AutoGuide News Blog
The AutoGuide News Blog is your source for breaking stories from the auto industry. Delivering news immediately, the AutoGuide Blog is constantly updated with the latest information, photos and video from manufacturers, auto shows, the aftermarket and professional racing.
The Saab soap-opera continues, but this week the news is good. Saab just won a court appeal to protect it from creditors while it awaits funding from its Chinese investors.
Earlier this year, two Chinese companies, Zhejiang Youngman Lotus Automobile Co. and Pang Da Automobile Trade Co. agreed to buy shares in Saab, totaling $334-million.
Considering Saab currently owes $207-million to its employees and creditors, so once the money is received, it can easily pay down its debt.
The lower-court had initially rejected protection to Saab, citing that it had done so once before in 2009-2010.
How long will it actually be before Saab’s 3600 employees and its creditors will get paid? That is dependent on how quickly its Chinese investors can pay their due.
For now, the court has given Saab some breathing room. Saab’s production line has sadly been at a standstill since April 2011. Let’s hope they can once again start making beautiful and wonderful cars like the original 92 (pictured).
[Source: Automotive News]
It was just yesterday when we reported that Saab was seeking government protection against bankruptcy, but now it seems like this step has failed.
A Swedish court has rejected a protection and voluntary reorganization plan, citing that it does not believe any steps the automaker makes will help it to recover.
Saab is “disappointed” with the ruling and is filing an appeal to overturn this decision. If the appeal is rejected also, this would very well be the end for Saab as an auto manufacturer. This would certainly be a very sad end for what was once a thriving company credited for making cars like the 900 Turbo (pictured).
The California Court of Appeal has ruled that drivers do not need to use their turn signals if no other car is nearby. A three-judge panel found that La Habra Police Officer Nick Wilson was in the wrong when he pulled over Paul David Carmona, Jr. after the accused made a right-hand turn without signaling in his Chevy.
The officer charged the driver with violating vehicle code 22107, which states a signal must be used when “any other vehicle may be affected by the movement”. The prosecutor argued that the driver actually violated a separate law, section 22108, which states, “Any signal of intention to turn right or left shall be given continuously during the last 100 feet traveled by the vehicle before turning”. However Justice Kathleen E. O’Leary found the officer was approaching from the opposite direction when the driver’s vehicle made a right-hand turn away from the officers vehicle, and as no other vehicles were present, there was no possible violation of section 22107.
It will be interesting to see how many preventable accidents begin occurring because of this ruling.
[Source: The Newspaper]