GM's not looking so good on this

[Wild one]

Now this is a new one on me,but GM isn't looking so good on this one.

Cadillac Voids Warranty After Escalade-V Owner Refinances Car

Not the kind of service you'd expect after dropping $150k.

carbuzz.com

 

[JHoward]

Yeah, this is also new to me. The owner resolving this issue with GM isn't going to be easy.

 

[GTyankee]

When you finance a vehicle, who is the primary owner ?
The Finance Company or the Borrower ?

The Finance company holds the title

 

[JHoward]

The Finance company holds the title

... and the "borrower" gets to drive the vehicle as long as monthly payments are made.

 

[Wild one]

When you finance a vehicle, who is the primary owner ?
The Finance Company or the Borrower ?

The Finance company holds the title

That's beside the point.This is an owner finding a better interest rate either through his bank or a credit union.GM doesn't own the vehicle their finance company might hold the title but the actual manfacture doesn't,so to cancel the owners warrenty is a bit out of what i think GM can legally do.
It's tough to fight a manufacture'r and their lawyers,but if you can get this complaint in front of a judge,i think GM will be covering his legal costs,as i can't see a court allowing this to happen.Just my opinion though

 

[GTyankee]

I do agree 100%
I was just bringing up the possibility of their twisted thinking

 

[GlennRH]

Now this is a new one on me,but GM isn't looking so good on this one.

Cadillac Voids Warranty After Escalade-V Owner Refinances Car

Not the kind of service you'd expect after dropping $150k.

carbuzz.com

I think the bad feelings this will generate far outweigh any gain GM had hoped to realize.

 

[gofishn]

When you finance a vehicle, who is the primary owner ?
The Finance Company or the Borrower ?

The Finance company holds the title

Regardless of the type of property involved, the Buyer is the legal property owner, until he misses enough payments, to be in violation of his financial agreemnt, thus allowing the Financier to take legal possession of the property. Even then, dependent on the typeof property, the orignal legal owner may still have Rights to the property, the Financier may not be able to dispose of the property and recoup his investment, until yet another time period has pass, that would allow the original Owner to fulfill the financial Contract.

Homes comes to mind. In Iowa, one can repossess but cannot sell , for one year, during which the Orignal Owner h as an opportunity to repay the laon, with fees, and retain possession of his home. Some folks buy those home sup, as an investment and do not care either way. Get paid for the loan and fees or repossess and sell it for a profit.

Either way, money is made at a nice rate of return.


Getting to what GM is attempting.

Highly doubt it is legal. GM is simply the manufacturer. Once the vehicle is actually sold, they no longer have an interest, of any kind. The warranty is one the vehicle and there are federal mandates involved. VOiding the warranty for perceived, after teh sale, violations is akin to taking ones ball home, except it is no longer ones ball.

 

[Dean2]

That has to qualify as one of the stupidest, bone head moves in recent memory by a large corporation. Whoever at GM made this decision needs to be fired on the spot. The bad press GM is getting over something this insignificant is truly hard to believe. They can't make it stick, they look like idiots for even trying it and they will lose thousands of sales from buyers worried the GM warranty isn't worth the paper it is printed on. Real marketing genius you GM boys.

 

[KansasArt]

Regardless of the type of property involved, the Buyer is the legal property owner, until he misses enough payments, to be in violation of his financial agreemnt, thus allowing the Financier to take legal possession of the property. Even then, dependent on the typeof property, the orignal legal owner may still have Rights to the property, the Financier may not be able to dispose of the property and recoup his investment, until yet another time period has pass, that would allow the original Owner to fulfill the financial Contract.

Homes comes to mind. In Iowa, one can repossess but cannot sell , for one year, during which the Orignal Owner h as an opportunity to repay the laon, with fees, and retain possession of his home. Some folks buy those home sup, as an investment and do not care either way. Get paid for the loan and fees or repossess and sell it for a profit.

Either way, money is made at a nice rate of return.


Getting to what GM is attempting.

Highly doubt it is legal. GM is simply the manufacturer. Once the vehicle is actually sold, they no longer have an interest, of any kind. The warranty is one the vehicle and there are federal mandates involved. VOiding the warranty for perceived, after teh sale, violations is akin to taking ones ball home, except it is no longer ones ball.

Homes & cars are apples & oranges. One is real property, the other is personal property. Laws are vastly different. And vary from state to state. (In the US anyways) But it sure sucks for this guy. I hope the bad press GM suffers hurts them in the pocket book. But in the end I doubt it. They have more lawyers than you can shake a stick at. And I’m sure they reviewed this every which from Sunday before making this decision.

 

[GTyankee]

Chevy VOLT is costing GM big money

all VOLTS 2017 - 2022 are recalled for battery fires

 

[gofishn]

.... They have more lawyers than you can shake a stick at. And I’m sure they reviewed this every which from Sunday before making this decision.

I doubt it.

I worked for a Class One Railroad, which, is not only a pretty big outfit too, but has a legal standing, I imagine, is levels of degree greater than GM.
Even still, they cannot just do whatever they wish. Though they think they can. Until Uncle Sam reminds Uncle Pete, exactly who carries the biggest stick.

They too have a ton of lawyers, yet, somehow, illegal things get done, implemented, whatever, consistently throughout the living memory of the last 100 years, which get changed, once they realize, Holy Crap we messed up.

(Living Memory, ie: My own, My Dads, my Dads Grandpa, as told to each other, hence living. Not actually experienced by one individual, per se, but was experienced, by one, then told to another, who told another, who is still alive to remember it.)

Sometimes, management flat out does stuff they know is illegal, for various reasons, from save their Jobs, to keep a bonus from being lost, to hoping for promotion by saving the Company Money or simply because its more profitable, to pay the lawsuits.

So, no, I do not automatically believe this was approved by legal dept, beforehand.
Nor do I believe that GM's legal dept is infallible and perfect, in all regards.

My Original statement was meant simply that a financier has certain legal rights, as does the Borrower, but voiding the manufacturers warranty, most likely, is not one of them. Paying off a GM Financial loan, even if only moving it from one bank to another, has no bearing on GM the builder, who warranties the car.

They each stand alone.
2 separate entities, GM the Builder & GM the Financier.

Which is yet another thing I've noticed with huge companies.

Oh, they want to separate themselves, into separate corporations, for whatever reason, usually to avoid taxation, or liability, but they still think of themselves as one big company.

Kind of like how they are all Capitalists, until the Economy tanks, then they all seek out Socialistic Subsidies.
Sure wish I could have my Cake, and eat it too, but I am not in any protected Category, nor financially powerful enough, to buy the requisite Elected Officials, to get my Wish.

 

[Docwagon1776]

Highly doubt it is legal. GM is simply the manufacturer. Once the vehicle is actually sold, they no longer have an interest, of any kind. The warranty is one the vehicle and there are federal mandates involved. VOiding the warranty for perceived, after teh sale, violations is akin to taking ones ball home, except it is no longer ones ball.

GM is also the guarantor of the warranty and does not *have* to transfer any warranty not required by law. Legaly there's no requirement to warranty much of anything, emissions equipment being the major exception. This is likely just a glitch, some software somewhere flagging it as a flipped vehicle and once a human verifies it's the same owner it'll be resolved. However people who bought these cars agreed to the non-transfer clause of their warranty when they bought them. Or should have been if they read their paperwork.

 

[Dean2]

GM is also the guarantor of the warranty and does not *have* to transfer any warranty not required by law. Legaly there's no requirement to warranty much of anything, emissions equipment being the major exception. This is likely just a glitch, some software somewhere flagging it as a flipped vehicle and once a human verifies it's the same owner it'll be resolved. However people who bought these cars agreed to the non-transfer clause of their warranty when they bought them. Or should have been if they read their paperwork.

There was NO transfer of title. GM has no basis to deny warranty coverage, even by their rules. All the original owner did was move his financing from one place to another.

GM, like any large company, certainly has a legion of lawyers but that has never stopped me from taking on large companies. I have only had to do it personally a few times but in those few times I have used small claims court, $50,000 plus court costs action limit with no punitive damages awarded, I have yet to not get a settlement before court and I won both times when it went to court. Do not let their size intimidate you.

 

[ramsare4real]

In plain English, that is just ********!

 

[18CrewDually]

GM is also the guarantor of the warranty and does not *have* to transfer any warranty not required by law. Legaly there's no requirement to warranty much of anything, emissions equipment being the major exception. This is likely just a glitch, some software somewhere flagging it as a flipped vehicle and once a human verifies it's the same owner it'll be resolved. However people who bought these cars agreed to the non-transfer clause of their warranty when they bought them. Or should have been if they read their paperwork.

From my understanding you got it closer than any comment I've read here.
The original buyer who financed through GM Financial also signed off that they would not transfer the vehicle or sales agreement. Once the Financial Center computer system was inputted it was being transferred to a different financial center, it appears as a transfer of ownership, flagging the original purchasers warranty now void.
That's what I gathered. I also suspect it will be worked out once proven it is still being financed by the original buyer, UNLESS GM was slick enough to include in the contract that the buyer must own AND continue the financing through GM Financial.
If that is the case, buy by warranty. Like said above, manufacturers do this so someone doesn't order a highly sought after vehicle and once it arrives they flip it for usually large profits. They usually have a set time if 6 months or 1 yr of required ownership or the void warranty.

 

[RamDiver]

The original buyer who financed through GM Financial also signed off that they would not transfer the vehicle or sales agreement.

Is this kind of financing detail very common with large manufacturer financing?

I'm no lawyer but I read every last word in my purchase/financing agreement and my loan looks to be 100% open and I can pay it off or transfer it at any time without penalty AFAIK.
.

 

[turkeybird56]

THIS is my issue. All above posters basically correct, computers probably flagged and maybe be worked out unless there is some clause in Financial Contract ref financing. Way back when , when I bought my last new GM Product, like 1982, they had clauses like that in contract. SO, ne way, it is always easier to buy and use dealer financing then switch out. On that last purchase, their was some gobbity **** ref financing and switch. I told the Dealer Finance guy straight up, after one month, being re-financed and had all that extra BS crossed out of contract to insure no issues. THEY weren't happy, but alas, BOIRD can be a real a z z when motivated also.
OP: You definitely need a lawyer and if you have not, you need to read real closely your purchase contract and financial contract and see what exactly is in there and worded. Hopefully, just a computer flag and you can get worked out.

 

[turkeybird56]

Is this kind of financing detail very common with large manufacturer financing?

I'm no lawyer but I read every last word in my purchase/financing agreement and my loan looks to be 100% open and I can pay it off or transfer it at any time without penalty AFAIK.
.

May depend upon Country laws since you are in Canada vs US and each state does have their own particular financial laws. Never hurts to really read those contracts in full and fully understand if anyone is trying to pull the wool over somebodies eyes, like it does not happen (sic).

ADDED: The part I hate are Mortgage Loans. There you go, do all the required stuff, and Finance home for 15 years say fixed (ne body does an ARM loan may be silly). Then there you go, 2 years into your mortgage, and Wahoo, you get a Letter from a Mortgage company telling you they just bought your Mortgage. SO there you are, now gotta switch all stuff like auto bank payments, etc, and now instead of having a Mortgage Company in TX, it is now in OK, NY, VA, wherever. My last mortgage I had with a company in TX, and it was sold like 5 times in 8 years, last company was in OK and THEY were horrible, and there is nothing U as the consumer can do. That is my big Biotch.

ADDED: And all the Payday places and Used Car lots around Military Installations. They consistently rip off military, kinda their genre (IMHO). You always know when a big unit had come back from Rotation say in IRAQ, and all of the sudden everybody is driving Monster SUV's, Trucks, Escalades, etc. Give it 4 months, and the majority of those vehicles be in the used car lots and such, lol.

 

[stevenP]

I saw this story a while ago. GM was doing this because people were buying vehicles and selling them at prophet with in a very short time span. So to discourage this practice they were voiding the vehicles factory warranty, so the next buyer got screwed.