noise in front left--fell on deaf ears--was told to keep driving the car to "get the kinks out"
ticks, vibration (duplicated) --dealer "lubed"
I feel I was lied to, put off, pacified, cheated and robbed of $20,000.00 dollars worth of sub-standard vehicle. According to unnamed arbitrator, these noises "pose a problem, defect in material and/or workmanship, and, could be a substantial impairment of safety to the vehicle if it is not repaired properly.
I will not travel the 600 miles to visit my mother with this car. I DO NOT feel safe. Would you? Holding that wheel in my hands is not a comfortable feeling other than local trips out here in the boonies.
GM bought back my vehicle. I had a superb attorney. Their link is on the front page. GM tried to toy with me, but that didn't last. They bought back my car, plus interest, plus they cut a separate check for my attorney fees. I PAID NOTHING. Basically, I drove the car for 20,000 miles and 1 1/2 years. Keep in mind, a good attorney WILL NOT make you pay up front. A good attorney WILL NOT make you pay anything if you lose your case. A good attorney WILL take your case if they see it is solid and you have your ducks in a row i.e. documents, receipts, dates. There are very good Lemon Law attorneys out there. For a majority of people the purchase of a new car is a major investment, rationalized by the peace of mind that flows from its dependability and safety. Once their faith is shaken, the vehicle loses not only its real value in their eyes, but becomes and instrument whose integrity is substantially impaired and whose operation is fraught with apprehension. ZABRISKIE CHEVROLET, INC. v Smith, 240A.2d 195. Concerning the amount of grief a person must endure, one court expressed the consumer's lament in the following manner: Threr comes a time when enough is enough - when an automobile purchaser, after having to take his car into the shop for repairs an inordinate number of times and experiencing all of the attendant inconvenience, is entitled to say "That's all," and revoke, notwithstanding the repeated good faith efforts to fix the car. RESTER v. Morrow, 491 So.2d,204. A breach of both written and implied warranties: Based upon the generally accepted rule that an unsuccessful effort to remedy defects found to exist renders the warrantor liable; the buyer is not bound to allow him the opportunity or permit him to "tinker" with the article indefinitely in the hope that it may ultimately be made to comply with the warranty. KURE v. Chevrolet Motor Division, 581 P.2d603. In my opinion, I highly recommend to all who encounter Impala or Monte Carlo problems, a known defect in the cradle and repeated visits to the dealership, some of whom know the problem and some of whom do not due to GM not recalling any of this, to utilize your states Lemon Law and/or the Federal Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act which also protects the consumer.
