Go Back   Team-BHP > BHP India > The Indian Car Scene


Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 9th December 2009, 12:53   #16
Senior - BHPian
 
McLaren Rulez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Mysore
Posts: 2,375
Thanked: 474 Times
Default

Something seems really really fishy here. This kind of case is rather absurd and the fact that the court ruled in Mr. Tolat's favour is even more absurd.

Tell me first. What is an SUV? Can you categorically define it? Is it about GC? No, we don't have a system where cars having more than a particular GC are called SUVs. Is it about the chassis construction? No, we have SUVs that use tradional body on frame chassis and ones that use monocoques. Its not about being a 4x4 either since we have 2WD SUVs. So we cannot define what an SUV is.

Next, the frequent breakdowns that he suffered. Fair enough, but who says SUVs are supposed to be bullet-proof? Even if a car survived the floods and the SUV did not, that only makes it an unreliable SUV. That's it. It doesn't mean that his SUV, which is in itself a poorly defined term, has suddenly become a car.

Lastly, the owner's manual and the brochure. This seems to be the critical point. The original brochure claimed that the Forester could do a great job off road and called it an SUV. The manual said it was a passenger vehicle with limited off road ability. If you read it carefully enough, you will see that there is nothing contradictory about it. Every SUV is a passenger vehicle and no SUV has unlimited off road ability.

End of the day, SUV is a marketing term. It is not well defined and cannot be made out to be so. I think GM has been seriously wronged in this judgement. And because this man is a senior citizen, we all think its the right judgement. That is really unfortunate. And although many of you have quoted other examples of misrepresentation is jest, think about it. Are we going to sue every manufacturer with arguments as specious as this?

Unless there was a very specific fact that was different in the brochure and the manual (for instance, approach angle or GC or something), its hard to see on what grounds the court gives this man 13 lakhs. Even if there was such a specific discrepancy, there is little to suggest that the Forester has been so badly misrepresented that this man needs to get a full refund. They didn't even subtract the money for depreciation since no Forester will sell for 13 lakh in the used car market.

Considering that people like harishv struggle so hard to get genuine compensation, it makes suspect that this old man has some serious connections. This is a terribly flawed judgement that has either been heavily influenced or one which shows that GM needs to hire a new law firm to represent it. I wonder if GM can appeal this decision. If they can, I certainly hope they do.

Last edited by McLaren Rulez : 9th December 2009 at 13:05.
McLaren Rulez is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 9th December 2009, 12:55   #17
BHPian
 
Sudan_NFS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: chennai
Posts: 759
Thanked: 13 Times
Default

It's good to hear that case has been own and I appreciate the effort take by the senior citizen.
Again the court has taken it's own time to resolve this which should have been done long ago when the car was in sale.
Sudan_NFS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 9th December 2009, 13:35   #18
BHPian
 
Exhaust_Note's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Goa
Posts: 169
Thanked: 18 Times
Default

Just a radical angle of thought. Look from GM's POV. 13 lakh given, splashed all over the country. Now would that boost sales on the paradigm of "Honest Company"?

The first thing that came to my mind after reading this was the American man in the GM advt. with his palm on his heart and promising hassle free ownership

Last edited by Exhaust_Note : 9th December 2009 at 13:36.
Exhaust_Note is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 9th December 2009, 14:03   #19
BHPian
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Bangalore
Posts: 448
Thanked: 33 Times
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by clevermax View Post
EDIT: Recently heard that someone won a case against AXE, for him not getting attracted by women, after using their deo for years - contradicting to what they show in the Ad!
ASAIK, some guy filed the case..not won.

Anyway, good to see that there are a few who have guts to stand against these erring bigwigs, but sad that he has been fighting a already won battle for so many years.

First consumer forum, then state forum, then national forum, then SC. What next GM? International court??


Regards,
amohit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 9th December 2009, 14:03   #20
BHPian
 
pb10gagan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Construction Capital
Posts: 357
Thanked: 2 Times
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by McLaren Rulez View Post
Something seems really really fishy here. This kind of case is rather absurd and the fact that the court ruled in Mr. Tolat's favour is even more absurd.

..............

Considering that people like harishv struggle so hard to get genuine compensation, it makes suspect that this old man has some serious connections. This is a terribly flawed judgement that has either been heavily influenced or one which shows that GM needs to hire a new law firm to represent it. I wonder if GM can appeal this decision. If they can, I certainly hope they do.
@McLaren Rulez

i agree with the point that you are making that SUV is a conspicuous term, a marketing jargon and can not be defined.

but making such allegations against a person who fought his battle in three consumer courts and then supreme court is un-called for.

do you think a company like GM can not hire a lawyer who could come up with an argument regarding the SUV term?

its the first thing any first time layer would do.

this old guy fought his battle in 3 consumer court and then the supreme court, do you think he has so many connections to influence the judgement at so many platforms?

please, i request you, do not undermine the long drawn battle fought here by a senior citizen, and also don't undermine the judicial institution of this country.

just think about it?

how many of us "young" guys would have fought a legal battle at so many levels?

Last edited by pb10gagan : 9th December 2009 at 14:04.
pb10gagan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 9th December 2009, 14:26   #21
ACM
Distinguished - BHPian
 
ACM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Mumbai
Posts: 4,146
Thanked: 2,436 Times
Default

Though this was a victory in the supreme court, and there must be more to the case than was reported in the press, but the press mentioned suff that seemed absurd and made me feel the judgement is incorrect.

1) Mentioned that the forrester is not an SUV? - Why because of height - its capability to go offroad is much more than that of many so called SUV as well.

It is an AWD and an all terrain vehicle.

2) The guy mentioned that in the 2005 water deluge his car was stuck in 1 ft of water and did not start later, but all other cars did, but had they mentioned a water fording capability greater than that what was delivered.

3) In te 1 year of ownership did he not figure out that this is a different kind of vehicle.

If the press reports are entirely correct and that is all there is to it then the judgement seems flawed.
ACM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 9th December 2009, 14:28   #22
Senior - BHPian
 
McLaren Rulez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Mysore
Posts: 2,375
Thanked: 474 Times
Default

Regarding the senior citizen thing, let me tell you that I certainly respect them. But to say that this poor old man has fought for so long and conclude that he should win it makes a mockery of our judicial system. His age is completely irrelevant to the case. And it should stay that way. Its not about young or old. Its about what's right.

As for our judiciary, its easy to believe that its perfect. No human system is perfect and this in no exception. I'm not discounting the possibility that there was a serious argument against GM that wasn't reported by the paper. But if this consumer's argument was that he thought the Forester was an SUV when it actually isn't, then this judgement is wrong. I would love to see the full verdict of the case if someone can procure it. And if any lawyers can explain what winning argument this consumer could have put forth, that would be enlightening too.

Last edited by McLaren Rulez : 9th December 2009 at 14:33.
McLaren Rulez is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 9th December 2009, 14:44   #23
BHPian
 
pb10gagan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Construction Capital
Posts: 357
Thanked: 2 Times
Default

well i never said that this guys age has anything to do with the case. i never meant that he is old so he should be compensated. all i wanted to say was that, fighting a consumer court case or any case for that matter, takes a lot of courage and patience, and at an old age it takes even more courage and patience.

and at no point i said that our judicial system is an epitome of perfection. but think about it. can all the imperfections be exploited by this guy? and not by GM, who, has a lot more influence buying capacity?

and yes, the press might have reported it in a wrong way, and not brought to light the complete facts, but, what else can we expect of most of our current crop of reporters.
pb10gagan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 9th December 2009, 14:54   #24
Senior - BHPian
 
McLaren Rulez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Mysore
Posts: 2,375
Thanked: 474 Times
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by pb10gagan View Post
well i never said that this guys age has anything to do with the case. i never meant that he is old so he should be compensated. all i wanted to say was that, fighting a consumer court case or any case for that matter, takes a lot of courage and patience, and at an old age it takes even more courage and patience.
Fine then. But his admirable courage and patience are irrelevant to our discussion, which is about the verdict itself.

Quote:
Originally Posted by pb10gagan View Post
and at no point i said that our judicial system is an epitome of perfection. but think about it. can all the imperfections be exploited by this guy?
Its not an impossibility. The likelihood is obviously low, but certainly not zero. But anyway, this is idle speculation. So let's leave that issue because without proof, there's not much we can talk about.

However, that doesn't change the fact that the verdict seems flawed. Like I said, I would really like to see what the verdict was in this case and what the winning argument was.
McLaren Rulez is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 9th December 2009, 15:01   #25
BHPian
 
vdiatech's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Bangalore
Posts: 413
Thanked: 7 Times
Default

OT: A similar lawsuit was filed against the then owners of Landrover years ago I remember
vdiatech is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 9th December 2009, 15:03   #26
BHPian
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Chennai
Posts: 762
Thanked: 518 Times
Default

Good verdict but by the same yardstick a lot of customers should get refunds.

Any Subaru vehicle can hold it's own off-road much better than many SUVs being sold today.
chncar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 9th December 2009, 15:08   #27
BHPian
 
gupta_chd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Ludhiana/Chandigarh
Posts: 157
Thanked: 39 Times
Default

Ok Guys, on a different note, how about the below line, it looks interesting to me.

He has filed a Special Leave Petition in the SC to make GM contribute Rs 10 crore to the Central Consumer Welfare Fund.

If he wins this too, GM would be gasping for breath.
gupta_chd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 9th December 2009, 15:25   #28
BHPian
 
Exhaust_Note's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Goa
Posts: 169
Thanked: 18 Times
Default

I remember in a thread that was the introduction of a DBX based off roader (lots of off roaders in the sand and talk about Red bird flying) that none of the so called SUVs sold in India are true SUVs. Which is true. That does not justify a law suite by every SUV purchaser in India. I "feel" sure it was some specific claim made by GM regarding this car which was exposed to be false during the deluge (hence the law suite after a year's ownership). Also "while all other cars were functioning" statement indicates that this car was not even at par with standard non-SUV cars regarding that particular feature/ capability.
Just idle speculation, but I would not be surprised if this was the line of winning argument. To win the case, the GM claim HAS to be in print and something that GM could not refuse. I mean not a sales talk claim from the dealer.
Exhaust_Note is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 9th December 2009, 15:29   #29
Senior - BHPian
 
McLaren Rulez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Mysore
Posts: 2,375
Thanked: 474 Times
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Exhaust_Note View Post
I remember in a thread that was the introduction of a DBX based off roader (lots of off roaders in the sand and talk about Red bird flying) that none of the so called SUVs sold in India are true SUVs. Which is true. That does not justify a law suite by every SUV purchaser in India. I "feel" sure it was some specific claim made by GM regarding this car which was exposed to be false during the deluge (hence the law suite after a year's ownership). Also "while all other cars were functioning" statement indicates that this car was not even at par with standard non-SUV cars regarding that particular feature/ capability.
Just idle speculation, but I would not be surprised if this was the line of winning argument. To win the case, the GM claim HAS to be in print and something that GM could not refuse. I mean not a sales talk claim from the dealer.
This is what I mean. Unless there exists such a specific claim, it doesn't make sense. But I wonder why the news report paints such a different picture. Even if our media exaggerates a little, that's not enough to explain how they got the whole story wrong.
McLaren Rulez is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 9th December 2009, 15:34   #30
Senior - BHPian
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Bangalore
Posts: 2,376
Thanked: 528 Times
Default

There used to be a Safari ad some time back which showed a Safari being used like a boat to cross a river. Wonder what would happen if some of the owners try it literally and claim for the losses later.
Guna is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Diesel SUV ban - Mahindra to refund booking amounts in Delhi Aditya The Indian Car Scene 27 4th February 2016 14:50
Totalled Chevrolet Forester Xtreme Torque Street Experiences 32 20th August 2011 10:00
Spotted Subaru Forester & "Chevy Forester" in Hyderabad midlifecrisis The Indian Car Scene 14 26th October 2007 12:29
Court hauls up GM India - Orders refund of Chevy Forester himanshugoswami The Indian Car Scene 4 12th June 2006 11:46
The 2005 chevrolet forester normally_crazy The Indian Car Scene 5 3rd October 2004 14:13


All times are GMT +5.5. The time now is 11:38.

Copyright 2000 - 2017, Team-BHP.com
Proudly powered by E2E Networks