One unlucky loyal Bolt owner was denied compensation after his car burned because according to GM the fire voided his warranty. GM leaves owner owing $12K after Bolt EV battery fire last year - Electrek
GM doesn’t compensate owners for things that happen to their cars. That’s what insurance is for. The article title is misleading. Now, this owner should sue GM for the defective battery and seek compensation over and above the insurance claim. Especially if GM would have replaced the pack under the upcoming recall.
So every Takata airbag owners should file against their insurance and every Chevy Bolt owner shouldn't be compensated for their battery problems is what you are saying. How much GM stock do you own?
I'm saying you are shifting the responsibility of an auto manufacturer's problem to the insurance company which would be what a GM apologist would like to happen. There is a recall on the Bolt battery because the batteries tend to ignite and burn the car down which is exactly what happened to that one owner. GM's response was not to take responsibility and told the owner that GM is not responsible because the fire voided their warranty. Your point of shifting responsibility from an auto manufacturer to the insurance company when bad things happen caused by a defect in the vehicle is absurd. It follows that all Ford Explorer owners should file claim against their insurance company for accidents caused by their Firestone tires and that Takata airbags that blow up and cause accident/maim occupants should be compensated by the insurance company. If a Bolt EV burns because of a defect then GM should in good conscience compensate the owner for the "accident" because the car burned due to a defect in the battery and not because of the owner's negligence or wrongdoing.
The insurance covers the loss regardless of the cause. The mechanism to recover Additional damages from GM defect is to sue GM. Everything else you said I said was not said or implied. I’m taking about how the system works in the USA, not wouldas, couldas, and shouldas.
Everyone know the concept of insurance is to pool large number of people to help pay for coverage. So in your world it is ok for the rest of those insured to pay for GM's problem with the defective battery.
The world I live in requires people to fight for justice and corporations do the opposite of what is morally right.
That’s a reasonable question. If it was happening a lot, they probably would if someone decided it was worthwhile to recover. In the end, suing is the only way to really recover damages from negligence. Insurance is the first layer of protection we have against losses for unforeseen Reasons. Money isn’t handed out just because someone feels someone else is responsible.
