Classic car collectors have always found a way to keep vehicles going.  The
EV1 will be no different.  There are a number of AC drives out there.  I'm
sure that the ones they use are somewhat off the shelf in that a compatible
motor/ controller combo could be found. It might even work better.  Worst
case a motor/controller replacement.   Lawrence Rhodes....
----- Original Message -----
From: "1sclunn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, October 07, 2002 12:25 AM
Subject: Re: Keeping your EV-1 legally, or not


> nobody has said anything about who's going to fix this car when it brakes.
> If you do find some way of keeping it, who would know how to fix it if
> something brakes. It doesn't sound like the type you can just figure out
as
> you go along.  Without the company's support/help when it stops working
who
> will fix it?
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Adam Kuehn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 7:55 AM
> Subject: Re: Keeping your EV-1 legally, or not
>
>
> > >  >Civil disobedience (and I have no problem calling this act by that
> > >>name, since the goal is most definitely civic-minded)
> > >
> > >I wonder what the exact mechanics would be, because I think repo men
> would be
> > >dispatched immediately by GM.
> >
> > Well, as long as you are volunteering to break the law, you could
> > just do as Vince suggested and hide the car while offering to buy it.
> > That's theft, but the assumption is that you feel strongly enough
> > that the consequences are worth it.  Of course, you wouldn't want to
> > involve anyone else in your hiding scheme, unless they, too, were
> > prepared for the consequences as a co-conspirator.
> >
> > If you hide the car well enough, you may not even go to jail, as a
> > court could side with you and order GM to accept payment, and then
> > simply impose the same punishment on you as on any other first-time
> > thief.  That would require good lawyering, and certainly isn't an
> > outcome you could rely on, but it is one distinct possibility.  You'd
> > definitely need real commitment to the cause to even try it, though
> >
> > David's "tie yourself to the car" approach could also work pretty
> > well, as this would likely result in a couple of nights in jail and a
> > relatively minor fine.  The publicity would be shorter-lived than a
> > prolonged court battle, but the downside is much easier to take.
> >
> > Anyone who would consider this should be aware that an attorney will
> > be restricted in how he or she can advise you, as an attorney cannot
> > actively assist in law-breaking.  An attorney can only tell you in a
> > hypothetical way what the possibilities might be and what the law is,
> > and then formally advise you not to engage in law-breaking behavior.
> > A truly ethical attorney who issued the hypothetical advice would
> > probably not want to take you on as a defendant, so as to remain
> > distant from the implication that he or she was a co-conspirator.
> >
> > >I wonder also if any consumer-rights organization would say that some
> would-be
> > >EV1 leasors were defrauded if GM deliberately delayed or prevented
> delivery of
> > >the vehicle?
> >
> > There is very likely no cause of action here, as there is no contract
> > or other enforceable relationship between the parties.  If GM were
> > very formalistic about the way in which it accepted people onto its
> > wait list and gave them some assurances that they were operating
> > entirely on a first-come, first-served basis, there might be
> > something.  Everything I've heard, though, is that GM did what it
> > could to duck even having a waiting list (quite possibly for this
> > very reason).  Where waiting lists were formed, they were very
> > informal.  The presumption is that GM can sell to whomever it wants,
> > whenever it wants, with some very carefully-carved exceptions (such
> > as race-based preferences).  I very much doubt that there would be
> > anything here that would fall into such an exception or could be seen
> > as creating any enforceable obligation on the part of GM.
> >
> > As for deliberately wasting people's time, the key word there is
> > "deliberate".  You would have to prove that GM acted purposefully
> > with the full intention of causing harm.  It's just not going to
> > happen.  There's a lot of crummy stuff in life that we just have to
> > put up with.  This is one of them.
> >
> > --
> >
> > -Adam Kuehn
> >
> >
>

Reply via email to