"D Walford" <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote in message
> On 07/10/2013 10:38 PM, Clocky wrote:
>> "Noddy" <email@example.com> wrote in message
>>> On 07/10/13 5:17 PM, D Walford wrote:
>>>> Sounds like a row or several rows of spot welds were missing which can
>>>> easily happen if a machine breaks down on the production line but the
>>>> body shouldn't get past QC.
>>> This was the era of Blue motors. There *was* not QC then :)
>>>> If it was that simple I can't imagine Holden denying that it was
>>>> production fault,
>>> I think you can get away with denying whatever you like if you're
>>> to pay for the best legal team.
>> It makes no sense to draw attention to the fault if indeed there was
>> example of it.
>> Give the man a new car and let engineering loose on his broken wreck to
>> out what went wrong makes more sense.
> That makes sense to us here but we aren't an American car company, in my
> experience they do a lot of things that don't make sense.
>> Chances are Holden looked at the car and determined it really wasn't a
>> production fault and they weren't going to wear it.
> It may not have been a production fault but IMO any car that breaks in
> half without having had an enormous impact has a design fault which is
> even worse.
If indeed it wasn't an enormous impact. If it's the story I posted, the
impact was significant.
>>>> if I was in charge at Holden I would have given the
>>>> owner a new car and bought the wreck so the engineers could find out
>>>> it happened and make sure it didn't happen again.
>>> I would have too, but that would have been too easy. Holden was more
>>> concerned with making this guy's life a misery by having his claims
>>> publicly disgraced and thus avoiding any bad press about their product.
>> Or infact there was no production fault. You are speculating here.
>>> What they *could* have done was simply offered the guy a new car if he
>>> signed a non disclosure agreement and the public would never have known
>>> about it at all, but their minds simply don't work like that.
>> Obviously not a sound solution if it wasn't a production fault.
>> It's all very speculative.
> It is and without the facts which I doubt we will ever know its all just
> IMO Americans have some weird ideas which show up in many aspects of the
> way they do things, most civilised people think that providing their
> citizens with affordable health care is normal but the Yanks think its a
> communist plot, they also think its a great idea to be armed to the teeth
> and have shoot outs all over the country on a regular basis, if you happen
> to get shot its your fault because you didn't shoot back.
> With ****ed up thinking like that IMO anything is possible with crazy
> ****ing Yanks so after working for a US company I don't find it odd that
> they would chose to spend hundreds of thousands on lawyers instead of a
> few thousand on supplying a new car.
> I prefer the thinking of Mercedes Benz, apparently they try to buy the
> wreck of every one of their cars that has been involved in a fatal
> accident so they can investigate if there is anything they can do to
> prevent any more fatalities, I know its nothing to do with warranty but
> IMO it shows a much better attitude to their customers than any US
The US way hasn't worked out too well for them given the state of their
automotive industry ;-)