Business History Books » Business Consultant » Class Action Chrysler Re: Minivan Poor locks/ignition
Class Action Chrysler Re: Minivan Poor locks/ignition
Question:
: Well! The product should be theft proof, afterall they cost $25000+. ARE YOU NUTS! What anything on the planet is Theftproof! What a STUPID statement! Instead I recommend we all kick a lawyer and put an end to these bulls**t Lawsuits! : I am taking action against Chrysler Canada for the poor quality door locks : and ignitions on the 1995 Voyagers. In Ottawa several hundred have been : broken into and have been stolen. Chrysler ignores the problem and lets us : pay for it! : Well! The product should be theft proof, afterall they cost $25000+. : Are you interested in adding your name to the suit. My insurance company : will cover all legal costs! : Please Email a reply. : — : Ross Howard CMA, B.Sc., B.Ed. | The Excel Group : | : | — Instructional Technology Specialist Educational Service Unit #3 I have an inferiority complex but it is NOT a very good one!
Response:
I’ve had my dad’s minivan stolen two years ago as well. But from What I understand in the papers it was rated high in the stolen category as well as vokeswagon golf’s. They’re not cheap either, But I think your right when a large Number of these vehicles are being broken into, a respectable and CARING company would try to improve and change the locks to correct the trouble. Good Luck Andrew
Response:
>I am taking action against Chrysler Canada for the poor quality door locks >and ignitions on the 1995 Voyagers. In Ottawa several hundred have been >broken into and have been stolen. Chrysler ignores the problem and lets us >pay for it! >Well! The product should be theft proof, afterall they cost $25000+. >Are you interested in adding your name to the suit. My insurance company >will cover all legal costs! >Please Email a reply. >– >Ross Howard CMA, B.Sc., B.Ed. | The Excel Group > | > |
This is a joke right? Eric Bin
Response:
Chrysler will claim its equipment is no more theftworthy than other brands, so you’ll need credible evidence to the contrary. You also might also inform the insurance industry of your class action. Keep us posted. — Al.
Response:
> Chrysler will claim its equipment is no more theftworthy > than other brands, so you’ll need credible evidence to > the contrary. You also might also inform the insurance industry of > your class action.
Their claim will be substantiated by their position on the "frequency of stolen cars" lists. These lists probably led VW and GM to put theft alarms onto the Camaro and Golf as standardd equipment.
Response:
: > Chrysler will claim its equipment is no more theftworthy : > than other brands, so you’ll need credible evidence to : > the contrary. You also might also inform the insurance industry of : > your class action. : Their claim will be substantiated by their position on the "frequency of : stolen cars" lists. These lists probably led VW and GM to put theft : alarms onto the Camaro and Golf as standardd equipment. Uh, no, what led GM and VW to do this was insurance premiums on those cars were scaring potential buyers away. There is no requirement or expectation under law that a product is nonstealable.
Response:
> : > Chrysler will claim its equipment is no more theftworthy > : > than other brands, so you’ll need credible evidence to > : > the contrary. > : > : Their claim will be substantiated by their position on the "frequency of > : stolen cars" lists. These lists probably led VW and GM to put theft > : alarms onto the Camaro and Golf as standardd equipment. > Uh, no, what led GM and VW to do this was insurance premiums on those > cars were scaring potential buyers away. There is no requirement or > expectation under law that a product is nonstealable.
Further proof that, if left to its own devices, the free-market economy will settle things out. If Caravans really are that easy to steal, insurance costs will continue to rise until people find that it costs too much to own a Caravan. Then Chrysler will have to do something to win back customers. Even if word gets out that the vans are easy to steal, that in itself should scare away some customers. Yeah, unfortunately, this doesn’t help current owners. Buy an alarm, or sell the thing. — Brad M. Garcia ____/ _ _ / / / "Well, there’s more news, but who cares." / /_/ / / / - Jay Pochapin, WRRK Pittsburgh newsman 12/1/95 _____/ _/ _/ _____/ blip!
Response:
: I am taking action against Chrysler Canada for the poor quality door locks : and ignitions on the 1995 Voyagers. In Ottawa several hundred have been : broken into and have been stolen. Chrysler ignores the problem and lets us : pay for it! : Well! The product should be theft proof, afterall they cost $25000+. I’m sorry, but no maufacturer can guarantee their product is theft-proof. If you wanted an armored, bullet-proof tank, you should have bought one! : Are you interested in adding your name to the suit. My insurance company : will cover all legal costs! I doubt that. I don’t know about Canada, but your suit would be laughed at in the US. You simply cannot sue because somebody was able to break into your car! This is a prime example of frivolous lawsuits clogging the courts. I hope your case not only gets thrown out, but you get charged all of Chrysler’s legal costs!
Response:
I am taking action against Chrysler Canada for the poor quality door locks and ignitions on the 1995 Voyagers. In Ottawa several hundred have been broken into and have been stolen. Chrysler ignores the problem and lets us pay for it! Well! The product should be theft proof, afterall they cost $25000+. Are you interested in adding your name to the suit. My insurance company will cover all legal costs! Please Email a reply. — Ross Howard CMA, B.Sc., B.Ed. | The Excel Group | |
Response:
I am taking action against Chrysler Canada for the poor quality door locks and ignitions on the 1995 Voyagers. In Ottawa several hundred have been broken into and have been stolen. Chrysler ignores the problem and lets us pay for it! Well! The product should be theft proof, afterall they cost $25000+. Are you interested in adding your name to the suit. My insurance company will cover all legal costs! Please Email a reply. — Ross Howard CMA, B.Sc., B.Ed. | The Excel Group | |
Response:
: I am taking action against Chrysler Canada for the poor quality door locks : and ignitions on the 1995 Voyagers. In Ottawa several hundred have been : broken into and have been stolen. Chrysler ignores the problem and lets us : pay for it! : Well! The product should be theft proof, afterall they cost $25000+. I’m sorry, but no maufacturer can guarantee their product is theft-proof. If you wanted an armored, bullet-proof tank, you should have bought one! : Are you interested in adding your name to the suit. My insurance company : will cover all legal costs! I doubt that. I don’t know about Canada, but your suit would be laughed at in the US. You simply cannot sue because somebody was able to break into your car! This is a prime example of frivolous lawsuits clogging the courts. I hope your case not only gets thrown out, but you get charged all of Chrysler’s legal costs!
Response:
: Well! The product should be theft proof, afterall they cost $25000+. ARE YOU NUTS! What anything on the planet is Theftproof! What a STUPID statement! Instead I recommend we all kick a lawyer and put an end to these bulls**t Lawsuits! : I am taking action against Chrysler Canada for the poor quality door locks : and ignitions on the 1995 Voyagers. In Ottawa several hundred have been : broken into and have been stolen. Chrysler ignores the problem and lets us : pay for it! : Well! The product should be theft proof, afterall they cost $25000+. : Are you interested in adding your name to the suit. My insurance company : will cover all legal costs! : Please Email a reply. : — : Ross Howard CMA, B.Sc., B.Ed. | The Excel Group : | : | — Instructional Technology Specialist Educational Service Unit #3 I have an inferiority complex but it is NOT a very good one!
Response:
I’ve had my dad’s minivan stolen two years ago as well. But from What I understand in the papers it was rated high in the stolen category as well as vokeswagon golf’s. They’re not cheap either, But I think your right when a large Number of these vehicles are being broken into, a respectable and CARING company would try to improve and change the locks to correct the trouble. Good Luck Andrew
Response:
>I am taking action against Chrysler Canada for the poor quality door locks >and ignitions on the 1995 Voyagers. In Ottawa several hundred have been >broken into and have been stolen. Chrysler ignores the problem and lets us >pay for it! >Well! The product should be theft proof, afterall they cost $25000+. >Are you interested in adding your name to the suit. My insurance company >will cover all legal costs! >Please Email a reply. >– >Ross Howard CMA, B.Sc., B.Ed. | The Excel Group > | > |
This is a joke right? Eric Bin
Response:
Chrysler will claim its equipment is no more theftworthy than other brands, so you’ll need credible evidence to the contrary. You also might also inform the insurance industry of your class action. Keep us posted. — Al.
Response:
> Chrysler will claim its equipment is no more theftworthy > than other brands, so you’ll need credible evidence to > the contrary. You also might also inform the insurance industry of > your class action.
Their claim will be substantiated by their position on the "frequency of stolen cars" lists. These lists probably led VW and GM to put theft alarms onto the Camaro and Golf as standardd equipment.
Response:
: > Chrysler will claim its equipment is no more theftworthy : > than other brands, so you’ll need credible evidence to : > the contrary. You also might also inform the insurance industry of : > your class action. : Their claim will be substantiated by their position on the "frequency of : stolen cars" lists. These lists probably led VW and GM to put theft : alarms onto the Camaro and Golf as standardd equipment. Uh, no, what led GM and VW to do this was insurance premiums on those cars were scaring potential buyers away. There is no requirement or expectation under law that a product is nonstealable.
Response:
> : > Chrysler will claim its equipment is no more theftworthy > : > than other brands, so you’ll need credible evidence to > : > the contrary. > : > : Their claim will be substantiated by their position on the "frequency of > : stolen cars" lists. These lists probably led VW and GM to put theft > : alarms onto the Camaro and Golf as standardd equipment. > Uh, no, what led GM and VW to do this was insurance premiums on those > cars were scaring potential buyers away. There is no requirement or > expectation under law that a product is nonstealable.
Further proof that, if left to its own devices, the free-market economy will settle things out. If Caravans really are that easy to steal, insurance costs will continue to rise until people find that it costs too much to own a Caravan. Then Chrysler will have to do something to win back customers. Even if word gets out that the vans are easy to steal, that in itself should scare away some customers. Yeah, unfortunately, this doesn’t help current owners. Buy an alarm, or sell the thing. — Brad M. Garcia ____/ _ _ / / / "Well, there’s more news, but who cares." / /_/ / / / - Jay Pochapin, WRRK Pittsburgh newsman 12/1/95 _____/ _/ _/ _____/ blip!