2002 Saab 9-5 Wagon Only 93k Miles Serviced And Ready For A New Owner on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Dealership refunds student for broken Saab with bags of pennies

Every so often, we come across the story of someone trying to "stick it to the man" by paying a parking fine or speeding ticket in pennies or dimes. Never, though, have we heard of a business stooping to such cliched lengths. Enter Florida. Irena Mujakovic bought a 2003 Saab way back in January from Holiday Motors, in Jacksonville, FL. Shortly after the purchase, the transmission started acting up. She returned to the dealer and paid for the repair, and purchased a warranty for future issues. Total cost: $300. But then the trans crapped out not long after the initial repair, and Mujakovic was back at Holiday Motors. This is where things start going south. This second trip cost Mujakovic $400, with her warranty in hand. That's because the man that runs the dealer, Ed Di Miranda, neglected to mention that the warranty didn't cover labor costs. "The warranty did not cover labor and I failed to write that in and that was her loophole," Di Miranda told First Coast News. The young college student filed a complaint with the Florida DMV, who sided with her and ordered Holiday Motors to refund the money. Di Miranda and the dealership did just that, but when Mujakovic came to collect her refund, it was to a bag of pennies, with a few dollar bills sprinkled in for good measure. Di Miranda, doesn't seem to think he's done anything wrong, claiming that only about $85 was in change, while the rest was paper money. "I am doing what DMV asked me to do," Di Miranda said. "It is legal tender." Mujakovic has not collected her refund. Have a look below for the video news report. This content is hosted by a third party. To view it, please update your privacy preferences. Manage Settings. News Source: First Coast News via Jalopnik Car Buying Government/Legal Car Buying Saab

GM denies Spyker claims in $3B Saab lawsuit

Reuters reports General Motors has dismissed claims by Spyker outlined in a $3 billion lawsuit. Spyker alleged GM deliberately bankrupted Saab by preventing a deal with Chinese investor Zhejiang Youngman Lotus. GM, meanwhile, filed a response with the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan saying that as the former owner of Saab, GM had the legal right to approve the deal with Youngman. But Spyker's lawsuit claimed GM's refusal to approve the deal with Youngman stemmed from the fact that the American automaker didn't want to create a competitor in China.
GM has said the issue stemmed more from the fact that it would stop licensing its technology to Saab or stop building vehicles for the manufacturer in the event it was bought by Youngman. Since Saab built its own platform that didn't use any GM tech, Spyker says that argument is meritless.
The lawsuit has Spyker seeking $3 billion in compensatory damages, though that number could swell with interest, punitive damages and legal fees, as well. Victor Muller, Spyker chief executive, has said the lawsuit is being funded by an anonymous third party. That party will share in any settlement. Youngman has refused to comment on whether or not it's footing the legal bill.

Saab owners NEVS denied creditor protection by Swedish court

The story of Saab is practically a Greek tragedy at this point. The quirky Swedish automaker that was once known as a pioneer of affordable turbocharging has been followed by years of news that just seemed to keep getting worse. At this point, maybe the brand name should be allowed to fade away into the ether and be remembered for the good times that it gave us.
Saab's latest predicament is that its parent National Electric Vehicle Sweden (or NEVS) has been denied protection from its creditors by the Swedish courts. According to Reuters, the judges called the business' financing plan "vague and completely undocumented." A company spokesperson told Reuters that it plans to appeal.
Seemingly in reaction to the court's decision, NEVS posted a press release on its website announcing that the company had applied "for a reorganization to create more time for the ongoing negotiations." The automaker continues to claim that it's negotiating with two global automakers to sell a portion of the company, possibly Mahindra, but the process is taking longer than it originally predicted. It seems a distinct possibility that this reorganization attempt is simply a way to buy extra time.