2007 Chevrolet Tahoe Ls Sport Utility 4-door 5.3l on 2040-cars

Auto blog

GM isn't liable for punitive damages in ignition switch cases

NEW YORK — A federal appeals court said General Motors is not liable for punitive damages over accidents that occurred after its 2009 bankruptcy and involved vehicles it produced earlier, including vehicles with faulty ignition switches. The 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Manhattan said on Tuesday that the automaker did not agree to contractually assume liability for punitive damages as part of its federally-backed Chapter 11 reorganization. GM filed for bankruptcy in June 2009, and its best assets were transferred to a new Detroit-based company with the same name. The other assets and many liabilities stayed with "Old GM," which is also known as Motors Liquidation Co. Tuesday's 3-0 decision may help GM reduce its ultimate exposure in nationwide litigation over defective ignition switches in several Chevrolet, Pontiac and Saturn models. It is also a defeat for drivers involved in post-bankruptcy accidents, including those who collided with older GM vehicles driven by others, as well as their law firms. The ignition switch defect could cause engine stalls and keep airbags from deploying, and has been linked to 124 deaths. A lawyer for the drivers and their law firms did not immediately respond to requests for comment. GM had no comment. Circuit Judge Dennis Jacobs said GM's agreement to acquire assets "free and clear" of most liabilities excused it from punitive damages claims for Old GM's conduct. He also noted that the judge who oversaw the bankruptcy concluded that the new company could not be liable for claims that the "deeply insolvent" Old GM would never have paid. The decision upheld a May 2018 ruling by U.S. District Judge Jesse Furman in Manhattan, who oversees the ignition switch litigation. Drivers have sought a variety of damages in that litigation, including for declining resale values. GM has recalled more than 2.6 million vehicles since 2014 over ignition switch problems. It has also paid more than $2.6 billion in related penalties and settlements, including $900 million to settle a U.S. Department of Justice criminal case. The case is In re: Motors Liquidation Co, 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, No. 18-1940. Government/Legal Chevrolet Pontiac Saturn Safety gm ignition switch

Full-size trucks are the best and worst vehicles in America

You don’t need me to tell you that Americans love pickup trucks. And the bigger the truck, the more likely it seems to be seen as an object of desire. Monthly and yearly sales charts are something of a broken record; track one is the Ford F-Series, followed by the Chevy Silverado, RamÂ’s line of haulers, and somewhere not far down the line, the GMC Sierra. The big Japanese players fall in place a bit further below — not that thereÂ’s anything wrong with a hundred thousand Toyota Tundra sales — and one-size-smaller trucks like the Toyota Tacoma, Ford Ranger and Chevy Colorado have proven awfully popular, too. Along with their sales numbers, the average cost of new trucks has similarly been on the rise. Now, I donÂ’t pretend to have the right to tell people what they should or shouldnÂ’t buy with their own money. But I just canÂ’t wrap my head around why a growing number of Americans are choosing to spend huge sums of money on super luxurious pickup trucks. Let me first say I do understand the appeal. People like nice things, after all. I know I do. I myself am willing to spend way more than the average American on all sorts of discretionary things, from wine and liquor to cameras and lenses. IÂ’ve even spent my own money on vehicles that I donÂ’t need but want anyway. A certain vintage VW camper van certainly qualifies. I also currently own a big, inefficient SUV with a 454-cubic-inch big block V8. So if your answer to the question IÂ’m posing here is that youÂ’re willing to pay the better part of a hundred grand on a chromed-out and leather-lined pickup simply because you want to, then by all means — not that you need my permission — go buy one. The part I donÂ’t understand is this: Why wouldn't you, as a rational person, rather split your garage in half? On one side would sit a nice car that is quiet, rides and handles equally well and gets above average fuel mileage. Maybe it has a few hundred gasoline-fueled horsepower, or heck, maybe itÂ’s electric. On the other side (or even outside) is parked a decent pickup truck. One that can tow 10,000 pounds, haul something near a ton in the bed, and has all the goodies most Americans want in their cars, like cruise control, power windows and locks, keyless entry, and a decent infotainment screen.

The UAW's 'record contract' hinges on pensions, battery plants

DETROIT - After nearly four weeks of disruptive strikes and hard bargaining, the United Auto Workers and the Detroit Three automakers have edged closer to a deal that could offer record-setting wage gains for nearly 150,000 U.S. workers. General Motors, Ford Motor and Chrysler parent Stellantis have all agreed to raise base wages by between 20% and 23% over a four-year deal, according to union and company statements. Ford and Stellantis have agreed to reinstate cost-of-living adjustments, or COLA. The companies have offered to boost pay for temporary workers and give them a faster path to full-time, full-wage status. All three have proposed slashing the time it takes a new hire to get to the top UAW pay rate. The progress in contract talks follows the first-ever simultaneous strike by the UAW against Detroit's Big Three automakers. The union began the strike on Sept. 15 in hopes of forcing a better deal from each major automaker. But coming close to a deal is not the same thing as reaching a deal. Big obstacles remain on at least two major UAW demands: restoring the retirement security provided by pre-2007 defined benefit pension plans, and covering present and future joint- venture electric vehicle battery plants under the union's master contracts with the automakers. On retirement, none of the automakers has agreed to restore pre-2007 defined-benefit pension plans for workers hired after 2007. Doing so could force the automakers to again burden their balance sheets with multibillion-dollar liabilities. GM and the former Chrysler unloaded most of those liabilities in their 2009 bankruptcies. The union and automakers have explored an approach to providing more income security by offering annuities as an investment option in their company-sponsored 401(k) savings plans, people familiar with the discussions said. Stellantis referred to an annuity option as part of a more generous 401(k) proposal on Sept. 22. Annuities or similar instruments could give UAW retirees assurance of fixed, predictable payouts less dependent on stock market ups and downs, experts said. Recent changes in federal law have removed obstacles to including annuities as a feature of corporate 401(k) plans, said Olivia Mitchell, a professor at the University of Pennsylvania Wharton School and an expert on pensions and retirement. "Retirees want a way to be assured they won't run out of money," Mitchell said.