GM Gets Billions, Says No Money for Crash Victims
BOSTON - U.S. taxpayers have given 50 billion to rescue General Motors, but the company says it should not have to pay a penny to people harmed by known defects in its vehicles.
Despite the billions, the company is in collapse and filed for bankruptcy Jun. 1 to re-work debts and restructure its operations. It will dump the Hummer and Saturn models, lay off 21,000 workers, shutter 3,000 dealerships and start anew as a largely U.S.-owned company with a green edge.
As it negotiates bankruptcy in a New York court, the company is arguing that it should be absolved from paying out money to people who are hurt as a result of known problems in its cars already on the road. Consumer groups are fighting against the plan, and a similar deal already granted to Chrysler.
"If any defect in a GM car causes an accident, or injures someone or kills the occupants, there would be no recourse, no opportunity for compensation or to make a claim in a lawsuit. It would affect every single driver of a GM vehicle," Joanne Doroshow, executive director of the Center for Justice and Democracy, told IPS.
"In restoring GM to health, don't compromise the health and safety of consumers," Clarence Ditlow, executive director of the Center for Auto Safety, told IPS.
The U.S. now owns 72.5 percent of GM and the United Auto Workers health care trust owns 17.5 percent. The union gained a seat on GM's board, and it agreed not to strike through 2015.
GM has one of the very worst safety records among car makers. With 30 million vehicles on the road, the company is sued by the hundreds each year for known defects that result in people being killed, burned and disabled, according to Doroshow's group.
Victims file the lawsuits for help with medical bills, which can be extremely expensive in the U.S. private health care system.
Each year, between 500 and 1,000 people are harmed or killed in GM and Chrysler vehicles, according to the Center for Auto Safety. Chrysler has 10 million vehicles on the road.
Robert Doss, of Arizona, filed a lawsuit on behalf of his eight-year-old son, Shaun. Shaun became a paraplegic after the seatbelt in his father's Chrysler Dodge Durango failed during an accident. Their lawsuit will not go forward now, Doss told reporters Wednesday, while visiting Congress.
Jeremy Warriner, of Indiana, whose legs were burned beyond saving three years ago when brake fluid spilled and ignited during an accident in his Jeep Wrangler, said the personal injury lawsuit he filed against Chrysler also is defunct since the bankruptcy deal.
Chrysler used U.S. bankruptcy law to "sweep the people who have been injured by Chrysler products under the rug and walk away as if it never happened," Warriner said.
The consumer groups have filed an appeal to the bankruptcy court to reverse its decision about Chrysler.
GM filed for bankruptcy after years of bad management and its reputation for poor quality vehicles caught up with it during the recession.
Some of its vehicles have been plagued repeatedly by egregious safety problems, like roofs that collapse during rollover accidents, gas tanks that ignite upon impact and weak seats that give way.
"The government has investigated most of the defects. They conclude that there aren't enough crashes, injuries and fatalities to warrant a recall that could cost hundreds of thousands to the manufacturers," Ditlow said. Instead, the car companies are expected to pay out money to victims who sue.
One such lawsuit was settled in 1995 against General Motors and Chevrolet at that time. The companies built pick-up trucks in the 1970s and 1980s in which the gas tanks were outside of the frame, and vulnerable to impacts. More than 500 of the trucks had exploded and 183 people died. Trucks with a similar design are still on the road, Ditlow said.
GM spent 2.7 billion dollars on product liability losses in 2007, more than any other car company, which relates to its size and its poor safety record, Ditlow said.
"You don't pay that out unless you have serious defects in your cars," Ditlow said.
If the judge in the GM bankruptcy takes away people's right to sue the company, the consumer groups hope Congress will step in and create a fund for victims.
"They could clearly do this, and it's a reasonable thing to do," Doroshow said.
Long-time consumer advocate Joan Claybrook testified to Congress recently and urged lawmakers, after decades of asking, to finally step up safety requirements in vehicles, to prevent harm.
"The unfinished motor vehicle safety agenda is long and deep," Claybrook, the former president of Public Citizen, told the House Judiciary Committee on May 21.
Motor vehicle crashes kill over 40,000 U.S. citizens every year, injure another 2.5 million, and are the leading cause of death for all persons in the United States, ages four to 34, she said.
An injury due to motor vehicle accident occurs every 10 seconds and a motor vehicle fatality occurs every 12 minutes, Claybrook said.
"These manufacturers for the last 40 years have bobbed and weaved to oppose any serious improvements in motor vehicle safety, fuel economy and emissions," Claybrook said.
Twitter
StumbleUpon
Facebook
Delicious
Digg
Newsvine
Google
Yahoo
Technorati
35 Comments so far
Show AllNot honouring things when a company is 'taken over' is standard operating procedure isn't it?
I find it ironic that Americans disparage American GM cars much the same as the Russians did with their own manufactured cars in the communist era....
One thing that bankruptcy is good for GM however is that the many patents it holds (like a greedy wizened old man clutching gold coins to his wheezing chest) won't be lost to technological competitors in other countries such as China. Though through technological advancements and industrial espionage China is garnering leads quickly anyway.
China having virtual wage-slave labour also can undercut world pricings on vehicles and manufacturing such as that guy in China who forwent buying expensive assembly machines and chose instead to employ literally thousands of workers to do the same jobs as the machines but for peanuts. He's laughing all the way to his growing bank balance.
BTW, here in Australia there's been constant crowing on about how Holden (an Australian GM company sometimes termed "GM Holden" - Holden Australia is a wholly-owned subsidiary of GM) will continue onwards no matter what happens with the 'parent company' in the USA.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/06/07/2591606.htm
I think the models they were making for the USA market are being lopped off however.
Recently last year our esteemed Prime Minister here announced that the Government here would help save GM Holden by instigating a new model vehicle to encourage car buyers to purchase. The govt would chip in $150 million towards it.
http://www.zcars.com.au/holden-delta-small-car-2010/
Green groups (and concerned people) were not impressed because before the election the politicians were promising a 'green car' made in Australia.
What we're supposedly now getting is a 4-cylinder vehicle that can burn various fuels....but that's it.
As most enlightened people have pointed out, a 4-cylinder car like that is NOT green and the money to bail out our local GM shouldn't be coming out of a fund that was made for that purpose.
Perpetuating the status quo just for the sake of votes is pathetic. It's the same old 'say or promise something but don't deliver' stance that I'm sure you people in America have had enough of too.
Go to the URl below for a news site and enter in "GM Holden" into the search field to see the chronology of news about it all.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/
BTW, here in Australia we're also getting lots of progressive promises here about all sorts of things and when the time comes to push them forward they're either dropped or modified so heavily that it's almost not worth the bother of doing it in the first place.
Why should anyone be surprised? This is SOP for ALL USA Corporations. At least most Europeans and Asians adhere to the concepts of Honor and Face. China just recently executed a CEO for knowingly producing defective products that can kill. The recent Korean president Roh committed suicide over his ties to corruption. US=Un Scrupulous.
oh yes, barackstar, the only thing more ridiculous than your audacity of hope is the absurdity in your delivery of the audacity of false hope.
enlighten me.
i, you, us, are having forced down our throats and rammed up our asses seventy two point five per cent ownership in a product that we did not want, did not approve of, and obviously do not have any say-so in any of it's daily operations?
imagine. for a moment. "the woman scream as she burned to death," as acemoab did. or losing your eight year old son due to poor workmanship. or losing both of your legs due to corporate mismanagement. i, you, us, are now the proud owners of this american heritage. fucking disgusting.
barackstar, as previously posted, while you continue to slide, hopelessly out of control, down the slippery slopes of deception, it will be a great pleasure to see your ridiculously and obscenely bought and paid for administration come to its HOPEfully one-termed sorry-assed existence.
fuck Gm, and fuck Obama. and 911 was a false flag.
If GM goes away, I would never miss it. They dug their own grave. To ask for such an absolution from compensatory responsibility is unconscionable. To grant it would be even more so.
Jeevee
KARMA?
not a penny to people harmed by known defects......
That's what SINGLE PAYER HEALTHCARE is all about
Congress would be on these goons like stink on Republicans.
(our elected officials would have to pay for it)
Hey! Let people harmed by known defects buy their OWN damned politicians, and get their OWN damned bailout!
· Yr Obd't Servant
Since the US now owns the businesses of the idiots who prevented car safety legislation, any chance of it happening now?
obama is showing very early in his term that he's a shill for corporate america.
glad i didn't vote for him! imagine after this debacle what other plans he has in store for us.
another right wing university of chicago piped piper! there won't be much of any thing
left by 2012.
Ahhhh Santa Clause! Ahhhh Tooth Fairy! Ahhh Easter Bunny!
ahhh Capitalism! Ahhh Democracy! ahhh Rule of law!
Once you realize that none of these exist things become clear.
See you in the streets!
Ralph Nader warned us about this potential problem if and when Obama allowed GM to bankrupt.
The picture on this page is really scary for me. I have pulled five people out of three burning Garbage Motors s**t heaps in my lifetime. By the time the fire is like in the picture, anyone in the car will be dead. I had to listen to a woman scream as she burned to death in the last incident. I still have nightmares of this. In all three cases, the cars were less than a month old. GM's excuse: Lack of maintenance caused the fires. What in hell did the owners do in that long month, not wash the worthless things enough? Perhaps the cars should have been kept continuously wet, like at the bottom of a lake.
i'm sorry too. sounds terrible. maybe GM, the UAW leadership, congress, and Team Obama should be forced to watch some videos of your experiences.
on a looped tape.
forever.
Damn, I'm sorry man.
no strikes? isn't that illegal?
no strikes, no lawsuits...hmmmmm....something tells me that the analysis offered at wsws.org is right: GM is being used to further assaults on the working class. obama & co. don't give a rat's ass about GM, except as a platform to increase the profits of the superrich by crushing the living standards (and democratic rights) of everyone else.
It's perfectly legal for the union to agree to not strike. It's not legal for the government to require no strikes, until the laws change and the oligarchy removes all pretense that we are a democracy still.
but wasn't that part of the deal? UAW gets its seat at the CEO table, provided it guarantees no strikes. otherwise, obama pulls the plug.
in that blackmail/extortion is "legal", sure it's "legal". like don corleone saying "i'm going to make you an offer you can't refuse."
Who killed more people, the attack on 9/11 or defective GM cars since then?
My mother once got herself nearly killed in a Chrysler and it was traced to very poor manufacturing. This is why I am proud that both of my cars are from foreign auto manufacturers, a Toyota and an Acura. Both have lasted very well and maintenance was minimal plus better mileage and I even got to add in a little apple cider vinegar into my gas tank and increase the mileage by 1 mpg. If that makes me a traitor to America, bring it on ! At least foreign auto manufacturers treat even American workers with dignity and respect despite no labor unions.
I'm glad as ever that I don't drive.
Obama keeps stabbing the people who voted him into office, but it serves them right. They had been warned, repeatedly. Now instead of having Bush's 3rd term with McCain, they have Dick Cheney's 1st with Obama. Enjoy.
"If any defect in a GM car causes an accident, or injures someone or kills the occupants, there would be no recourse, no opportunity for compensation or to make a claim in a lawsuit."
"GM has one of the very worst safety records among car makers. With 30 million vehicles on the road, the company is sued by the hundreds each year for known defects that result in people being killed, burned and disabled, according to Doroshow's group."
"Some of its vehicles have been plagued repeatedly by egregious safety problems, like roofs that collapse during rollover accidents, gas tanks that ignite upon impact and weak seats that give way."
Going forward, why would anyone purchase a GM vehicle?
"Chrysler used U.S. bankruptcy law to "sweep the people who have been injured by Chrysler products under the rug and walk away as if it never happened," Warriner said."
Going forward, why would anyone purchase a Chrysler vehicle?
Maybe for the same reason I bought one - they're more affordable than Japanese cars. With my financial constraints, it was either get an American car or not get a car at all. I did not want to get another old, used car, no matter the make, which was more likely to run into big repair problems quickly.
I have a 2003 Chevy Cavalier. I hate knowing that I'm driving around a car which endangers me if I'm hit from the side - no side air bags and weak protection on the doors.
I also hate knowing that I'm driving around a car which gets mediocre gas mileage - 30 mpg in the best highway conditions, but usually less than 25. But again, to buy a reasonably new hybrid or other low-mpg vehicle requires shelling out 15 grand, or more likely 20 or 25 grand. In 10 months I'll be done paying off the $9500 loan, including interest, for the Cavalier I bought at 2 years old. (That is, I may be done, if my unemployment holds out that long or if I somehow manage to get a job by then).
The uniting link here is that unsafe and inefficient cars cost less, because the auto industry and our government haven't made either of these factors a priority enough so that cars with good safety and fuel efficiency are in the "basic, affordable" class. They're still in the "elite" class, which is ridiculous.
The fact you bought a USED Chevy Cavalier shows you were unbelievably desperate and/or not very bright. There's a reason Toyotas and Hondas cost more and hold their value. They're better made cars hands down. The old saying "penny-wise and pound-foolish" applies to you. Furthermore, Toyotas and Hondas are so common that their parts (original and knock-offs) are rarely more expensive than American parts and there's a ton of mechanics to install them all over the country. Finally, think about your peace of mind: If you'd spent $9500 for a used Toyota or Honda you'd be paying IT off now without having to worry about driving a Molotov cocktail.
I'm 58 years old, educated, and an army veteran. I'm no flag-waver but a politically-involved citizen. Still, I've NEVER owned an American automobile. Why? Because they were basically crap when I bought my first car and they still are mostly crap today. Nothing but VW bugs and later Toyotas for me because they gave me more value for my bucks. Now, I like to see Ford still hanging on; the company has innovated somewhat over the years (maybe learned a lesson from the Pinto?). But GM and Chrysler, both perfect examples of Big Time stodginess and arrogance, are rightfully taking their places in the annals of ignominy. There's little sympathy here either for their employees who, after all, were just willing cogs in two giant junk-making machines.
I understand completely. I just get so angry at the way things are happening these days, its driving me crazy.
Thanks for the advice. I did use Consumer Reports, but I'm very wary of high-mileage cars, no matter the make. But I will consider your scenario next time.
I just checked blue-book, and a 2004 Toyota Camry, for example, with 70K and standard features, buying from a retailer (comparable situation to my Cavalier purchase) goes for over 11 grand. That's almost double what I paid for a 2-year old Cavalier with just under 40K. So far I'm lucky with repairs on the Cavalier, and that might very well change, but the mark-up on Japanese cars is just really insane. Hyundai is something else to consider next time.
My friend who works in the car business told me that the Cavalier, specifically, is one of the easiest and least expensive cars for repairs. He said that parts also cost much less than for other cars. So you did make a wise choice.
But again, to buy a reasonably new hybrid or other low-mpg vehicle requires shelling out 15 grand, or more likely 20 or 25 grand....
----------------------
I've bought nothing but used cars my entire life, Hondas and Toyotas. In twenty plus years of driving I've had only one repair bill outside regular maintenance. I generally purchase cars that are one or two years old. You can get a great deal because the person who bought the car new takes the big hit in depreciation and you get a car like new.
Let me tell you what I tell others. You're better off buying a 5 year old Toyota with 70,000 miles on it than a 2 year old GM with 10,000 miles on it. Look in Consumer Reports Used Car Buying Guide to see the facts. A 5 year old Toyota still receives the highest marks in virtually every category (engine, brakes, body etc.) while the GM car starts to fall apart by year 2 or 3. I urge you to consult Consumer Reports before you make you next purchase.
We look at the present through a rear-view mirror. We march backwards into the future.
Marshall McCluan
If it's a rear-view mirror in a GM vehicle it's probably defective, distorting the view even more.
"U.S. taxpayers have given 50 billion to rescue General Motors, but the company says it should not have to pay a penny to people harmed by known defects in its vehicles."
The U.S. has a market economy. What do you expect GM to say? If Mother Teresa ran GM, they'd still be doing the same thing.
--
Eric Patton
Cincinnati, OH
ebpatton@yahoo.com
what is your point?
cc, I believe the gentleman was correctly, albeit sadly, stating that corporations only seek to maximize their profits. And, hypothetically, if angels ran them they'd be the same. ie they suck intrinsically, or, not liking snakes does not turn them into puppies.
Peace on a full moon!