[rajcs]

http://www.indianexpress.com/news/fo...owner/1158929/

In a case that underlines the importance of cross checking VIN while taking delivery of a new car, a 2009 model Aveo was sold to an unsuspecting customer as a 2011 model by Dynamic Motors Chandigarh along with a sale certificate from GM authenticating it to be 2011 model. The matter came to light when the owner wanted to exchange the car after a few months and he was told by a dealer that the car was actually a 2009 model.

The customer was lucky that he approached the Consumer Redressel Forum, which upheld his complaint and ordered compensation of Rs 2 Lakhs.

Unscrupulous dealers looking for short term gains is the bane of this country. Can't believe GM India is also involved in this as stated in the report.

I don't, however, believe we have a heard the last of this case yet. The dealer is sure to appeal in some higher court to delay the payment.

[vnabhi]

Scary to read this. I know that dealers can be unscrupulous, but GM, India too ??

I'm happy he got compensated.

[drmohitg]

How can GM certify it as a 2011 car? I can't believe that. Its too trivial a amount for GM to become a party to the fraud. The dealer's story is nothing new as business practices in India are devoid of any genuine etiquette. But if GM also intentionally committed the fraud then the compensation should be much higher and punishment more severe.

[a4anurag]

Originally Posted by drmohitg

How can GM certify it as a 2011 car? I can't believe that. Its too trivial a amount for GM to become a party to the fraud. The dealer's story is nothing new as business practices in India are devoid of any genuine etiquette. But if GM also intentionally committed the fraud then the compensation should be much higher and punishment more severe.

You echo my mind!

Doesn't the VIN details tell everything about the car and it's manufacturing date? So isn't the owner also equally at fault as he didn't check the VIN before purchase?!

General Motors then cleared that Dynamic Motors was not an agency of the company but was a dealer of Chevrolet Sales India Pvt. Ltd. They argued that they only issued a form about the chassis number of the vehicle which indicated the year of manufacture as December, 2009 and the sales certificate with February 2011 manufacture date was issued by Dynamic Motors. Dynamic Motors said that the complainant was aware about the vehicle's manufacture date of 2009 and had availed a discount of Rs 40,000 for the same. It also said that the mentioned year of manufacture on the sale certificate was a typographical error.

I mean this is bad from the dealer point of view and GM is not keeping a check on it's dealer who are selling a bad name to the world. GM is now in limelight for all wrong reasons for what not issues!

Anurag.

[drmohitg]

Originally Posted by a4anurag

Doesn't the VIN details tell everything about the car and it's manufacturing date? So isn't the owner also equally at fault as he didn't check the VIN before purchase?!

How many people know about this VIN number. Not many and we cannot blame them. Even I didn't know this before joining the forum. None of the people I know have any idea that such a number exists and we can easily decode it to find out the details. So I don't think the customer is at fault here. He went to buy a car in 2011 and by default should be provided with a 2011 model car.

[GTO]

What I'm even more surprised with is the fact that the dealer & Chevrolet made the poor man go to court

They very clearly made a mistake. Did they need the court to tell them that?

Is this the way you take care of your customer? Absolutely ridiculous. to the court for enforcing justice.

[tsk1979]

Why the +1 for the court. The court has passed a judgement in favor of chevrolet.
Think it like this.

LEts say Chevrolet sells 100 cars as fraud making 50 lakhs profit.
One of them goes to consumer court and gets 2Lakh

Net gain? = 48 lakhs.

This is what ails the consumer court system. High punitive damages like a few crores need to be handed out to these companies.
Otherwise they will figure out that it makes sense to pay one odd guy in court rather than get their act right.

[sa_kiran]

It is not surprising that GM is involved in this. Remember Tavera story, that fraud went on for years!

I hope that the affected customer is given the compensation and not dragged to higher courts. Let this case not be another Harish's story (Skoda).

[blue_pulsar]

2 Lacs is such a small amount for such a blunder. Chevy and the dealership must be laughing. And the dealership had the audacity to state that the year of manufacture was a typographical error. Who in their right minds would buy a two year old Chevrolet Aveo for just a 40K discount? Its just that the company is trying to blame the dealer and dealer is trying to save himself by making such ridiculous statements.

[tj123]

Sad, 2 lac compensation is a cruel joke, it should have been at least 10 times the cost of the vehicle, heavy punitive action is the only way to deter such malpractices.

This is a clear case of forgery by dealer and not just a case of mix-up.

[a4anurag]

Originally Posted by tsk1979

Lets say Chevrolet sells 100 cars as fraud making 50 lakhs profit.

One of them goes to consumer court and gets 2 Lakh

Net gain? = 48 lakhs.

Very nice and valid point.

And from customers point of view he would be jumping in joy as his case has given him a bonus of 2 L and a penalty to GM and the dealer. He would be in 7th heaven. Good for him though.

But the point is this thing must not repeat with another customer. VIN Data is very crucial and should be verified and decoded before signing the documents.

Anurag.

[wildon]

The VIN data should made available to consumers to know the details of the vehicle before or after he/she purchases the vehicle. Government should bring such laws like in USA to help out the consumers.

http://www.nhtsa.gov/About+NHTSA/Pre...pleted+Recalls

http://auto.howstuffworks.com/buying-selling/vin1.htm

[powertrain]

Originally Posted by a4anurag

Doesn't the VIN details tell everything about the car and it's manufacturing date? So isn't the owner also equally at fault as he didn't check the VIN before purchase?!

Hello Anurag,
I think the word "fault" is a little too harsh on the owner. I would call it more like a "mistake"
How many people outside automobile forums(including educated people) know about VIN no's?
It is this lack of knowledge that is proving costly. And dealers & manufacturers will continue to fleece us until that time. All this controversies about Chevy makes me think about it's CSR policy.

Regards,
Varun

[noopster]

Trying to look at this objectively: a 2009 December car being sold in Feb 2011 is not really unheard-of, for a relatively low-selling brand like the Aveo. Usually a carmaker/dealer would offer such cars at a heavy discount. In this case the dealer scented an opportunity and duped the unwitting customer. It would have probably not even been discovered had not the "typo" (yeah right) in the sales certificate issued by the dealer.

Nowhere does it mention what date of manufacture was printed on the RC book. But knowing the dealers (and the RTOs) it is quite possible they fudged that data too.

I wonder why the court did not order a criminal investigation against the company/dealer for what looks to be a clear case of fraud. Like Tanveer and others said, 2L is hardly a deterrent after wasting a couple of years fighting it in consumer court.

[deepfusion]

This is too little a compensation for the fraud the dealer has, with the patronage of its Principal, Chevrolet, has committed.

And as rightly pointed out by tsk1979, the court order lets Chevrolet, which is guilty of a much bigger fraud on India, and the Indians, in the pollution riddled taveras being offloaded on the Indian Roads, walk free out of this without a criminal investigation being ordered into the fraudulent practice being followed by Chevrolet in India.

The consumer forum has rightly delivered the judgement, but the amount awarded as compensation is less.