The disclosure form clearly tells customers that GM “has no obligation to the customer under a non-GM service contract” and that “GM is not responsible for the impact of installing GM parts, equipment or accessories on the vehicle,” the letter states. “If the dealer changes or sells a new modified motor vehicle or installs equipment, accessories, recycling parts or parts that are not supplied by General Motors, or sells a non-general service contract for a motor vehicle, the dealer will disclose it on the order and on the sales bulletin, indicating that the change , equipment, accessories or parts are not guaranteed by General Motors or that, in the case of a service contract, coverage is not provided by General Motors or a related company.” In recent weeks, major concerns have been expressed across the country regarding General Motors` communications to its dealers regarding the repair and maintenance of GM vehicles for customers by dealers using non-GM parts and non-GM service contracts. While recognizing the GM dealership`s right to use non-GM parts and non-GM service contracts with customers, the automaker has imposed a strict advertising regime, which it insists its franchisees implement when non-GM parts and non-GM service contracts are used. This information was found to be overstated by many, including NADA, and beyond the terms of GM`s dealer sales and service contract, when it ends up as the risk of unsuccessful repairs and maintenance, when the maintenance vendor uses non-GM parts and non-GM service contracts. In addition, the sanctions GM says GM will impose on its distributors for not implementing the data if genetically modified parts are not used are perceived by many as cumbersome or even illegal. In the form prescribed in Bulletin 17-12, the first part indicates the disclosure of a service contract not approved by GM, that GM is not responsible for any claims and that the contract cannot be accepted by other GM distributors. The problem is the prescribed language of Part 2 on non-genetically modified products or accessories. It contains the expected language that GM will not be liable to assist those who, “The installation and operation of non-GM products and accessories on a GM vehicle can cause significant damage to the vehicle, compromise its safety, compromise the operation of the vehicle or compromise the validity of the Warranty GM New Vehicle Limited” – August 24 Letter from Steve Hill, GM Vice President U.S. Sales, Service and Marketing August 3.
If you use non-GM parts and non-GM service contracts for the maintenance and repair of customer vehicles and want a modified customer information format, submit it to the plant and make sure they are working with you. If this is not the case and you think another approach is in accordance with the GM dealer`s sales and service contract and is appropriate for you and your client, take NADA`s advice and speak to your lawyer before moving forward. With this policy, GM may well go beyond its limits, but remember that no court or regulator in Maryland or Virginia has yet decided to do so. Will GM reconsider its position on this issue, with or without NADA, and the trade associations and present a tastier attitude for all its distributors? Maybe, maybe not. GM sent a letter to distributors on July 23 outlining changes to the new agreement, which appear to be minor and technical. For example, switching from distributor to commercial investor to reflect the majority of dealer agreements. “These laws can apply to GM in this situation,” he said.