Big,Automaker,Bankruptcies,Lea law Big Automaker Bankruptcies Leave Injured Without Recourse

Bankruptcy is a situation, wherein an individual is termed as unable to discharge all the debts. When a person or a company is not able to pay off its creditors, it has an obligation to file a bankruptcy suit. In fact, a bankruptcy suit is a When you work with an attorney, you will have no problem reducing the risks associated with getting your case in front of a judge and jury, or other formal court, when you need to. However, every case is different. It is important to work wi

Normal 0 false false false EN-US X-NONE X-NONE MicrosoftInternetExplorer4 /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;mso-style-noshow:yes;mso-style-priority:99;mso-style-qformat:yes;mso-style-parent:"";mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;mso-para-margin:0in;mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;mso-pagination:widow-orphan;font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";}The fall of some of the greatAmerican automakers has had a profound impact on many communities, as plant anddealership closings and lay-offs force many families into long unemploymentlines. But the impact of the Chrysler and GM bankruptcies does not stop there.If the current Chrysler bankruptcy plan is upheld and GM receives a similarplan, these companies' bankruptcies could hurt many more Americans for years tocome.Chrysler Insulated fromPre-Bankruptcy Injury ClaimsChrysler's Chapter 11 bankruptcyincluded a protection never included in a bankruptcy before: protection fromfuture personal injury claims by consumers who bought Chrysler vehicles beforethe company entered bankruptcy. This means that anyone who purchased a car fromthe company prior to the bankruptcy and who later is injured or killed by adefect in the vehicle will not be able to sue the company for damages for theinjury or wrongful death.How did this happen?During bankruptcy, Chrysler wassplit into two companies: the "old" Chrysler and the "new"Chrysler.The old Chrysler keeps all of thecompany's bad debts and liabilities, including any lawsuits filed against thecompany prior to the bankruptcy filing. The old company is also responsible forpaying out any personal injury judgments or settlements entered againstChrysler before the bankruptcy. Thus, personal injury victims become part ofthe long list of unsecured creditors who are owed money by the company, but whohave little chance of actually receiving it. Unsecured creditors are only paidif there are any funds left over after the secured creditors' debts have beensatisfied.The new Chrysler, on the other hand,emerges from the bankruptcy with the old company's assets, but none of itsdebt. However, this normally only includes the debt existing at the time ofbankruptcy and not any potential future debts or liabilities. In Chrysler'scase, the bankruptcy court determined it would be unfair to imposeresponsibility on the new company (which is owned in large part by Fiat and theUS and Canadian governments) for future personalinjury claims concerning vehicles purchased before it even existed.GM Seeking Similar Personal InjuryClaim ProtectionGM's current Chapter 11 filing isexpected to include a similar request for protection from personal injuryclaims on cars bought before the company entered bankruptcy. If the bankruptcycourt allows GM to do this - which it is likely to do - the impact could bedevastating for personal injury victims. While Chrysler is one of the smallestcar manufacturers in the country, GM is the largest, selling more than 2.9million vehicles in 2008. Allowing GM to shield itself from personal injurylawsuits could potentially silence thousands of Americans who have been hurt bythe company's products.Re-Victimizing the VictimsIt is patently unfair to consumersto give Chrysler and GM a free-pass on lawsuits for injuries caused by vehiclespurchased before the companies went into bankruptcy. The court's decisionleaves consumers with no means to recover their unpaid medical bills, lostwages and other expenses from the manufacturers, when they are hurt by defectiveauto parts or the defective design of their cars.It is even more unfair whenconsidering the fact that court had other options available to protectconsumers. For example, the bankruptcy court could have created a victimcompensation fund or another type of fund that could be used to pay outpersonal injury or wrongfuldeath claims against the automakers. A similar plan was used in theasbestos cases when the liable companies went bankrupt.The court also could have decidednot to allow the companies to skirt their responsibilities and made the newChrysler and GM companies liable for any claims arising out of vehiclespurchased before the bankruptcies. After all, both companies have agreed touphold the warranties on cars purchased before the bankruptcies, so why notalso guarantee the safety and workmanship of these vehicles? It seemscounterintuitive that the automakers are willing to replace defective parts,but they will not accept responsibility for any harm caused by these samedefective parts.At this point, it is unclear whethera company can shield itself from liability for a future claim that may or maynot happen. Some legal scholars and practicing attorneys are raising questionsabout whether it is a violation of a consumer's due process rights for thecourt to take away a person's future right to sue.Consumer protection groups,including the Center for Auto Safety and Consumers for Auto Reliability andSafety, plan to challenge the Chrysler bankruptcy judge's ruling on appeal.Until then, consumers who thought they were helping out American automakers bybuying their cars before they went into bankruptcy will be left with no legalprotections, rights or safeguards should they be injured by a defectively builtor designed GM or Chrysler vehicle. Article Tags: Personal Injury Claims, Vehicles Purchased Before, Personal Injury, Injury Claims, Bankruptcy Court, Vehicles Purchased, Purchased Before