GM Offering 60-Day Money-Back Guarantee

2010_gmc_terrain

We’ve seen a lot of bizarre sales tactics over the past few years, but the new GM is going somewhere none have tread before. Starting Sunday, the company will offer a 60-day, no-questions-asked, money-back guarantee on all new Buick, Cadillac, Chevy and GMC vehicles.

One television ad that will begin airing Sunday during NFL games will feature new GM Chairman Ed Whitacre, formerly AT&T CEO who was appointed to the GM post by the government. It seems he needed to be convinced about GM products, too, and thinks the offer will resonate with reluctant shoppers.

The program will run through November and does have a number of conditions, as you’d expect. We list a few of them below. More information will be posted on this GM site on Sunday.

  • The vehicle must be a new 2009 or 2010 Buick, Cadillac, Chevrolet or GMC.
  • It must be returned between 31 and 60 days from purchase.
  • It must have no more than 4,000 miles.
  • The buyer can't be behind in payments.
  • If the purchase loan included an additional amount to pay off the loan on a trade-in above what the trade-in was worth, that portion won't be refunded.

GM will offer 60-day, money-back guarantee on new cars (USA Today)

By David Thomas | September 10, 2009 | Comments (51)

Comments 

H

Saturn has or had a 30-day satisfaction policy. I don't recall whether it was money back or exchange for a different model.

Original sheth

I dont think you could get your money back with Saturn. I do believe an exhange was possible.

Original sheth

Never mind, others are saying you could get your money back from Saturn. I'll go with that.

Okay. I admit it; i'm picking nits. But I think you wanted the following
...Ed Whitacre, formally AT&T CEO who was appointed...

to actuallly read ...Ed Whitacre, FORMERLY AT&T CEO who was appointed...

segfault

Up to 4,000 miles? Sounds kind of prone to abuse... Some people might "buy" a qualifying car in order to take it on a nice, long road trip, return it, and only be out one monthly payment.

f

I say the grill on that Terrain is worse than the front end of the controversial new Honda!

Unoriginal Seth

For those that need the quick miles, not really a bad way to go. That is if no down payment.

Unoriginal Seth

Not a bad quick hookup if you can prevent from getting a down payment.

Dave Wuss

How much longer until they ask for another bail-out? The reference to the former AT&T CEO remind us that GM truly is Government Motors. If it weren't for the rebates and rental fleet dumping they would barely move any product.

Original Ziggy

DW-

Actually rental car companies have curtailed they're purchases. This is why the malibu and impala fell out of the top 10 in sales.

Dan

Dave-
Are those the only requirements? They don't seem all that restrictive. Basically make your payments, don't drive excessively, and don't try to get extra money out of the system, and they'll take it back. Is there no reduction for wear and tear or anything?

H

Remember the guy who can't think of anything original to say so he has to use the same played out punchline over and over again?

H

...and the sidekick who doesn't know the difference between "they're" and "their". Laughable.

Paul

I see Pontiac isnt included.They are phasing that out quickly arent they?
Didnt Oldsmobile try this money back thing once before? I swear it was GM somehow a few years back.

Amuro Ray

Wrong! Wrong! Wrong! This is just utterly wrong. Using taxpayers' money to take that 30% instant loss out the door. But then, it's only the taxpayers' money, not the shareholders, or the CEO, or the company's...

Well, it certainly is innovative, and could help people who would otherwise not be interested in GM cars to at least go to the dealer and give it a test drive. The fact is that a 2-mile test drive doesn't really reveal much, and getting a longer test drive to find out if a vehicle is going to work for your family is not easy.

If you look at the fine print, you won't get back any negative-equity from your trade-in, accessories, or "Fees." So if the dealer charges you a $395 "Doc" fee, it's theirs to keep, even if you bring the car back.

Still, it's something. All along pundits have been saying that GM isn't making cars that people want to buy. Well, GM is stepping up and saying "People want to buy our cars, and we'll prove it."

* Bad deal at the dealership? Tell us! http://www.cardealerhorrorstories.com *

Andy

This is a good idea as I've been reading Chevrolet is having a lot of problems with the Equinox transmissions. Now I won't have to wait to buy one because this guarantee protects me.

This is a good policy.
I go through the terms and conditions of money back and agree with this.But if I want to go for loan then what will be the installments and interest to be paid.
please suggest it.
Anyways thanks for the post.

Original sheth

"I say the grill on that Terrain is worse than the front end of the controversial new Honda!"

Difference is GM also sell the Equinox for those who dont like the Terrain's styling.

Andy:

On edmunds.com the Equinox is one of the highest rated small SUVs by consumers. No mention of tranny problems. It's not like the tranny is new, its in other GM products already.

"Wrong! Wrong! Wrong! This is just utterly wrong. Using taxpayers' money to take that 30% instant loss out the door. But then, it's only the taxpayers' money, not the shareholders, or the CEO, or the company's..."

At this point GM probbaly isn't even spending taxpayer money. That money was a bridge to help them survive and operate during Chapter 11. The CEO has already said he doesn't plan on asking for another dime and at this point they are trying to make money to make back the loans.

Original sheth

"How much longer until they ask for another bail-out? The reference to the former AT&T CEO remind us that GM truly is Government Motors. If it weren't for the rebates and rental fleet dumping they would barely move any product. "

They arent asking for another bailout and as I've told you numerous times Hyundai, Nissan and Toyota are major fleet players right now. In fact, imports have the majority of the fleet market right now. Many car rental agencies are happily buying imports. Can't be good for residual values.

Carl

Original Sheth many sites in addition to Edmunds have documented new Equinox owners complaints about the transmission. A Google search turned up several links, here is one:

http://townhall-talk.edmunds.com/direct/view/.f1e117b/40

Dave Wuss teaching sheth-head yet another lesson

"In fact, imports have the majority of the fleet market right now."

Where's the link? You can't produce one because you are too busy guzzling the Kool Aid.

The FACT is GM dominates rental car sales and it's reflected in them leading the marketplace in having the WORST resale values:

http://www.cars.com/go/advice/Story.jsp?section=buy&story=loResidual&subject=best_resale&referer=&aff=national

6 out of the top 10 vehicles with the worst resale value are GM products. Now that's what I call a GM accomplishment!

Original sheth

Dave:

google imports and fleet sales. You will find something. I read this in the LA times. You are so out of touch that its ridiculous. The rental car agencies were effectively bragging about having so many imports. They say the prices on imports are now competitive and they say many people like having rental imports. Ignorance isnt anything to be proud of, trust me.

Original sheth

Carl:

As I said, the transmission is used on other GM products and this is the first I've heard of problems. Many people do not like how modern transmissions hold gears for fuel economy reasons. That is the source of many complaints these days about tranny performance. Besides, all I said was the Equinox is one of the highest rated crossovers in its class on Edmunds. Few people on there noted complaints about transmission performance.

Original sheth

Dave:

One last note, GM doesn't "dominate" fleet sales. GM has about 20% of the overall market and about 25% of their sales go to fleets. Last I heard about a third of Hyundai sales and 14% of Toyota sales come from fleet customers. Low resale value is a product of many factors, saying its only related to rental sales is ridiculous. BTW, the gap between import and domestic residuals is closer than ever because the imports have increased fleet sales and rebates while Detroit has done the opposite.

Dave Wuss

It's not a surprise you couldn't provide a single link. Now get back in your hole fraud.

Original sheth

Dave:

Please go away. You are incredibly juvenile and uninformed.

http://blogs.edmunds.com/straightline/2009/07/imports-surpass-domestics-in-rental-fleet-sales.html

read that. I don't expect a response. It speaks for itself. Use Google before telling me I am making things up next time.

Dave Wuss

You clearly lack reading comprehension as the article makes it clear that GM is being turned away by rental fleets because their products have the industry's worst resale value. Also the article clearly states that consumers prefer to drive non-US cars when renting so the Koreans are stepping in and filling the void.

"GM said their fleet sales have been below target and they hope to recapture some of the market share they've lost."

"Our customers prefer non-US plates...Residual value experience and expectations are definitely important because it diminishes the risk...this makes the fleet companies and their bankers happy."

GM can no longer rely on the fleet companies to buy their Malibu's, Impala's, Trailblazer's, and Cobalt's. I'm sure the White House will be asked to intercede. LOL!

Original sheth

Dave:

You are the one who told me unconditionally that imports did not lead in fleet sales. Now you are telling me I have comprehension problems because you have proven yourself a fool once more. You make no sense. I read the article and the bottom line is rental agencies like buying imports and import companies have made their prices attractive to fleet customers. The same fundamentals that made fleet sales bad for Detroit make them bad for Japan. Period. The reliance on fleet sales is one reason why residuals for most Toyota products are no better than GM's latest products. Obviously Hyundais aren't known for resale and they never will be as long as Hyundai overuses rebates and rental sales. Hyundai is all about gaining marketshare at all costs, they are not concerned about vehicles holding values. BTW, Hyundais are purchased by rental agencies because they are cheap, not because customers are clamoring for them.

the Trailblazer has been out of production almost a year. Even when it was in production it wasn't a popular fleet vehicle. BTW, "fleet" sales include government and corporate sales. That article only deals with rentals, the domestics still dominate government, livery and corporate sales. How many camry police cars have you seen?

Original sheth

I guess you missed this section of the article:

"Industry experts say some brands could be making the same rental mistakes the domestics once did. Through May, Hyundai said that more than 30% of its U.S. sales have gone to rental fleets. Kia declined to provide an updated number, but through the first quarter of the year, more than a third of Kia and Hyundai sales went to rental companies, according to Automotive News. For its part, Nissan sent 29% of its total sales volume that way in the first quarter.

"I think a couple of our competitors have jumped in the deep end," said Mike Michels, a spokesman for Toyota, which has shown more discipline, selling only 13% to rental companies in the first quarter.

Not every opportunity to get customers behind the wheel of your car proves to be a good one. Last month, Lorna Marino of Studio City paid $17.50 a day to rent an economy car for a weekend trip. She got a Kia Rondo, an oddly shaped compact crossover vehicle that she said reminded her of an AMC Pacer.

"I felt like there was nothing remarkable about it," said Marino, a hairstylist who normally drives a Mini. "Nobody should ever own a Rondo.""

I guess you also skipped over the section that said cuts in production and a desire to increase profitability prompted the Big 3 to raise prices and pull back on reliance on low margin fleet sales. also, the logic about rental agencies wanting higher residuals is at odds with their love for Hyundai products which are not known for resale value. If residuals were of the utmost concern they would be buying HOndas and BMWs. They aren't because those brands don't offer the discounts of Nissan and Hyundai. When you offer hundreds of thousands of vehicles to rental agencies at discounts you will bring down resale value over time. history will repeat itself.

Belly

Shet said:

"...the logic about rental agencies wanting higher residuals is at odds with their love for Hyundai products which are not known for resale value."

LA Times said:

"Yet higher prices have made Detroit's products less attractive to rental companies, which are holding cars longer and placing more emphasis on how much vehicles command on the used market.

That metric -- residual value -- is an area in which imports hold a decisive edge.

Over the last three years, residuals for Hyundai and Kia rose sharply -- up 12% and 8%, respectively."

Good call.

Belly

Oh yeah, here's a little more from the LA Times:

"Residual value experience and expectations are definitely important," said David Wyshner, chief financial officer of Avis Budget Group, which has increasingly turned away from American cars. In 2005, just 7% of Avis Budget's U.S. fleet was foreign; this year it expects that number to reach 32%.

Better residuals please lenders because it diminishes the risk that the rental agencies will default on loans.

That's a KEY REASON that Hertz now maintains a U.S. fleet with "well over half" the cars bearing foreign badges, said spokesman Richard Broome."

Simple math

"this year it expects that number to reach 32%"

"well over half"

Original sheth

"Over the last three years, residuals for Hyundai and Kia rose sharply -- up 12% and 8%, respectively."

Good call. "

I know. A 12% rise on worst in industry resale isn't anything to write home about. Notice the article never actually compares resale of Hyundais to american brands. Why is that? Try to think like an adult here.

Also, try to grasp this: residuals aren't set in stone and all domestic residuals aren't created equal. If imports continue to do business as Detroit used to their resale values will continue to dip. In additon, SOME american vehicles like the Malibu and CTS have resale equal to imports. Rental agencies are probably dumping the models with the lowest resales (chrysler vehicles, Impala perhaps) with Nissans and Hyundais. If residual values for imports and domestics are generally even in 3 or 4 years the advantage of the imports will be erased- and they are helping to erase that gap by fleet dumping.

Belly

Oh ingnorant Shet, the article clearly clues you in as to why you are wrong:

"For years, Detroit used rental fleets as dumping grounds for vehicles it couldn't otherwise sell. The car companies unloaded those vehicles to rental fleets at deep discounts, frequently with a promise to buy them back.

Many of those rental agencies were controlled by the carmakers themselves. Avis was partially owned by a unit of GM and had a marketing agreement to carry its cars. Hertz belonged to Ford. Dollar Thrifty was a unit of Chrysler, and as a result carried fleets almost entirely composed of the corporate parent's cars. All those rental firms were spun off as independent companies. But only in the last few years have they begun diversifying beyond a few vehicle brands."

Once the domestic makes didn't give the incentives, the rentals started buying imports. Resale is based on desirability, supply, etc. but since you are so brilliant to suggest that residual values are not set in stone you must know that!

"SOME american vehicles like the Malibu and CTS have resale equal to imports"
-To what? A Hyundai or a KIA? Is that good or bad?

If residual values for imports and domestics are generally even in 3 or 4 years the advantage of the imports will be erased- and they are helping to erase that gap by fleet dumping.
-Okay, that's a big IF. And fleet sales themselves don't reduce the value of a car. The car itself has more to do with that than anything.

Belly

Okay, okay, before you get all scientific and posting all your "proof" and "facts" Shet, let me clarify a statement - Fleet sales may have something to do with the value of a car, just like any other sales. If there is a greater supply, the price is more likely to go down.

Unoriginal Seth

Sheth, we get the point. Get over it already. To try and force someone wrong is unnecesary. You spend lots of time gathering these points across. We get the point. But really, people now mostly want to buy Ford since they never went to the government for money. So this MAY attribute to it. If it doesn't, I don't need proof nor do I care to read any links. But the pieces fit.

Kristian

Last week my neighbor brought home a new Ford Fusion. He mentioned that he was split between the Chevy Malibu, Honda Accord, and Fusion. He said Honda dealer wouldn't negotiate much and he liked the other two cars a little better so he went with the Fusion. He said in the end he couldn't bring himself to buy the Malibu since Chevrolet is owned by our government and he resents that they took tax payer money. This wouldn't figure into my decision making process however I bet it does with many folks.

Kristian,
Thanks for sharing the anecdote. I understand the idea, but wonder then wouldn't it make more sense if they're mad about the govt owning the company that you'd shop its competition? Thus taking money out of your own pocket? Just a thought for your neighbor.

Same Old Story GM

It seams like every couple of years GM claims they're serious about reinventing themselves. I've been hearing this tune for about a decade along with "Just wait until our next (fill in the blank) arrives." GM has turned themselves into background noise.

Original sheth

Belly:

here is a simple fact for you:

Import residuals on mainstream brands are declining and domestic residuals are increasing. Its that simple. Rental fleets are a big factor in that, but not the only one. You can insult me, mispell my name or do whatever else you want to try and distract people but the truth is the truth. ALG rates the Malibu and your beloved camry in the same category for resale value- 3 out of 5 stars. Don't shoot the messenger.

""SOME american vehicles like the Malibu and CTS have resale equal to imports""

No Toyotas according to ALG. Most Toyotas are rated at 3/5 stars just like the Malibu and CTS. A few Lexus models (not ES350 though) are rated higher than 3 stars.

"But really, people now mostly want to buy Ford since they never went to the government for money. So this MAY attribute to it. If it doesn't, I don't need proof nor do I care to read any links. But the pieces fit. "

Last month GM was #1, Toyota #2 and Ford #3. while a vocal minority is swearing off GM/chrysler products there really is no evidence of a mass defection to Ford. Sorry. Ford is doing well, but its got a long way to go to pass Toyota or GM in US sales.

Original sheth

"It seams like every couple of years GM claims they're serious about reinventing themselves. I've been hearing this tune for about a decade along with "Just wait until our next (fill in the blank) arrives." GM has turned themselves into background noise."

when was the last time GM went through bankruptcy, shed billions in liabilities and cut four brands? Let me know.

Belly

"Import residuals on mainstream brands are declining and domestic residuals are increasing."
-Simple fact? Here are ALG rankings:

Industry Brand Residual Value Rankings
Rank Brand
1 HONDA
2 SUBARU
3 VOLKSWAGEN
4 TOYOTA
5 NISSAN
6 MAZDA
7 SUZUKI
8 SATURN
9 PONTIAC

GM has Pontiac there right? Good job - wait they're going away. ALG also states:

Below industry average were the following brands (listed in alphabetical order): Buick, Chevrolet, Chrysler, Dodge, Ford, GMC, Hyundai, Jeep, Kia, Mercury and Mitsubishi.

You can find this story and more:

https://www.alg.com/Newsroom

And instead of giving some BS about a five star ranking system (kind of reminds me of how you said the Cobalt was good because 86% of owners on edmunds would recommend it to a friend - when there was ONLY 14 people total) , how about looking at something worth while like percentage values:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/auto/article967724.ece

48 month residual value for a camry was 45%, the malibu was 40%. Seriously where are your links?

And here is some of the best information - what cars are overpriced based on residuals.

http://www.forbes.com/2009/07/01/overpriced-cars-autos-lifestyle-vehicles-overpriced.html

There are a lot of GM vehicles here


Belly

I really like this statement by James Clark, general manager of ALG:

Lexus is a repeat winner because of Toyota Motor Corporation’s dedication and focus on maintaining industry-leading manufacturing standards, market-based vehicle production that limits incentives, and providing an exceptional dealership experience in both the sales and service areas.

https://www.alg.com/Lexus+Maintains+Leadership+in+ALGs+Luxury+Models+Summer+2009+Perceived+Quality+Study

Unoriginal Seth

I stick with belly and his information since he doesn't put people down for any reason including childish acts. KO!!

General Motors Money Back Guarantee Is A Scam

I went to two local Chevrolet dealers to discuss the guarantee and discovered at the first dealer a clause that states that if the dealer determines there is $200 or more in damage the vehicle cannot be returned. Both dealers informed me that it could be as little as a scraped wheel, small door ding, or scratched bumper. I asked if the buyer would be given the opportunity to fix the damage and the answer from both dealers was a resounding No. Both emphasized that they don't ever expect anyone to exercise the money-back guarantee. Based on this experience it looks like my family will be purchasing a Toyota Highlander instead of the Chevrolet Traverse. I'm really not surprised to see that Chevrolet hasn't changed from their days of cheating customers.

Grass Valley GM buyer

The GM 60-day Guarantee is a total scam! We are trying to return a Malibu and have been told that we are not eligible for the return due to a scraped wheel, estimated by GM’s inspector to be over $200 damage. How many people who drive a car for 30 days are not going to get a parking lot ding, scrape a high curb, or get dinged from kicked-up gravel? Practically any ding is going to be estimated over $200 damage!! GM is banking on this. Why do think that the car must be kept for 30 days? No wonder such a small percentage of cars have been returned. According to the contract, GM is the one who decides if the car is eligible for return. Don’t fall for this deal! Buy a Honda!

Adam

GM 60 day return is a HUGE SCAM. My mother bought a 2010 Camero from Scott Rumsey at St. Anthony Motros in ID. After 23 days she decided it did not handle well in the snow. We took it back because Chevrolet offers a 60 day money back guarantee. When we sat down with Scott and his manager we were told that they would not honor the 60 day guarantee. While signing the documents Scott had told her that they were running a incentive that if she did not return the car within 60 days they would give her a 500$ credit towards the car. What he did not say was that by taking that 500$ it waived the 60 day guarantee. We did not realize that was what we were signing and told them this and they responded "It's not our fault you did not understand" They said that they could trade her camero in for something else. She bought the car for $30,500 23 days previous and had put 400 miles on it since. As we were walking to the office to sit down and talk about her options the Sales Manager said "You are not going to be happy with this. They were going to give her 25,000 trade in on it. When I confronted them about this saying this was dishonest business practices they became angry at me and resorted to name calling. The next ten minutes I was called a "Hot head" "Liar" "Dishonest" and they said I was a person that could not be trusted. By the time we left my mom was crying while Scott and the manager were right in my face calling me names. This is the worst experience I have ever had with a company. Please stay away from these dishonest people. They do not care about anyone but themselves and only care about making the sale.

H

Adam,

This site asks commenters to not post the names of specific dealerships.

Your story is unfortunate but hopefully you and your mom learned an important lesson...read the terms and conditions before signing off on anything. By the way, it's not a scam when the terms and conditions are explicitly spelled out.

Belly

H, why don't you let the site worry about monitoring. And it is most likely so they cannot be held to be a party to a defamation claim. If it is a true story then it is not defamation.

Belly

And its nice how you support a dealership relying of fine print and contracts of adhesion, and then calling the customer a liar and dishonest.

Post a Comment 

Please remember a few rules before posting comments:

  • If you don't want people to see your email address, simply type in the URL of your favorite website or leave the field empty.
  • Do not mention specific car dealers by name. Feel free to mention your city, state and brand.
  • Try to be civil to your fellow blog readers. This blog is not a fan or enthusiast forum, it is meant to help people during the car-buying process and during the time between purchases, so shoppers can keep a pulse on the market.
  • Stay on topic. We want to hear your opinions and thoughts, but please only comment about the specified topic in the blog post.
view posting rules

If you have a TypeKey or TypePad account, please Sign In

Search Results

KickingTires Search Results for

Search Kicking Tires

KickingTires iPhone App
Ask.cars.com