[luvzforplay]

I own a 2011 Camaro SS and have always had a problem backing up because of extremely limited vision rear ward, I found out that in 2012 they finally figured the solution was installing a rerar view camera in every 2012 Camaro and later, I feel the 2010 and 2011 Camaros should be recalled to have the cameras installed because of a defective design flaw !

[JudyKayTee]

Find a number of people in the same situation, retain counsel to represent all of you and sue.

[Curlyben]

Really, so what about all those Italian super cars that you cannot see out of the rear of even trucks..
Possibly a design flaw but very doubtful actually actionable as there is no legal requirement to see out of the rear of the vehicle.

[ScottGem]

First, back cameras are a fairly new technology, and will be rarely found in any 2010-2011 model year. Second, I doubt if you will find enough people to make a class, and even if you did I doubt if you would win.

The first thing I would do is determine how many Camaros in those years were involved in rear end collisions while backing up. That will give you an indication of whether this is a dangerous flaw.

[ebaines]

This case would go nowhere.

Recalls are made for manufacturing or design defects, but lack of a rear view camera doesn't qualify. Unless you can show that the 2011 Camaro is in violation of government standards in effect in 2011 or common industry practice you don't have a case. Similar to how if you owned a 1980's car without air bags or ABS - the manufacturer is not obligated to retroactively apply all feature and safety improvements for owners of previous models of cars. The limited rear visibility is obviously something you were well aware of when you bought the car (or certainly should have been aware), so caveat emptor.

[luvzforplay]

Really, so what about all those Italian super cars that you cannot see out of the rear of even trucks..
Possibly a design flaw but very doubtful actually actionable as there is no legal requirement to see out of the rear of the vehicle.

That's all well an good till you back over an old person trying to back out of a parking space cause you can't see them..

[ebaines]

That's all well an good till you back over an old person trying to back out of a parking space cause you can't see them..

Are you suggesting that all pick up trucks, cargo vans, and low slung sports cars with poor rear visibility should all be banned? All these vehicles come with innovative technology called "mirrors" on both sides of the vehicle, and it's up to the operator to learn how to use them properly.

By the way, you can purchase an after-market kit with a rear view camera and display screen. You may want to look into it.

[ScottGem]

That's all well an good till you back over an old person trying to back out of a parking space cause you can't see them..

Again, do you have any proof that this is prevalent with this vehicle? Has it ever even com close to happening to you? Have you tried getting a panoramic rear view mirror?

ebaines is right, this doesn't not meet the test of a design flaw, since it met the standards at the time.

If you want a backup camera for your ease of mind, then put one in. Or just a backup alarm, or the cheapest is an panoramic mirror. Don't waste your time, trying to assemble a class to try and get something for nothing.

[JudyKayTee]

- and that's why you advertise and find other people, contact an Attorney for facts/figures and he sees if it's a viable claim.

And, of course, the only person who "makes any money" is the Attorney!

[luvzforplay]

First, back cameras are a fairly new technology, and will be rarely found in any 2010-2011 model year. Second, I doubt if you will find enough people to make a class, and even if you did I doubt if you would win.

The first thing I would do is determine how many Camaros in those years were involved in rear end collisions while backing up. That will give you an indication of whether this is a dangerous flaw.

Well a friend bought a 2012 and it has a camera , I asked him if it was an option , and he said the sales manager told him that GM finally realized that people could not see behind them to back up so the cameras are standard in 2012 and later Camaro's seems to me that should be like an admition the screwed the pooch on the design of these cars..

[luvzforplay]

Again, do you have any proof that this is prevalent with this vehicle? Has it ever even com close to happening to you? Have you tried getting a panoramic rear view mirror?

ebaines is right, this doesn't not meet the test of a design flaw, since it met the standards at the time.

If you want a backup camera for your ease of mind, then put one in. Or just a backup alarm, or the cheapest is an panoramic mirror. Don't waste your time, trying to assemble a class to try and get something for nothing.

Well I wouldn't exactly think it is something for nothing , I paid 37,500.00 for my CamaroSS and have 4 to 5 inches of vision room looking out the back window, If you try looking out the side mirrors the rear fender are high and rounded effectively blocking off you vision so that unless someone is at least 5 foot behind the car you cannot see them , plus the back up sensors only seem to work if the object you are approaching isn't moving..

[JudyKayTee]

An investigator (or researcher) will pull accident reports, determine how many were caused by the problem you describe, determine whether the changes in design were due to this reported "flaw" or something else (such as accessories which are now common), see if there is a legal action.

Did you test drive before you bought? You aren't going to like this, but you have a responsibility to guarantee your own safety.

And I've test driven every Camaro since 2009 - I think they all are flawed in some aspect or another, and certainly there are lawsuits over the various problems.

[ebaines]

...plus the back up sensors only seem to work if the object you are approaching isn't moving ..

Since it has back-up sensors that eliminates any possibility of suing over the issue of not providing a camera. However, if you can show that the back-up sensor is faulty - that it doesn't sense moving objects - then maybe you have a case.

[ScottGem]

First, if you could get that dealer to repeat what he said under oath (highly unlikely) or get some internal memo from GM that admits it, you might have a case.

Again, backup cameras are new technology. The inclusion of a lot more electronics in newer model years makes a backup camera more viable.

But you do what Judy suggested. You find out whether this issue has caused accidents before. Then you get other Camaro owners to agree to a class action.

The bottom line though is YOU have the responsibility to safely backup. If you don't exercise due caution when backing up then you will be at fault.

[luvzforplay]

This case would go nowhere.

Recalls are made for manufacturing or design defects, but lack of a rear view camera doesn't qualify. Unless you can show that the 2011 Camaro is in violation of government standards in effect in 2011 or common industry practice you don't have a case. Similar to how if you owned a 1980's car without air bags or ABS - the manufacturer is not obligated to retroactively apply all feature and safety improvements for owners of previous models of cars. The limited rear visibility is obviously something you were well aware of when you bought the car (or certainly should have been aware), so caveat emptor.

Well when you go for a test drive they never have you back up unless there is absolutely nothing behind you , My girlfriend don't like driving my car and neither do my daughter or granddaughter and they both love fast cars, which this thing is ! My sales man said it is a little vision restrictive but don't worry you have back up sensors, but he didn't say they only start beeping if there is something stationary behind you.. But the fact that they are now installing them as standard equipment should mean something , GM doesn't give away anything unless there is a reason for it .

[JudyKayTee]

I've driven sports cars, particularly two seaters, and have had a couple of Camaras in my lifetime. They are, as you know, a different breed.

I currently have a Corvette. No one had to tell me to try driving in reverse. It's something I do when I test drive a car.

How does your girlfriend's preference enter the test drive?

I do know that that model is listed as a lemon - have you "googled" it?

[odinn7]

First, if you could get that dealer to repeat what he said under oath (highly unlikely) or get some internal memo from GM that admits it, you might have a case.

I agree with most everything you say but I doubt that what one dealer has to say about his theory on this would make a difference. I have worked for and with dealers before (still do) and their opinions are usually just that. I am sure that GM didn't call him and tell him they realized there was a problem and they took care of it. Dealers, for the most part, are just as in the dark about why the companies do what they do as the general public is. This dealer in court (as you said, if you could even get him to admit saying it) would be worthless.

To the OP: I doubt that this whole class action thing would go anywhere. The window is hard to see out of... it's not like the brakes are failing or the engine is doing something... You drove the car, you agreed to buy it as it was... now you don't like the visibility. Live and learn. Sell the car.

[luvzforplay]

I guess it is just that most people that don't appreciate muscle cars don't like driving the car because sooner or later you will have to back up . I drove tractor trailers for 10 years, both tankers and freight boxes, those mirrors work great because there is nothing designed on the tractor or tanks or trailers that obstruct your vision , I had several vets too including a 63 split window which was a bear to back up , but alas I was younger and my body moved a heck of a lot better then it does now , Which may be a big part of the problem. I used to drive a B/MP at PID before they started that ET stuff which made drag racing kind of lame !