Automotive

GM to settle 17 gasket lawsuits

  • Last Updated:
  • Apr 20th, 2009 12:41 pm
Tags:
None
[OP]
Deal Guru
User avatar
Apr 16, 2001
14369 posts
1309 upvotes
Oshawa

GM to settle 17 gasket lawsuits

Get your repair bills out...

GM to settle 17 gasket lawsuits

Joe Schneider
Bloomberg News

Thursday, September 11, 2008

TORONTO - General Motors Corp. agreed to settle 17 Canadian lawsuits claiming a defective part in cars made between 1995 and 2003 caused engines to overheat and seize, a lawyer for the plaintiffs said.

GM will pay car owners $50 to C$800 each for costs of repairs related to a faulty engine gasket, terms similar to a settlement in the U.S., lawyer Colin Stevenson said Wednesday in a phone interview.

As many as 900,000 car owners in Canada may be covered by the agreement, which applies to models ranging from the 1995 Buick Regal to the 2003 Oldsmobile Silhouette, he said.

"The real trick here is getting people to know about it," said Stevenson, a partner at Stevensons LLP in Toronto. "If people don't make a claim, it'll be a small payout."

An Ontario judge is scheduled to consider approving the settlement and certification of the case as a class action, or a group, lawsuit at an Oct. 14 hearing. The judge also will weigh a request by the suing law firms for $2.6 million in legal fees, Stevenson said.

GM spokesman Stew Low didn't respond to a request for comment.

GM used plastics in a gasket that sealed the cylinder head and engine block to the intake manifold, which channels an air-fuel mixture to the engine, plaintiffs said.

The seal degraded prematurely, causing coolant to leak into the engine, according to the complaint. GM introduced a new gasket in 2004 without acknowledging the earlier product was defective, Stevenson said.

30 replies
Member
Nov 11, 2003
212 posts
1 upvote
Nice- it's about time.
I did my own gaskets on a 2000 Alero. Not too pricey but a lot of labour involved. I wonder if I can bill them for my time?
My brother's Alero is beginning to show signs of LIM gasket leakage as well.

This is a VERY common problem on a large number of GM vehicles.
Definately interested in seeing where this goes...
Banned
Jul 16, 2008
524 posts
Pickering
GM figures that it is cheaper to pay off a law suit than spend a few cents to prevent the problem in the first place. And they still wonder why Japanese auto makers continue to kick their ass all over the street.
I drive an older GM vehicle but wouldn't ever consider most of the crap they are putting out today.
Deal Fanatic
User avatar
Mar 13, 2004
7630 posts
621 upvotes
Toronto, Ontario
any more info about this? for example the exact cars that are effected and what are the steps to take to get $$ back?

Thanks
0_o
<_<
>_>
Deal Guru
User avatar
Aug 6, 2001
11444 posts
788 upvotes
Mississauga
dealmeone wrote:
Sep 14th, 2008 9:42 pm
GM figures that it is cheaper to pay off a law suit than spend a few cents to prevent the problem in the first place. And they still wonder why Japanese auto makers continue to kick their ass all over the street.
I drive an older GM vehicle but wouldn't ever consider most of the crap they are putting out today.
If you notice, their newer stuff is OK. Its just like Honda's transmission problems with Accords, TLs etc.
Deal Addict
Dec 24, 2005
4881 posts
545 upvotes
dealmeone wrote:
Sep 14th, 2008 9:42 pm
GM figures that it is cheaper to pay off a law suit than spend a few cents to prevent the problem in the first place. And they still wonder why Japanese auto makers continue to kick their ass all over the street..
if only Honda acted how GM does.... we wouldn't be ut 5k cash on our 3rd transmission (2003 acura 3.2 TL)
Deal Fanatic
User avatar
Nov 13, 2005
5679 posts
162 upvotes
GTA
dealmeone wrote:
Sep 14th, 2008 9:42 pm
GM figures that it is cheaper to pay off a law suit than spend a few cents to prevent the problem in the first place. And they still wonder why Japanese auto makers continue to kick their ass all over the street.
I drive an older GM vehicle but wouldn't ever consider most of the crap they are putting out today.
Ford thinks the same way as GM. Remember the good old Ford Pinto back in the early 80's that had the potential of the gas tank exploding upon impact. Well Ford figured that it would be cheaper to payout $250,000 on each incident than to repair the problem!!!!

sk
Sr. Member
Dec 2, 2003
740 posts
3 upvotes
dealmeone wrote:
Sep 14th, 2008 9:42 pm
GM figures that it is cheaper to pay off a law suit than spend a few cents to prevent the problem in the first place. And they still wonder why Japanese auto makers continue to kick their ass all over the street.
I drive an older GM vehicle but wouldn't ever consider most of the crap they are putting out today.
All car manufacturers have design defects. In this case, the problem took a few years before it showed up, if GM knew about this on day one, you can bet they would have fixed it right away (a lot cheaper).

If you think Japanese manufacturers are any better, you just have to look at how Toyota handled the oil sludge problem. Problem didn't show up for a few years, effected a lot of vehicles - so they refused to acknowledge there was a problem and blamed the owners until eventually a class action lawsuit was settled (sound familiar to GM's faulty gasket?).
Deal Addict
Aug 1, 2005
1701 posts
55 upvotes
Windsor
Too bad they put milage restrictions on these payouts..

Have a 2001 Malibu LS that blew the head gaskets around 285,000 km earlier this year.. Had it replaced, and then thanks to idiots doing a poor job on the head machining, blew the head gasket again 10,000km later...
Jr. Member
Feb 5, 2007
156 posts
3 upvotes
thanks op. it's about time.

my car (2001 pontiac) has the cracked lower gasket & the GM dealer quoted me approx. $1200+tax for repair. i called GM Canada head office to have my car repaired for free but no luck. since then, my car's just sitting in garage collecting dust.

so my question is.... how does this work for people with affected cars who haven't repaired the problem? do i just take my car into the dealer & they will deduct $xxx from the bill automatically?
Jr. Member
Feb 5, 2007
156 posts
3 upvotes
1995-1997 Buick Riviera
1995-1998/2000-2003 Buick LeSabre
2000-2003 Buick Century
2002-2003 Buick Rendezvous
1996/1998-2001 Chevrolet Lumina
1997-2003 Chevrolet Venture
1999-2003 Chevrolet Malibu
1995-1998 Oldsmobile Ninety Eight
1996-2003 Oldsmobile Silhouette
1999 Oldsmobile Cutlass
1999-2003 Oldsmobile Alero
1997-1998/2000-2003 Pontiac Grand Prix
1996-1999 Pontiac Trans Sport
1999-2003 Pontiac Grand Am
1999-2003 Pontiac Montana
2001-2003 Pontiac Aztec
1995-2004 Buick Park Avenue
1996-2004 Buick Regal
1997-2004 Buick LeSabre
1998-2004 Chevrolet Monte Carlo
2000-2004 Chevrolet Impala
1995-1999 Oldsmobile Eighty-Eight
1998-1999 Oldsmobile Intrigue
1995-2004 Pontiac Bonneville
1997-2003 Pontiac Grand Prix with 3.8L V6 Engine

Source: http://www.gmcanadianclassaction.ca/gm% ... hicles.pdf
sickcars wrote:
Sep 14th, 2008 11:54 pm
any more info about this? for example the exact cars that are effected and what are the steps to take to get $$ back?

Thanks
Deal Guru
Feb 29, 2008
13525 posts
1201 upvotes
Montreal
SkiD wrote:
Sep 15th, 2008 9:36 am
All car manufacturers have design defects. In this case, the problem took a few years before it showed up, if GM knew about this on day one, you can bet they would have fixed it right away (a lot cheaper).

If you think Japanese manufacturers are any better, you just have to look at how Toyota handled the oil sludge problem. Problem didn't show up for a few years, effected a lot of vehicles - so they refused to acknowledge there was a problem and blamed the owners until eventually a class action lawsuit was settled (sound familiar to GM's faulty gasket?).
BMW sub-frame cracking...
Banned
Jul 16, 2008
524 posts
Pickering
sunnybono wrote:
Sep 15th, 2008 9:34 am
Ford thinks the same way as GM. Remember the good old Ford Pinto back in the early 80's that had the potential of the gas tank exploding upon impact. Well Ford figured that it would be cheaper to payout $250,000 on each incident than to repair the problem!!!!

sk
The same with GM and the Chevy Malibu of the late '70's/early '80's and the gas tank fires on impact. It would have cost GM $9 per car to fix the problem, and they knew it at the time but decided it was cheaper to pay off the law suits from victims' familites. This was documented by GM and eventually revealed to the public.

GM knew about the gasket problem and denied it was even happening. They just kept building the engines the same way until about 2004 (9 years?). The problem is that the defect showed up, just after the warranty ran out. When it happened, GM did NOTHING. It took a class action suit to get them to even admit it. NO, I don't "bet" that GM would have done anything if they knew of the problem from day one because they DID know of the problem and chose to do nothing. They had to be forced to do something.

Their products can be much better if they just didn't cut corners in the name of cheapness. It used to be that you really only saw such cheapness from 3rd world cars. I'm not saying that GM is the only one who does this but they certainly do and they know that they do.
Deal Guru
Nov 16, 2004
12230 posts
676 upvotes
Toronto
Wow that's good news.
"Deal of the Day" addict
× < >

Top