[Nitrous Power]

Originally Posted by SLK

The owner is responsible for regular maintenance, period, everything else is manufacturer's problem. Passenger vehicles ply on a 15 year permit and commercial (in Delhi) on a 5 year permit.

So how can you hold Tata responsible for 5 years old Indica or Sumo emitting black smoke? Isn't it Owner? The case here with GM is, from factory gate itself, Tavera did not meet emission, Period. Can they even imagine to pull of this in USA? Is Tata selling cars/trucks that are not meeting emission norms?

[MHG]

Originally Posted by Mpower

How does that matter? If Mukesh Ambani leaves his Benz in a no-parking zone, you cannot write him a ticket for 1 lac, can you?

The fine amount is already spelled out in the law and this is the judgement

While the amount is within law, my argument is that the law itself is flawed, assuming GM indeed does get fined only 3.4 crore rupees (which is a speculation by a random automotive website which may or may not have legal credentials to back up their speculation).

Rs. 300 is the fine for exceeding speed limit on a city road. Acceptable. But for something as serious as lying about the vehicle and deceiving the regulatory authority and all its customers for several years, much higher fines should apply.

[julupani]

Originally Posted by MHG

While the amount is within law, my argument is that the law itself is flawed, assuming GM indeed does get fined only 3.4 crore rupees (which is a speculation by a random automotive website which may or may not have legal credentials to back up their speculation).

Rs. 300 is the fine for exceeding speed limit on a city road. Acceptable. But for something as serious as lying about the vehicle and deceiving the regulatory authority and all its customers for several years, much higher fines should apply.

I think imposing a huge fine on the company is not the way to go about it. If we impose a huge fine on the company, the entire company is affected, everybody from the CEO to the minor worker at the bottom. In fact, more often than not, its the worker who takes more of a beating in terms of reduced bonuses or reduced salary hikes etc.Or the company's vendors by way of delayed payments. Or the fine may effectively be transmitted to the customer by way of higher prices.

But you have to remember, the worker who is tightening a nut in the assembly line is not really responsible for this in any way. Its only a few people in management who are responsible. It is these people who should be punished severely, rather than the company as a whole.

[rohanjf]

Originally Posted by julupani

But you have to remember, the worker who is tightening a nut in the assembly line is not really responsible for this in any way. Its only a few people in management who are responsible. It is these people who should be punished severely, rather than the company as a whole.

It is really tough to find the culprit. The government can either blame the company as a whole, or some top management people. If the company is punished, innocent mechanics will get punished as mentioned by you. If the individuals of top management are blamed, it is possible that some innocent individuals are also punished (those who took up their jobs recently, and had no idea about company's cheatings) and real culprits may never get punished (those who actually sent doctored cars for testing, but have quit the company now and possibly have left India).

I guess that is the reason most governments impose fines on the erring companies, as well as sentence top officials to jail whenever they can.

[julupani]

Originally Posted by rohanjf

It is really tough to find the culprit. The government can either blame the company as a whole, or some top management people. If the company is punished, innocent mechanics will get punished as mentioned by you. If the individuals of top management are blamed, it is possible that some innocent individuals are also punished (those who took up their jobs recently, and had no idea about company's cheatings) and real culprits may never get punished (those who actually sent doctored cars for testing, but have quit the company now and possibly have left India).

I guess that is the reason most governments impose fines on the erring companies, as well as sentence top officials to jail whenever they can.

Just because something is tough to do, is no reason to take the easy, but unfair, way out. There should be an investigation, that has to pour through documents etc available with GM so as to try and find out who in the management, present and/or former, is responsible. The courts can then decide whom to punish and whom not to punish. But not pursuing the case against the erring people will send out a very wrong message.

Also you cant just put the blame on whoever you find easy to blame.

[volkman10]

ARAI seeks more random selection of vehicles and increased frequency of testing after the TAVERA fallout!

ARAI intends to propose that instead of declaring a particular day on which testing agency visits the factory for picking up vehicles for CoP test, ARAI could declare a broad timeline of a particular week or a month within which, the agency can land up without giving prior notice to the automobile companies.

It is also seeking to explore computerised generated system of randomly picking up vehicles from the factory to enhance the randomness in testing procedures.

http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/...w/21790640.cms

[lifebuoy]

Has anybody actually seen the recalls and the "fixing" happening at GM dealerships ? Or is it just a media exercise to hush up major flaws that GM might have in its production line up ?

I don't see a emission issue causing GM to fire most of their top bosses, particularly from the engg deptts, there's more than meets the eye here, for sure.

[Mpower]

So now the question is why did they have to resort to these tricks?

When they redesigned the engine in an attempt to meet BS-4, it probably came out short...so it was known in the first place.

[MHG]

Originally Posted by Mpower

So now the question is why did they have to resort to these tricks?

When they redesigned the engine in an attempt to meet BS-4, it probably came out short...so it was known in the first place.

But Sonalika still sells BS4 versions of their vehicle (Rhino or Extreme or something it is called I guess) with the same engine right ?

[a4anurag]

Originally Posted by MHG

But Sonalika still sells BS4 versions of their vehicle (Rhino or Extreme or something it is called I guess) with the same engine right ?

Yes.. ICML Rhino uses the same engine as in Tavera. So ICML is akso at the knife edge or they are on the BS-4 variant as required. Lets see if these companies are also put on limelight.

If I'm not wrong this engine is manufactured by ICML for Chevrolet and for itself.

Anurag.

[Mpower]

Good Point MHG. The emissions is a function of the engine and the weight of the vehicle its pulling along...so there may be minor differences.

Overall.. if they were off by a huge margin then it begs the question as to where Sonalika stands?

[a4anurag]

Originally Posted by Mpower

Overall.. if they were off by a huge margin then it begs the question as to where Sonalika stands?

May be Sonalika would have asked the media and ARAI to be silent and they would pay the fine how much ever it is. Sonalika gets hardly any buyers (Not seen much in Hyderabad) so if the media and ARAI thrash with such issue then the reputation will go down the drain and what ever little customers they get, they also would vanish.

If i'm not wrong there is another company or car that uses this Tavera engine other than Sonalika Rhino. Any idea which it is or is it these two only?

Anurag.

[Nitrous Power]

Originally Posted by Mpower

Good Point MHG. The emissions is a function of the engine and the weight of the vehicle its pulling along...so there may be minor differences.

Overall.. if they were off by a huge margin then it begs the question as to where Sonalika stands?

AFAIK, GM is replacing cat converter on all these 1.4 L Taveras. May be all the Sonalika Rihnos that were sold passed the norms using that right Cat Converter. And it's just GM that did not use correct component that will make engine compliant of emission norms.

[a4anurag]

Originally Posted by Nitrous Power

AFAIK, GM is replacing cat converter on all these 1.4 L Taveras. May be all the Sonalika Rihnos that were sold passed the norms using that right Cat Converter. And it's just GM that did not use correct component that will make engine compliant of emission norms.

I don't think GM would sell a car without an updated version that too neglecting a emission feature and rather give to Sonalika to sell the updated and better version in its Rhino that doesn't sell even half of what the Tavera does.

There is some mistake or loop hole that is not being shown to the world.

Anurag.

[Nitrous Power]

Originally Posted by a4anurag

I don't think GM would sell a car without an updated version that too neglecting a emission feature and rather give to Sonalika to sell the updated and better version in its Rhino that doesn't sell even half of what the Tavera does.

There is some mistake or loop hole that is not being shown to the world.

Anurag.

Correct me if I am wrong here but, isn't it Sonalika's engine (ISUZU engine manufactured by Sonalika under some agreement) that they are providing to GM. As when BSIV was implemented, GM's engine doing duty in Tavera was not compliant so they went with Sonalika's version of ISUZU.