Chrysler Walks Away From Lemon Laws

by Robert Farago

Published: May 9th, 2009

When life gives you lemons, you make lemonade (or glazed strawberry lemon streusel muffins). When Chrysler gives you lemons, you’re SOL. Since April 30, Judge Arthur Gonzales has to approve payment on claims against Chrysler incurred before C11. That includes “lemon law” settlement checks to customers who bought defective Dodge, Chrysler or Jeep products. Not happening. “San Diego attorney Ellen Turnage represents a client who reached a settlement with Chrysler over a 2006 Dodge Magnum with a bad suspension. The car has been returned to Chrysler, but the automaker’s check bounced. ‘Now he’s got no car and no money, so he can’t go buy a new one,’ Turnage said of her client. ‘He’s stuck. We’re hanging on to a glimmer of hope that at some point this will all be resolved.'” As the LA Times reports, Turnage’s pessimism is well-justified. Instead of saying, sorry, we’ll expedite this, the new Chrysler is telling aggrieved customers to FO&D.

The company said it had no plans at this point to ask the bankruptcy judge to approve payments to settle lemon law complaints. “This is a complex process and there are a lot of issues being discussed,” said Chrysler spokesman Mike Palese. “This could be one of those issues that comes up in the course of the bankruptcy, but I can’t say that we have any plans to present it at this time.”

Chrysler advises customers with pending lemon law complaints to file a proof of claim form with the Bankruptcy Court and join the ranks of the automaker’s unsecured creditors.

“In that case, you’ll be lucky to get pennies on the dollar,” [Atlanta attorney Alex] Simanovsky said.

Can we see the details on that government-backed warranty now, please? [thanks to pixarwolf for the link]

Robert Farago

More by Robert Farago

Comments

Join the conversation

2 of 30 comments

Pch101 on May 11, 2009
My outrage is reserved for the public officials who are driving this process. A bankruptcy would have been filed, anyway. The difference is that the government may pay these claimants. Had the government not been involved, the odds of them ever seeing the money would be about 0%, because the secureds would be entitled to take 100% of the tiny cash pie that is available to pay the creditors in this case. You've gone at length about your belief in absolute priority as an absolute doctrine, so it's surprising that you didn't pound on that argument here. Perhaps that's because absolute priority was probably not really your first concern, and your position has a lot more to do with your angst over the alleged value of the VEBA's worthless stock, even though it seems likely that the VEBA would have creditor priority over a lemon law litigant. Your absolute priority must be to make sure that the union gets zero, regardless of whatever rights it may have as a creditor in this case.

Like Reply
Slumba on May 20, 2009

This doesn't make a lot of sense. If the check bounces you can go to court and get treble damages; should be simple and fast.

Like Reply

Recent Comments

Redapple2 Love the wheels
Redapple2 Good luck to them. They used to make great cars. 510. 240Z, Sentra SE-R. Maxima. Frontier.
Joe65688619 Under Ghosn they went through the same short-term bottom-line thinking that GM did in the 80s/90s, and they have not recovered say, to their heyday in the 50s and 60s in terms of market share and innovation. Poor design decisions (a CVT in their front-wheel drive "4-Door Sports Car", model overlap in a poorly performing segment (they never needed the Altima AND the Maxima...what they needed was one vehicle with different drivetrain, including hybrid, to compete with the Accord/Camry, and decontenting their vehicles: My 2012 QX56 (I know, not a Nissan, but the same holds for the Armada) had power rear windows in the cargo area that could vent, a glass hatch on the back door that could be opened separate from the whole liftgate (in such a tall vehicle, kinda essential if you have it in a garage and want to load the trunk without having to open the garage door to make room for the lift gate), a nice driver's side folding armrest, and a few other quality-of-life details absent from my 2018 QX80. In a competitive market this attention to detai is can be the differentiator that sell cars. Now they are caught in the middle of the market, competing more with Hyundai and Kia and selling discounted vehicles near the same price points, but losing money on them. They invested also invested a lot in niche platforms. The Leaf was one of the first full EVs, but never really evolved. They misjudged the market - luxury EVs are selling, small budget models not so much. Variable compression engines offering little in terms of real-world power or tech, let a lot of complexity that is leading to higher failure rates. Aside from the Z and GT-R (low volume models), not much forced induction (whether your a fan or not, look at what Honda did with the CR-V and Acura RDX - same chassis, slap a turbo on it, make it nicer inside, and now you can sell it as a semi-premium brand with higher markup). That said, I do believe they retain the technical and engineering capability to do far better. About time management realized they need to make smarter investments and understand their markets better.
Kwik_Shift_Pro4X Off-road fluff on vehicles that should not be off road needs to die.
Kwik_Shift_Pro4X Saw this posted on social media; “Just bought a 2023 Tundra with the 14" screen. Let my son borrow it for the afternoon, he connected his phone to listen to his iTunes.The next day my insurance company raised my rates and added my son to my policy. The email said that a private company showed that my son drove the vehicle. He already had his own vehicle that he was insuring.My insurance company demanded he give all his insurance info and some private info for proof. He declined for privacy reasons and my insurance cancelled my policy.These new vehicles with their tech are on condition that we give up our privacy to enter their world. It's not worth it people.”