said he'd do it within 3 business days (which makes it Tuesday).

My Mackabee reference was not in any way complaining about not having a final result today. I liked getting the story in chapters.

I knew what you meant. I considered it a complimentary!

imidazol97

andres3 said:

Keep in mind where that figure of 3 is coming from though; consider the source. Also, they were specific in talking about this particular defect, only God knows how many other related and similar (but different) defects exist.

Just like most other brands? You're making it sound like there are Cadillacs dropping like flies on the roadside. That's the generalization that I have trouble with. Those weren't made in past years with transmissions, engine gel, head gaskets, seeping engine blocks, unintended acceleration, and many additional flaws that have occurred in other brands through a couple of decades but are squashed in forums by accusing complainers of being trolls and not really owning that brand, e.g..

Frankly, I can't recall seeing a stalled Caddy along the roadside or on a tow truck in years.

andres3 said:

In my experience cases and decisions "taken under advisement" for a future decision has never resulted in particularly good news, although sometimes it results in an outcome you can at least live with.

The Judge Judy world doesn't exist except on her $30 million a year tv show. Instant, or in JJ's case predecided opinions, are not given immediately at the end of the case after listening to the two sides in a whimsical manner like JJ.

I assume the AB will enter a written opinion and he'll want to research and state bases on which he makes his decision.

graphicguy

While I do think I had the NY Cadillac rep and the CR present at the hearing on their heels the majority of the time (they sounded like robots, repeating themselves over and over again), I did get some pushback once from the arbitrator.

At one point, I wanted to set up that my experiences with Cadillac with previous vehicles has been dismal. The NY rep said that had no bearing on the hearing we were in. Arbitrator agreed and stopped me in my tracks going down that avenue.

28firefighter

I don't see @graphicguy's issues as a systemic quality issue across Cadillac's in general. I agree that their quality has vastly improved and their design and features are very compelling.

However, @graphicguy's issues speak volume about the Cadillac customer service experience, specifically how they value and treat their customers. That alone is enough to deter me from purchasing one of their vehicles.

abacomike

graphicguy said:

ARBITRATION continued..... CR honed in on the fact that it was a recall that Caddy moved to rectify immediately. I rebutted that a)....they didn't rectify it immediately given the car was delivered to me by the dealer and it took months for the wiring to arc and melt before anything was done ( and put my saftety at risk), and b)....it still took Caddy 2 months for a solution. He repeated that the amount of time that had passed for diagnosis and repair had no correlation to how long the defect existed. I rebutted that the defect didn't manifest itself overnight, but over a long period of time, and that I was lucky that a more far reaching consequence (as in an entire engine bay fire) didn't occur. AB asked if the car were performing OK right now. I replied that yes, while driving it to the hearing, it was fine. But, I only had it back for a few days because they had the car for 3 additional weeks to replace the exhaust. He started questioning some of the verbiage the (now gone) service writer entered on the service receipts. I was a bit confused by this. But, as I explained, I'm not a mechanic. And, I had no control over what the service writer entered into their closed service system. AB said he needed to inspect the car, but given it had performed OK on the way to the hearing, he did not have to drive it. We went to the car (about two blocks from the BBB) and the AB gave it a cursory look. He asked me if it had been in any accidents......no! He asked if I had made any modifications.......no! He recorded the VIN# and the mileage. We then went back to the BBB conference room for closing statements. Maybe I'm too much of a skeptic, but the AB and the CR walked in front of me and seemed from the "chit chat" to be more than just passing acquaintances. Not much I could do about that, though. First up, Caddy HQ, who reiterated the same thing she said before, and repeated the denial of my requests. CR did the same, and repeated the safety issue being the cause of the repair delay. I was a bit more verbose in my closing statement, but again, paraphrasing, I said.... "This decision really has no grey area. The State of Ohio has taken the subjective part of this decision and specifically defined it. That is, if a car has to be out of the owner's possession for 30 days or more for a defect in the first year of ownership, it's a Lemon. Not sort of a Lemon, not partially a Lemon, it's a Lemon. By Mr CR's own admission, the car's defect was a safety issue, which makes this issue even clearer that the car is a Lemon All the good intentions, the talk of my safety being of their concern and nice apologies don't change any of that. That car is defined, by law, as a Lemon. So, the only ruling to be made is for my full restitution." The AB said he'd render a decision to the BBB no later than next Tuesday. I'm feeling cautiously optimistic. I don't see how they can possibly see it any other way. But, you never know. Interestingly, not sure how much BBB is paid by GM, or how much Cadillac had to pay the rep to be there, or what the Caddy HQ person is paid, but with travel time, this was a 3 hour chunk out of our day. I took a day vacation time to do this. So, BBB money, + CR money, + HQ money.......it makes no financial sense for them to irritate (and lose) a customer this way.

GG, are you sure you are not a trained trial lawyer?  Sure sounds like you are as you described the arbitration hearing!  GOOD FOR YOU!

Remind me to call on you the next time I need an attorney!  

stickguy

Might come down to personal principals now. They could offer a cash settlement, keep the car. Assuming carmax would make a decent offer, if GM threw in enough cash ($10k? $20k?) could make it go away that way. Why they would rather, who knows.

andres3

28firefighter said:

I don't see @graphicguy's issues as a systemic quality issue across Cadillac's in general. I agree that their quality has vastly improved and their design and features are very compelling.

However, @graphicguy's issues speak volume about the Cadillac customer service experience, specifically how they value and treat their customers. That alone is enough to deter me from purchasing one of their vehicles.

If you and @imidazol97 are right about Caddillac's issues being isolated aberrations (though CR might argue with that based on subscriber results), that only serves to make their customer service look even worse. I get the impression they do what they are doing to @graphicguy to a lot of people, otherwise, why bother? If you only have 3 lemons in the '16 model year why not just pay them off and save face? Now if you have 3,000 lemons..... their actions make more sense.

carnaught

@graphicguy, I'm no lawyer but from what I can tell by your description, you represented your case quite well. Whether that gives a judgemnt in your favor or not, that of course, remains to be seen. They may consider your car "fixed" and your lost few months immaterial, who knows. Just know we're pulling for you, and you gave it your best shot.

andres3

imidazol97 said:

andres3 said:

Keep in mind where that figure of 3 is coming from though; consider the source. Also, they were specific in talking about this particular defect, only God knows how many other related and similar (but different) defects exist.

Just like most other brands? You're making it sound like there are Cadillacs dropping like flies on the roadside. That's the generalization that I have trouble with. Those weren't made in past years with transmissions, engine gel, head gaskets, seeping engine blocks, unintended acceleration, and many additional flaws that have occurred in other brands through a couple of decades but are squashed in forums by accusing complainers of being trolls and not really owning that brand, e.g..

Frankly, I can't recall seeing a stalled Caddy along the roadside or on a tow truck in years.

andres3 said:

In my experience cases and decisions "taken under advisement" for a future decision has never resulted in particularly good news, although sometimes it results in an outcome you can at least live with.

The Judge Judy world doesn't exist except on her $30 million a year tv show. Instant, or in JJ's case predecided opinions, are not given immediately at the end of the case after listening to the two sides in a whimsical manner like JJ.

I assume the AB will enter a written opinion and he'll want to research and state bases on which he makes his decision.

I did see another Cadillac on the freeway today with the 2.0 badge (it was a CTS) and it was running on its own power without any indication of any mechanical malfunctions.

Not to resurrect the unintended acceleration thread again, but I always felt that was one tiny step away from blaming and suing a manufacturer for an accident because they made the top speed higher than the State's speed limit.

explorerx4

@graphicguy,
It was good that you were honest about the car running ok now. If you had said there were problems and the AB drove it and it was ok, that would have torpedoed your case.

houdini1

28firefighter said:

I don't see @graphicguy's issues as a systemic quality issue across Cadillac's in general. I agree that their quality has vastly improved and their design and features are very compelling.

However, @graphicguy's issues speak volume about the Cadillac customer service experience, specifically how they value and treat their customers. That alone is enough to deter me from purchasing one of their vehicles.

Amen!!

houdini1

carnaught said:

@graphicguy, I'm no lawyer but from what I can tell by your description, you represented your case quite well. Whether that gives a judgemnt in your favor or not, that of course, remains to be seen. They may consider your car "fixed" and your lost few months immaterial, who knows. Just know we're pulling for you, and you gave it your best shot.

I honestly don't see how they can get around the 2 months spent at the dealer without a fix. This meets the definition of a lemon, as GG pointed out in his closing argument.

oldfarmer50

andres3 said:

28firefighter said:

I don't see @graphicguy's issues as a systemic quality issue across Cadillac's in general. I agree that their quality has vastly improved and their design and features are very compelling.

However, @graphicguy's issues speak volume about the Cadillac customer service experience, specifically how they value and treat their customers. That alone is enough to deter me from purchasing one of their vehicles.

If you and @imidazol97 are right about Caddillac's issues being isolated aberrations (though CR might argue with that based on subscriber results), that only serves to make their customer service look even worse. I get the impression they do what they are doing to @graphicguy to a lot of people, otherwise, why bother? If you only have 3 lemons in the '16 model year why not just pay them off and save face? Now if you have 3,000 lemons..... their actions make more sense.

I have to agree with you on that last point. If only 3 cars had the problem and two were fixed rather quickly why not just give GG a refund and save the bad publicity. Assuming the car can eventually be fixed and sold Caddy can't be out too much more than the salaries of all these reps and arbitrators.

Could it be they actually want someone like GG to splash this all over social media so that it will dissuade the next guy?

houdini1

andres3 said:

imidazol97 said:

andres3 said:

Keep in mind where that figure of 3 is coming from though; consider the source. Also, they were specific in talking about this particular defect, only God knows how many other related and similar (but different) defects exist.

Just like most other brands? You're making it sound like there are Cadillacs dropping like flies on the roadside. That's the generalization that I have trouble with. Those weren't made in past years with transmissions, engine gel, head gaskets, seeping engine blocks, unintended acceleration, and many additional flaws that have occurred in other brands through a couple of decades but are squashed in forums by accusing complainers of being trolls and not really owning that brand, e.g..

Frankly, I can't recall seeing a stalled Caddy along the roadside or on a tow truck in years.

andres3 said:

In my experience cases and decisions "taken under advisement" for a future decision has never resulted in particularly good news, although sometimes it results in an outcome you can at least live with.

The Judge Judy world doesn't exist except on her $30 million a year tv show. Instant, or in JJ's case predecided opinions, are not given immediately at the end of the case after listening to the two sides in a whimsical manner like JJ.

I assume the AB will enter a written opinion and he'll want to research and state bases on which he makes his decision.

I did see another Cadillac on the freeway today with the 2.0 badge (it was a CTS) and it was running on its own power without any indication of any mechanical malfunctions.

Not to resurrect the unintended acceleration thread again, but I always felt that was one tiny step away from blaming and suing a manufacturer for an accident because they made the top speed higher than the State's speed limit.

I always thought it was a few driver errors by hitting the gas instead of the brakes...then a lot of crooks took advantage and piled on.

explorerx4

I can't believe anyone is taking the GM reps at their word.

houdini1

GG, I assume if the decision goes against you, you have more options? Best to hope for the best, but be prepared for the worse. If you have the arbitrator's name, etc. you could try and find out as much about him and his past decisions as possible. Google might be your friend.

sda

For a brand that is trying to retain and attract new buyers it is unthinkable that Cadillac would be so brazen and try to deny any responsibility. It is short sighted and false economy to say the least. GG, your explanation and testimony rocks!

driver100

jmonroe said:

driver100 said:

This is good.....can't wait for the next installment.....

Me too.

How comes you never said that about my stories. :@

jmonroe

Well, I'll tell you why.....on second thought, ...........................

driver100

houdini1
GG, I assume if the decision goes against you, you have more options?

What they give you may not be too different from what CARMAX would give. Current value of the car less mileage or whatever. In fact it may have been better and easier to go through that route, but arbitration was worth a try.

I think it would have been fun, instead of taking a lawyer take Scott Pelly from 60 Minutes and film the whole event....people would love to see what goes on in those meetings, and it might put a damper on Cadillacs arrogance

GG, if you aren't given the value of the car and a penalty for all the inconvenience then I don't know who could possibly win their case....maybe if the car went up in flames due to spontaneous combustion.

venture

graphicguy said:

While I do think I had the NY Cadillac rep and the CR present at the hearing on their heels the majority of the time (they sounded like robots, repeating themselves over and over again), I did get some pushback once from the arbitrator.

At one point, I wanted to set up that my experiences with Cadillac with previous vehicles has been dismal. The NY rep said that had no bearing on the hearing we were in. Arbitrator agreed and stopped me in my tracks going down that avenue.

Maybe I'm denser than most, but what is the Arbitrator going to decide? According to the law it's a lemon.

Is the decision on how much money you get, if they give you a new car, or what?

driver100

Just an opinion and someone may know more, but generally they give you what the car is actually worth at this time. They could award double or triple damages which I think would be reasonable in this case, but, I doubt that happens very often. If I was the arbitrator, I would certainly award a penalty for putting someone through this, and as punitive damages........at least $10000 - but I think they mostly just try to make you whole...probably not overly generous.

If all this is true, GM has a real incentive to go the limit, they won't be out much more than they would have if they settled, and 80% of the people won't take it this far...they would just dump their lemon on some poor unsuspecting buyer.

stickguy

My guess is he ends up winning, but just for replacement value. So might not be much different than taking it to carmax. Up to him if he wants to contest. I would fold and take it and run. No way I see him getting punitive damages.

and remember, if Caddy had settled early, they could just retail the car normally. If they lose, title has to be branded, and they might as well take it back to HQ and strip it for training purposes.

oldfarmer50

stickguy said:

My guess is he ends up winning, but just for replacement value. So might not be much different than taking it to carmax. Up to him if he wants to contest. I would fold and take it and run. No way I see him getting punitive damages.

and remember, if Caddy had settled early, they could just retail the car normally. If they lose, title has to be branded, and they might as well take it back to HQ and strip it for training purposes.

Don't you think if GG ended up taking it to CarMax they could find out it had a tainted past? There must be some red flag attached to that VIN for all eternity.

stickguy

not yet. unless there is a judgement filed, that title is currently clear as the driven snow.

ab348

driver100 said:

Just an opinion and someone may know more, but generally they give you what the car is actually worth at this time. They could award double or triple damages which I think would be reasonable in this case, but, I doubt that happens very often. If I was the arbitrator, I would certainly award a penalty for putting someone through this, and as punitive damages........at least $10000 - but I think they mostly just try to make you whole...probably not overly generous.

If all this is true, GM has a real incentive to go the limit, they won't be out much more than they would have if they settled, and 80% of the people won't take it this far...they would just dump their lemon on some poor unsuspecting buyer.

I don't know where you're getting they could order double or triple "damages". There is nothing that I've seen indicating an arbitrator has that ability, and I have not heard any accounting of such a thing anyway. The same with you punitive damages. You'd need to go into litigation for that which would take years and lots and lots of legal fees.

28firefighter

ab348 said:

Just an opinion and someone may know more, but generally they give you what the car is actually worth at this time. They could award double or triple damages which I think would be reasonable in this case, but, I doubt that happens very often. If I was the arbitrator, I would certainly award a penalty for putting someone through this, and as punitive damages........at least $10000 - but I think they mostly just try to make you whole...probably not overly generous. If all this is true, GM has a real incentive to go the limit, they won't be out much more than they would have if they settled, and 80% of the people won't take it this far...they would just dump their lemon on some poor unsuspecting buyer.

I don't know where you're getting they could order double or triple "damages". There is nothing that I've seen indicating an arbitrator has that ability, and I have not heard any accounting of such a thing anyway. The same with you punitive damages. You'd need to go into litigation for that which would take years and lots and lots of legal fees.

You're correct. The most the arbitrator can do is order the vehicle be bought back under the lemon law for the State of Ohio. 

Punitive damages, actual "damages" beyond the value of the car? You need to sue. And odds are you wouldn't get them in this case.

driver100

ab348 said:

driver100 said:

Just an opinion and someone may know more, but generally they give you what the car is actually worth at this time. They could award double or triple damages which I think would be reasonable in this case, but, I doubt that happens very often. If I was the arbitrator, I would certainly award a penalty for putting someone through this, and as punitive damages........at least $10000 - but I think they mostly just try to make you whole...probably not overly generous.

If all this is true, GM has a real incentive to go the limit, they won't be out much more than they would have if they settled, and 80% of the people won't take it this far...they would just dump their lemon on some poor unsuspecting buyer.

I don't know where you're getting they could order double or triple "damages". There is nothing that I've seen indicating an arbitrator has that ability, and I have not heard any accounting of such a thing anyway. The same with you punitive damages. You'd need to go into litigation for that which would take years and lots and lots of legal fees.

If you Google car arbitration double or triple damages you will see there are certain states that award double or triple arbitration. Ohio doesn't seem to be one of them unfortunately for GG.

Lemon laws differ from state to state, and Wisconsin's is one of the strongest. The state's law allows lemon buyers to demand a replacement or refund, with carmakers given only 30 days to respond. The automaker can face the cost of the repairs or, in some cases, will have to pay up to twice or triple (what's known as a treble damage) the amount of the purchase price as well as paying the car owner's legal fees if the carmaker is found guilty.

Autoblog Lemon Laws

This about Massachussetts:
Massachusetts is a very strict state with regard to regulations that auto dealers must adhere to. This includes “Lemon Laws,” along with auto sale and advertising regulations which auto dealers must adhere to as well. If they do not, it could result in a 93A violation. This could mean that a consumer could be entitled to up to double or triple damages, plus attorney fees and costs paid for.

LEMON LAW MASS

imidazol97

Trigger alert--this post is more than 150 characters.

I had to laugh at the coincidence sitting in front of my local UDF, drinking my French vanilla-laced decaf coffee in my 32 oz thermal cup.

Listening to Columbus car show sponsored by a family-owned group of dealership, including Mercedes. A caller complained about his '16 CLA with only 7000 miles not starting after being driven by his wife and parked. Can't even get into the car. Had to call Mercedes' version of AAA twice in the last several days. Caller was really worked up. They tried to suggest lemon law but caller seemed to believe that was suing. He just wanted the car fixed so he could trade it.

It's funny how fast talking the 3 radio guys are when they get a complaint about any brand the sponsor company sells. It was just a computer problem. Document the calls. It's been into the dealership twice already for this. No problem found! LOL Caller used to have a '10 Mercedes and was happy about it. The radio guys were mumbling about how all cars are put together by humans and problems might occur even in their Hondas, Kias, Fords, Mercedes, Acuras, that their stores sell. And they were sure this would be fixed (ain't happened in two service visits and two road calls!).

Then one of the radio guys told about a pickup owner who had a check engine light that wouldn't go away and GM paid him $12,000 for nuisance of the problem. Owner did NOT want a different truck.

May GG be so lucky with a positive outcome similar.

What's so funny is listening to the 3 cars guys, and occasionally a lady who's part of the family who owns the stores and sponsors the show try to minimize problems in certain brands. And then brands they don't sell have the problems from he11. Jeep. GM's. Just ain't got it together. They used to be critical of Fords and then the company bought a Beavercreek, OH, Ford store between Dayton and Xenia.

Car shows should not be sponsored by auto brands or dealerships. A Cincy car radio guy just loves the toyota store where he "buys" his vehicles that sponsors the show. KY and GG and others in Cincy probably know the show.

driver100

28firefighter said:

ab348 said:

driver100 said:

Just an opinion and someone may know more, but generally they give you what the car is actually worth at this time. They could award double or triple damages which I think would be reasonable in this case, but, I doubt that happens very often. If I was the arbitrator, I would certainly award a penalty for putting someone through this, and as punitive damages........at least $10000 - but I think they mostly just try to make you whole...probably not overly generous.

If all this is true, GM has a real incentive to go the limit, they won't be out much more than they would have if they settled, and 80% of the people won't take it this far...they would just dump their lemon on some poor unsuspecting buyer.

I don't know where you're getting they could order double or triple "damages". There is nothing that I've seen indicating an arbitrator has that ability, and I have not heard any accounting of such a thing anyway. The same with you punitive damages. You'd need to go into litigation for that which would take years and lots and lots of legal fees.

You're correct. The most the arbitrator can do is order the vehicle be bought back under the lemon law for the State of Ohio. 

Punitive damages, actual "damages" beyond the value of the car? You need to sue. And odds are you wouldn't get them in this case.

Some states do allow for double or triple damages. I didn't check Ohio specifically. Ohio is not one of the stronger states regarding Lemon Laws.

imidazol97

Fine dining is a subtopic here, so on the lighter side (under 150 characters) table side food prep at upscale restaurat:

https://www.youtube.com/embed/yBJEP4lsRFY

oldfarmer50

I'm watching a 1954 Frank Sinatra movie called Suddenly. All the police cars are Nash Ambassadors.



Looking at that car I had to wonder how you would chase anyone with that unusual hidden front wheel.

ab348

driver100 said:

Some states do allow for double or triple damages. I didn't check Ohio specifically. Ohio is not one of the stronger states regarding Lemon Laws.

Funny you say that. The Autoblog link you posted earlier said that Ohio has one of the stronger lemon laws.

I did find it interesting that the example the article used as its poster child was a guy with a Mercedes lemon. After 5 years of litigation he won $482,000 from the courts. But it also says M-B does not consider that matter closed, so more legal fees probably. The M-B spokesperson said "We do not agree with the court's decision to vacate the jury's verdict (which was in favor of Mercedes-Benz) and instead impose a verdict in favor of plaintiff. So we are appealing on the grounds that the trial court abused its discretion by substituting its opinion for that of the jury."

Geez, how could M-B act like that? I think it speaks volumes about the M-B customer service experience, specifically how they value and treat their customers. That alone is enough to deter me from purchasing one of their vehicles.

houdini1

ab348 said:

driver100 said:

Just an opinion and someone may know more, but generally they give you what the car is actually worth at this time. They could award double or triple damages which I think would be reasonable in this case, but, I doubt that happens very often. If I was the arbitrator, I would certainly award a penalty for putting someone through this, and as punitive damages........at least $10000 - but I think they mostly just try to make you whole...probably not overly generous.

If all this is true, GM has a real incentive to go the limit, they won't be out much more than they would have if they settled, and 80% of the people won't take it this far...they would just dump their lemon on some poor unsuspecting buyer.

I don't know where you're getting they could order double or triple "damages". There is nothing that I've seen indicating an arbitrator has that ability, and I have not heard any accounting of such a thing anyway. The same with you punitive damages. You'd need to go into litigation for that which would take years and lots and lots of legal fees.

Out of curiosity, why did you think GG was past the time limit for the lemon law?

graphicguy

So....to answer the question of what I'll do if the arbitration hearing doesn't go in my favor? On to court....hire a lawyer....turn them loose....sue for ALL the expenses and hassle Cadillac has put me through.

I was telling my son last night over dinner while recapping everything that the Cadillac brand has put me through, "for a company who purports to be 'the standard of the world', they're anything but.

They're trying to rebuild their image and reputation. They've been working on it for awhile, now. Yet, their sales keep dropping like a boulder in water. Their reputation is still nowhere near what it is for M-B, BMW, heck even Infiniti, Lexus or Acura. Forget their reputation with me, which is hovering somewhere near that of a Trabant right now.

Personally, if I were running GM, I'd cut even deeper. Chevrolet is really where the company is really making waves. They have developed some of the best trucks and SUVs on the road. They make the Camaro and the Corvette, two of the best sports cars on the road. They are every bit the leader in electric vehicles that Tesla is, and at lower price points. Even their gas cars have been well reviewed and accepted.

Suydam is driving one of Chevrolet's cars (Volt) that is one of the most well reviewed cars I've ever seen. Plus. owners love them from everything I've seen.

Want to have an upscale brand? Buick has a much better rep than Cadillac right now.

What does Cadillac have that can't be replicated elsewhere with other GM brands?