NIGEL PAGON, the chairman and chief executive officer of GM Challenger, has responded to a story about a motor vehicle dispute between his company and former television host Christine Hewitt.
The story was published in The Gleaner on May 19 headlined 'Motor vehicle dispute ends up in court'.
Mr. Pagon said: "Let the facts be known we have not, to date, received a summons to attend court and that Christine Hewitt's vehicle has not been diagnosed as having a 'defective brake'. Her claim that she 'applied the emergency brakes to the floor. After she removed her foot from the regular brakes the vehicle rolled for a good distance before stopping' tells that it was obvious that she had not engaged the vehicle in 'P' park, as no vehicle that is automatic will roll for a 'good distance' if engaged in the park position.
SERVICE
"Her claim of taking the vehicle to adjust her brakes on July 31, 2002 is false, as we have no records to support her claim. Miss Hewitt's first service was done on August 16, 2002, which included checking her brakes, oil and filter change. On September 23, 2002, having done 8,297 km or 4,998 miles, we did a performance of changing her rear disc pads, which is normal wear, having done almost 5000 miles. This performance is not covered under warranty, as changing a disc pad after 5,000 miles is not as a result of a defect, but normal wear from her driving.
"Miss Hewitt's claim that 'faulty brakes' caused her to be in an accident on December 12, 2002 is untrue. She brought the vehicle to us for estimates and repairs and stated that 'someone forced her off the road in very heavy rain and she lost control hitting another vehicle'.
"Now to the facts as it relates to this accident:
(1) She had no brake problem as her report to NEM Insurance made no reference to one.
(2) The repair cost of $490,000 was approved by NEM Insurance and their loss adjuster and to date, Miss Hewitt owes GM Challenger.
(3) Miss Hewitt is not in a position to speak about the brake at the time of the accident as she was not the driver at that point.
(4) Miss Hewitt requested that the vehicle be fixed within five days as she needed the vehicle to attend an event on January 17, 2003. Her vehicle was worked on up until 8:00 p.m. the night of the event, just to accommodate her; with the understanding that the vehicle would be returned to us to complete the job hence there were some electrical problems with her horn, indicator etc. as she stated.
(5) This accident has nothing to do with her faulty ignition switch.
"On most occasions that Miss Hewitt's vehicle is in our custody for service or repairs, she is given a 'complimentary' vehicle to preserve our goodwill.
"Prior to May 12, 2003, Ms. Hewitt complained about her vehicle losing power and lights appearing on her dashboard. This problem was happening intermittently and each time she took the vehicle to us we had difficulty probing the problem as the vehicle showed no problem with us."
