[McLaren Rulez]

Originally Posted by CPH

I wonder whether Mr Sawant is telling the full truth?

He took delivery of the car, was driven in it for forty five minutes before the car caught fire and he just about managed to get out alive. Throughout the incident, there was a driver from Tata's dealership with him. And you suspect him of lying?

What happened to all the preaching about not making allegations? Or speaking with facts? Glass house and plenty of stones to throw, eh?

Originally Posted by CPH

I am not claiming that Mr. Sawant set the car a fire.

Oh thank God! At least you stopped short of that.

[CPH]

Originally Posted by Gilead

If the car was indeed manufactured in 2008 and is a 'pre production' model as alleged, it should never have been shipped from the Tata plant to Concorde. I have never heard of any manufacturer delivering a not-so-fully tested pre production model to a dealership before. I hope Tata responds to this allegation at the earliest. They should know by now whether it was made in 2008 or not. If they sit mum, I am going to assume the worst.

Working in the industries now for 31 years I have been to many dealerships in Europe, where the had 'zero runs' (as we call them in Germany) in the show rooms at larger dealers.

These model are pre-production ones that often are sold in due course. The purpose of them is to show the product as well as for ironing out production flaws.

If it trns out to be true that it is a 2008 production sample then there is some more about it, which Concorde hasn't told yet.

Originally Posted by RajaTaurus

Dear friend, it is not an allegation by anybody else, it is explanation by Tata's own spokesman. How Tata could possibly respond is to 'sack' this spokesman, either way.

You called me arrogant. Hmm.

How do you know that it isn't true what the spokesman said?

There is a lot at stake on the international stage to make a deliberate false claim.

Toyota feels the sting of it world wide.

Originally Posted by McLaren Rulez

He took delivery of the car, was driven in it for forty five minutes before the car caught fire and he just about managed to get out alive. Throughout the incident, there was a driver from Tata's dealership with him. And you suspect him of lying?

What happened to all the preaching about not making allegations? Or speaking with facts? Glass house and plenty of stones to throw, eh?



Oh thank God! At least you stopped short of that.

It is claimed that Mr Sawant works for an insurance company.

His job is to check details.

Either he is not capable of doing his job properly or he might have known of the origin of the car and is witholding information that could give him a benefit in his claims.

Things like this happen every day.

[RajaTaurus]

@ CPH,
That's why I said "either way". Either it is True or False, both ways, he should not have said that, as far as Tatas are concerned, as now they have explain more 'rat-smells' to the media and the public. And now comes jargons like 'deliberate false claims'. Come on CPH, lets hit the ground, this is India, watch the show unfolding and we might even need the Bag-piper to come again to de-rat-ify this place.

[McLaren Rulez]

Originally Posted by CPH

It is claimed that Mr Sawant works for an insurance company.

His job is to check details.

Either he is not capable of doing his job properly or he might have known of the origin of the car and is witholding information that could give him a benefit in his claims.

Allegations galore! Wow, CPH. Not one of those things in bold have any proof. Its you hypothesizing with no solid evidence to back it up. The sheer magnitude of your hypocrisy is incredible when you accuse, falsely sometimes, others of allegations and then happily make some of your own.

Let me also add that he is an insurance agent but you have no idea about several things:

1) Firstly, is he is an insurance agent for cars?
2) Second, was his Nano insured by the insurance company he works in?
3) Most importantly, is he is acting maliciously as you accuse him of?

Speaking of which, is this even a matter of insurance? An insurance claim is for accidental fires. Does this particular case qualify as one?

[Ponmayilal]

I also have the same doubt that it may a strategy to convince prospective buyers that post pre-production models have no such defects or problems. Only an upright investigation can bring out the truth.

Of course, it is going to be an onerous task as any evidence of it being a preproduction model or a recently manufactured one could have been destroyed by the fire or deliberately later. One has to wait and see how things turn out to be.

But the fact is either way Mr.Sawant is on a strong foot. As far as any consumer forum is concerned a car that burns out on its maiden titanic journey within 45 minutes is defective, irrespective of the how and why of it.

The insurance claim does not come into picture since Tata Motors have already offered him a refund or a new car as he wishes.

[scooby05]

Is there some place I can send my NANO, for a Complete check up in Mumbai and Get a clearance that "all is well"? Do not suggest the dealers centres Please.

[CPH]

Originally Posted by RajaTaurus

@ CPH,
That's why I said "either way". Either it is True or False, both ways, he should not have said that, as far as Tatas are concerned, as now they have explain more 'rat-smells' to the media and the public. And now comes jargons like 'deliberate false claims'. Come on CPH, lets hit the ground, this is India, watch the show unfolding and we might even need the Bag-piper to come again to de-rat-ify this place.

You want to tell me that the Indian way is wanting to know something not wanting to know when you don want to know it in the first place and blame people for not telling and when they tell, they aren't supposed to tell and that it is a blooming cheek to have solved the mystery?

An interesting way to view things.

I am sure I never would become a spokesman. Far to much headache for my liking.

[Gansan]

The production date can't be falsified, I suppose. Even if the car is charred, the engine and chassis numbers will be recorded elsewhere - the sale invoice as well as the Rc book, not to mention the insurance policy.

[RajaTaurus]

@CPH,
When they tell, we expect them to 'tell' something logical and convincing and not to add more confusion to the already prevailing confusion.
OT, CPH, you write like a pure British, not sure if you are one, but amazing sentence that one was. Wow.!

[Gilead]

Originally Posted by CPH

These model are pre-production ones that often are sold in due course. The purpose of them is to show the product as well as for ironing out production flaws.

Selling a pre-production unit that may have production flaws sounds criminal to me. I don't care if that's the way it is in Europe, but Tata should not be doing it here if this is true.

Originally Posted by CPH

It is claimed that Mr Sawant works for an insurance company.

His job is to check details.

Either he is not capable of doing his job properly or he might have known of the origin of the car and is witholding information that could give him a benefit in his claims.

Things like this happen every day.

First you say baseless allegations should not be made against Tata and the Nano. And now you yourself are speculating about the motives of a person who barely managed to escape from a flaming wreck. Please try and be a little consistent. The car was headed to LIC colony, so we can safely assume he works in the life insurance industry and not car insurance. Or do you think he was trying to collect on his life insurance policy?

[CPH]

Originally Posted by McLaren Rulez

Allegations galore! Wow, CPH. Not one of those things in bold have any proof. Its you hypothesizing with no solid evidence to back it up. The sheer magnitude of your hypocrisy is incredible.

Let me also add that he is an insurance agent but you have no idea about several things:

1) Firstly, is he is an insurance agent for cars?
2) Second, is his Nano was insured by the insurance company he works in?
3) Most importantly, is he is acting maliciously as you accuse him of?

Speaking of which, is this even a matter of insurance? An insurance claim is for accidental fires. Does this particular case qualify as one?

I am going on Mr Sawants on statements. You only read what you want to read. Not my problem.

I read everything and from Mr Sawants statements alone things don't add up.

1. and 2. would be irrelevant. He signed some papers that state certain things. If he checked the details we would know. If he didn't check them then he didn't do his job. As the owner it is his duty to mkae sure that the paers are correct. This goes in every country in the world.

If he checked the details then he would know of the origin of the car. He did not mention anything other that he wants compensation.

What do you want to pin on me?

[Car&me]

Originally Posted by CPH

Now you can tell them that the Nano is even defended in the UK.

I would even offer prepare for introduction and to market the Nano in Europe, but only if I get a yellow one.

BTW I am serious.

CPH, I was a Tata Employee not in Tata Motors, but TCS. But the Tata Business Ethics are same across the group.
I would have loved to partner with you on the European Market.

[CPH]

Originally Posted by RajaTaurus

@CPH,
When they tell, we expect them to 'tell' something logical and convincing and not to add more confusion to the already prevailing confusion.
OT, CPH, you write like a pure British, not sure if you are one, but amazing sentence that one was. Wow.!

Only Germans make sentences as long as this.

They tried to tell us that Saddam has got weapons of mass destruction. They were very convincing the way the politicians promoted it. Desaster struck in due course. Half of the world is still paying the prize, Turkey being the worst affected.

I believe in being straight. The British beating around the bush is not productive.

But we live in some sort of a free world.

[McLaren Rulez]

Originally Posted by CPH

I am going on Mr Sawants on statements. You only read what you want to read. Not my problem.

I read everything and from Mr Sawants statements alone things don't add up.

1. and 2. would be irrelevant. He signed some papers that state certain things. If he checked the details we would know. If he didn't check them then he didn't do his job. As the owner it is his duty to mkae sure that the paers are correct. This goes in every country in the world.

If he checked the details then he would know of the origin of the car. He did not mention anything other that he wants compensation.

What do you want to pin on me?

Okay, I can't impress it upon you any more clearly than I have already. The man was driven for forty five minutes by a Tata dealer's employee and the car caught fire.

He may be ignorant because he didn't check his manufacturing date. But this was his first car and not everyone walks into a showroom armed with a PDI checklist or a VIN decoder. Above all, you're bringing his profession as an insurance agent into it when it really has no relevance. If you still think that this man is lying, then I'm done trying to convince you.

I hope you enjoy your yellow Nano if you ever buy one.

[RajaTaurus]

Originally Posted by CPH

I
1. and 2. would be irrelevant. He signed some papers that state certain things. If he checked the details we would know. If he didn't check them then he didn't do his job. As the owner it is his duty to mkae sure that the paers are correct. This goes in every country in the world.

If he checked the details then he would know of the origin of the car. He did not mention anything other that he wants compensation.

What do you want to pin on me?

CPH, Now you sound exacly like an Auto Industry person. It is the buyer's job(!?) to check all the papers and not the duty of the seller to make sure all papers are correct?