Bricklin to file a multi billion USD lawsuit against Chery
Since the Bricklin-Chery agreement broke down, Bricklin has been looking for something else to invest his money in.
Autoblog elaborates:
Back in 2004 serial automotive entrepreneur Malcolm Bricklin announced plans to collaborate with “rogue” Chinese automaker Chery Motors to bring new cars to the US market. Chery is referred to as “rogue” because the company never actually got permission from the Chinese government to get into the car business. Needless to say, the deal eventually fell apart when Chery decided to hook up first with Israel Corp and Quantum LLC for a different joint venture which has also yet to come to fruition.
Bricklin’s company, Visionary Vehicles, which is now know as V Cars LLC, has now filed a lawsuit against Chery, Israel Corp, and Quantum LLC, et al. The suit is being filed under RICO statutes, typically used to go after mobsters, and V Cars is hoping to pursue Chery for the potential profits the company feels it could have made over the course of the deal. How much? $14 billion.
V Cars claims they provided Chery with business plans and ideas (along with $26 million in up front investments) which they then used for their own business after abandoning the deal. During a conference call today, Bricklin explained that he wants to show Chery and other Chinese companies that if they are going to do business with western companies they need to deal ethically and follow the rules. V Cars is also seeking injunctions to prevent Chery from selling any vehicles based on these plans in North America. The complete text of the suit that has been filed in Federal District Court in Detroit can be read here (Warning: PDF download).
[Source: V Cars]
The Chery-Bricklin broke down, with Bricklin throwing around a few accusations, and then getting sued by a designer for monies unpaid. Perhaps there is just more money in lawsuits, than making cars these days.
Tweet This
Share on Facebook
Digg This
Save to delicious
Stumble it
RSS Feed
so if Malcolm wins the lawsuit, Chery’s S12, B14, B21, B22 and B23 won’t be allowed to sell in the US as the report said these are for the joint venture.
I was just reading through half of the text of the suit, but I already see that Chery is quite in the wrong here.
> so if Malcolm wins the lawsuit, Chery’s S12, B14, B21, B22 and B23 won’t be allowed to sell in the US as the report said these are for the joint venture.
S12 : Based on Matiz chassis and banned in the US and Europe.
B-series : Based on Magnus chassis and banned in the US and Europe.
The lawsuit details how these Daewoo designs were stolen and replicated by Chery.
> I was just reading through half of the text of the suit, but I already see that Chery is quite in the wrong here.
Yes, Chery committed grave sin.
Why did Malcolm designated the S12 and B series for the joint venture at the first place ?
plus I don’t think B23 is based on Magnus chassis.
only the Eastar, V4, B12, and B22 are based on the Magnus Chassis I believe.
> Why did Malcolm designated the S12 and B series for the joint venture at the first place ?
Malcolm did want to have the lowest priced car in USA.
> only the Eastar, V4, B12, and B22 are based on the Magnus Chassis I believe.
Code(Model Name)
S12(A1) : Stretched Matiz
B14(V5) : Magnus Wagon
B21(A7) : Reskinned Magnus sedan
B22(T3) : Reskinned Tigo(Toyota Chassis?)
B23(A6CC) : Magnus coupe
“Malcolm did want to have the lowest priced car in USA”
so Malcolm need to question his own business practice then, knowing that those models are banned by GM in North America and Europe and yet hes still wanted to sell them in the US.
IHC, Can you show proof of what you said about those models ? cos sometimes I cannot really take some people’s words seriously especially the one with a name loveutube77 on youtube. Thanks.
cos from the source that i got, it tells me something quite different.
ah but wasn’t Malcolm the one that terminate the contract ?
> ah but wasn’t Malcolm the one that terminate the contract ?
No, Chery did.
But hey this is what i also read from the text
Yugo was the most sucessful European import in the United States
Is this real ?
Well, Malcolm claimed the fastest selling new Euro brand. Which maybe true for the first year.
bricklin will not win…the general consensus is that agreemnet based on good-faith has no standing at common law
> bricklin will not win…the general consensus is that agreemnet based on good-faith has no standing at common law
Malcolm has described in detail how Chery pirated GM and VW cars in his lawsuit. GM will be happy to join in as a win verdict would ban Chery product in the US and Europe for a decade.
Bringing in VW, and GM is really irrelevant I think. Isn’t this lawsuit just about him losing his business deal, and obviously his joint venture with Chery had nothing to do with VW or GM. and plus GM already settled the problem with Chery and impose the ban of Chery QQ on sale in North America or Europe, so I don’t see why GM need to waste more money on lawsuit this time.
But based on Malcolm’s tone, I think he must be quite broke and frustrated now.
Do you know Bricklin, I don’t well not personally.. I have followed his many ventures, Both GM and VW could be brought in a as witness to how Chery does its business.
Note that GM sued Chery in China there was no way GM could win. Here on American turf Chery will learn a few things about the US Laws.
Chery settled with the designer for an undisclosed amount.
As for the designer suite, get the facts, Chery paid in a big way.
I don’t quite understand the last line of your post, what do you mean ?
Sorry Brain stall
> Bringing in VW, and GM is really irrelevant I think.
Malcolm is trying to equate himself to VW and GM. Malcolm documented in his lawsuit how Chery stole car designs from VW and GM by hiring away their former employees, and is claiming that Chery did the same to him by hiring away some of key Visionary Vehicle people.
> plus GM already settled the problem with Chery and impose the ban of Chery QQ on sale in North America or Europe, so I don’t see why GM need to waste more money on lawsuit this time.
To stop Magnus and Lacetti based Cherys from reaching the US and Europe.
Furthermore, I don’t think Chery’s honoring its agreement with GM. Matiz derivative A1 is on sale in Mexico under Dodge brand, a clear violation of the terms of the agreement.
The bottom line here is that chinese business tactics and attitudes do not work in the ‘west’. It will take a few hard knock wake up calls for many Chinese companies to loose their arrogance and ignorance before being succesful in the so called ‘west’.
Arrogance and ignorance are pretty much universal business values (pioneered in the West – particularly England) are they not?
Either way, what would probably happen is that the U.S. courts will find in favor of Bricklin. Unenforceable. Then he’ll sue in China. He’ll win. Chinese court will make the penalty something like 5,000rmb (usual payouts in foreigner vs. local practice) and Bricklin will have claimed a moral victory.
> what would probably happen is that the U.S. courts will find in favor of Bricklin. Unenforceable.
Of course it is enforcible. The moment any Chery manufactured vehicles land on US soil, they would be seized at the port and auctioned off to pay off the court judgement against Chery. In other word, Chery is banned from selling any vehicle in the US until they pay off the judgement.
In that case, good. Thanks for clarifying.
Personally, unless someone is willing it bring in an already high level vehicle with outstanding luxury, fuel efficiency, safety, and possible high tech alt fuel options, I don’t think any car should be allowed into a country (goes for China, too). No more cheap crap stuff like Yugo or early Hyundais. I think in this day and age, cheap should not be the only criteria to enter a market.
But with the US economy the way it is in now, I guess this may take care of itself?
As if anyone would award the douche 14 billion
Maybe Zimbabwe Dollars.
Indeed.
lol , look how motortrend blog describe this drama with its mockery
“Of course, the chances that Bricklin & Co. can get Chery into U.S. District Court in Eastern Michigan are about as good as Chery’s chances of entering the U.S. market anytime soon. Or as good as the chances that Elon Musk or Henrik Fisker will beat GM to market with plug-in hybrid sedans. (These two are starting to look like cut-rate Bricklins, aren’t they?) Watching Bricklin and his defendants from Chery would be at least as much fun as watching Musk’s Tesla v. Fisker. Malcolm Bricklin may have a 40-year record of seeing fledgling car companies fail, but you can always count on him to be entertaining.”