Η GM πλήρωσε $594,5 εκατ. σε αποζημιώσεις λόγω των ελαττωματικών διακοπτών ανάφλεξης

Η General Motors έδωσε την τελική ανακοίνωση σχετικά με το φιάσκο των ελαττωματικών διακοπτών ανάφλεξης της. Συνολικά 124 άνθρωποι έχασαν τη ζωή τους, 18 τραυματίστηκαν σοβαρά και 257 λιγότερο σοβαρά, από τους προβληματικούς διακόπτες των αυτοκινήτων της Αμερικάνικης εταιρίας, η οποία έκανε γνωστό πως πλήρωσε 594,5 εκατ. δολάρια σε αποζημιώσεις. Αυτό σημαίνει πως οι 399 άνθρωποι ή οι οικογένειες αυτών, πήραν κατά μέσο όρο περίπου 1,5 εκατ. δολάρια.

Από τις 399 περιπτώσεις, το 90,5% δέχτηκε τα χρήματα της αποζημίωσης που πρότεινε το ειδικό ταμείο αποζημιώσεων της GM, το οποίο συνολικά αξιολόγησε 4.343 αιτήματα. Από αυτά, μόλις το 9,2% αποζημιώθηκε, 399 περιπτώσεις, οι οποίες ήταν πολύ περισσότερες από ό,τι αρχικά είχε ανακοινώσει η GM. Πριν την δημιουργία του ταμείου, η αμερικανική εταιρία είχε αναγνωρίσει 13 θανάτους και 54 ατυχήματα. Συνολικά η GM έχει δαπανήσει περισσότερα από  2 δισεκατομμύρια δολάρια για το φιάσκο των προβληματικών διακοπτών ανάφλεξης.

[learn_more caption=”Δελτίο Τύπου”]

FINAL REPORT

DECEMBER 10, 2015

The GM Compensation Claims Resolution Facility is nearing completion of its work. The Program was designed to provide swift compensation to eligible individual claimants who submitted claims to the Facility. During the past sixteen months, the Facility has worked closely with individual claimants (and their lawyers if applicable) to determine eligibility and compensation. The Facility has reviewed, evaluated, and resolved 4,343 claims and determined that 399 claims were eligible for compensation from the Program. These 399 eligible claims were finalized and payment has been made, or is in process, to all claimants who have accepted the Facility’s Final Determination Offer. The total aggregate amount of compensation offered was $594,535,752. The Facility is pleased to report that over 90 percent of the offers extended to eligible claimants were accepted. We attribute the success of the Program to a number of important factors, including the following:

First, to achieve the goal of notifying as many potentially eligible individuals about the existence of the Program, over 5 million notices were sent out by GM to current and former owners of eligible vehicles announcing the establishment of the Program.

Second, in developing the Protocol, the Program Administrator solicited input from divergent interests, including claimants’ attorneys, GM, and other groups. While the Administrator gave due consideration to all submitted views and opinions, the Facility retained complete and sole discretion over all eligibility decisions and compensation awards to eligible claimants. GM placed no cap on the aggregate amount, had no say in final eligibility determinations and agreed to pay whatever the Facility deemed appropriate in each and every case.

Third, the Facility’s goal was to create a compensation program that was efficient, speedy, cost effective, and consistent in resolving the claims of individuals who applied for compensation. For this reason, the Facility did not conduct rigorous scientific or technical determinations or engineering analyses as to whether an ignition-switch defect manifested itself in a particular accident or whether a particular death or injury was “caused” by an ignition-switch defect. The Facility also did not consider legal defenses that might otherwise be available to GM in litigation, such as contributory negligence, statutes of limitations, or the bankruptcy shield.

Final Program Statistics

*Outstanding Offer Expires 1/6/16

*It is important to emphasize that the Protocol expressly ignored any evidence of contributory negligence on the part of the driver; accordingly, the Program did not consider any such evidence in making its individual determinations. Yet, contributory negligence loomed large as a contributing cause of many of the automobile accidents resulting in death and physical injury.

Of the 399 claims deemed eligible for compensation by the Program, 244 claims (61%) involved accidents in which the claim file documentation contained clear evidence of one or more of the following examples of contributory negligence: no seat belt, excessive speed, driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs, fell asleep, reckless driving. (Several claimants were associated with multiple factors of contributory negligence.) In such cases, claimants would confront serious legal challenges if litigating in the courtroom. By ignoring any evidence of such contributory negligence, the Program proved to be a preferred avenue for individuals seeking compensation.

[/learn_more]