Another day, another calamity for General Motors. The beleaguered manufacturer is now staring down the barrel of $10 billion in lawsuits from the disgruntled owners of vehicles affected by the ignition switch recall. Meanwhile, a board of judges will get together and figure out whether to combine the 79 individual lawsuits into one, big suit.

Most of the 79 suits allege that the ignition switch problem has lowered the resale value of the recalled vehicles, while some are arguing directly against GM's bankruptcy defense, claiming the company, as successor to Old GM, remains liable. One suit even alleges that Old GM committed "deceptive and unfair acts and omissions."

As we've reported previously, GM has asked the US Bankruptcy Court to invalidate suits relating to economic loss, citing the Old GM/New GM argument. This is in contrast to death and injury claims, which the company is in the process of negotiating.

There seems to be empirical evidence opposing claims of lost resale value. The Detroit News cites ALG, which discovered that used prices of Chevrolet Cobalts affected by the recall have only dipped $300 relative to the average vehicle in the class.

"Similar to Toyota's widespread 'unintended acceleration' recall from 2009, GM has seen short-term impacts to its resale values," ALG's vice president of editorial, Eric Lyman, said in a statement according to The News. "It's unlikely there will be any long-term effects, however, and ALG has no reason to forecast lower values than previously projected."

Meanwhile, GM is aiming to revamp its legal department in a bid to eradicate groups that may have delayed the recall internally. The company's general counsel, Michael Milikin, has hired a legal advisor to work with various department heads to streamline the process of reporting recalls or defects in order to prevent another ignition switch recall situation (we're guessing this is part of the push to "empower" employees to report problems). An internal investigation is also being conducted, the head of which, Anton Valukas, said will be handled without any "sacred cows."

Despite this proactive move, there still seem to be concerns that GM establishment types being blamed for keeping the ignition switch recall quiet will continue to thrive in Detroit. For example, Bloomberg points out that General Counsel Milikin has been with GM since 1977. The firm that's assisting with the recall's internal investigation, meanwhile, has been an ally of GM since the 1970s.

General Motors might be in the middle of a recall crisis, but safety advancements for new cars is still top of mind. In coordination with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration Click It or Ticket campaign, the automaker is announcing a new, optional Belt Assurance System on some of its fleet models for later this year.

The system ensures that both the driver and front passenger are wearing their seat belts by not letting the vehicle shift out of Park if it detects that they aren't buckled. GM spokesperson Jennifer Ecclestone tells Autoblog that the system uses the same sensor as the airbag to detect whether someone is in the seat. The vehicle can still turn on, just not drive.

The feature will be offered as an option in 2015 model year examples of the Chevrolet Cruze, Colorado, Silverado and GMC Sierra. However, this won't be a option that normal buyers will be able to order. "We are rolling it out with a small group of fleet customers first," said Ecclestone. The fleets will be able to spec the Belt Assurance System for no additional cost beginning in the third or fourth quarter of 2014. With a positive response, Ecclestone indicated GM could offer the technology more widely.

According to NHTSA, 87 percent of drivers already wear seat belts as of 2013, but they are still the best way to save lives in a car accident. Of course, we can totally see how this system could become a nuisance if the sensors malfunction.

Canadian government officials are trying to determine whether the Canadian unit of General Motors had delayed the recall of some cars, breaking the law in doing so, after the U.S. fined the parent company $35 million for its delayed response.

Transport Minister Lisa Raitt said in the wake of the U.S. move to fine General Motors for not recalling cars with faulty ignition switches as soon as it knew about the problem, she instructed her officials to get answers from GM Canada.

"Having seen what has developed in the United States I've gone back to my officials to go back to GM Canada and ask them when did they find out. Did they find out at the same time as GM in the U.S. told the world or did they know earlier than that?" Raitt told reporters on a conference call.

"I need to get that information and that answer from GM Canada before we move any further because, as you know, if they had that information and didn't put the recall in place, then they could be in violation of the Motor Vehicle Safety Act," she said.

GM Canada began its recalls in February with 235,855 vehicles affected by faulty ignition switches. It issued three more recalls this week for 181,500 vehicles for various reasons.

GM Canada was not immediately available to respond to Raitt's remarks.

In the United States, GM has issued an unprecedented 29 recall notices for a record number of vehicles this year.

The most high-profile recall was of cars with defective ignition switches, linked to at least 13 deaths. The problem was originally noticed by GM more than a decade ago, but the first recalls began only in February of this year, despite years of consumer complaints.

Even though it is clear GM as a company delayed its response, Raitt said it was important to determine separately when GM Canada knew before being able to take any action under Canadian law.

"In order for us to have a good case to prosecute under, it does matter when GM Canada knew," she said.

The struggle is on to decide where to hear the US district court cases relating to General Motors ignition switch recall. The automaker already paid a $35 million fine to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration over its poor handling of the situation, and it agreed to additional oversight by the regulator. However, it still has the civil cases to deal with.

The first step to dealing with them is consolidating the cases into a single court, and the US Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation in Chicago is deciding the location for that now. The two most likely sites are New York and Santa Ana, CA. According to Automotive News, GM's lawyers argue that the Manhattan court is the best place because it's near the bankruptcy court for Old GM. Attorneys for the plaintiffs don't think this matters and want the California court where the unintended acceleration cases from Toyota are being heard. A decision is expected within a week.

The judgment would only affect the economic loss claims against the company, but the question still looms how far these cases can go. While GM is reportedly facing $10 billion in lawsuits, a judge could decide it's a matter for the bankrupt Old GM and save the current business from paying for it.

There also continue to be claims of more deaths caused by the faulty switches, but so far there is no proof showing more than 13. According to Automotive News, one of the attorneys even alleges 60 fatalities related to the recall but so far without any verification. Acting NHTSA boss David Friedman believes there could be more as well. The death and bodily injury claims against GM are being negotiated separately.

After filing for bankruptcy five years ago, General Motors is now one of the most profitable companies in the world.

GM has earned a stunning $22.6 billion since the dark days of the financial crisis, when the automaker was bailed out by the U.S. government. Taxpayers didn't fare nearly as well. They'd lost $10.6 billion by the time the U.S. Treasury department closed the books on the $49.5 billion bailout in December.

GM (GM, Fortune 500), which filed for bankruptcy five years ago this Sunday, has repaid everything it was obligated to pay Treasury. Taxpayers came up short because the U.S. decided to buy GM stock to keep the automaker alive instead of giving it a loan and saddling it with more debt.

Although GM has been very profitable since 2009, its stock price never rose to a level that let Treasury to recoup that investment.

"Our goal was never to make a profit but to stabilize the auto industry," said one Treasury official on background the day it sold its final GM shares. "By any measure, we succeeded."

GM is now one of the 40 most profitable companies in the nation. It's more profitable than a third of the companies in the Dow, including Verizon (VZ, Fortune 500), American Express (AXP, Fortune 500), Boeing (BA, Fortune 500) and 3M (MMM, Fortune 500).

But the costs related to its controversial ignition switch recall essentially wiped out its profit in the first quarter of this year. GM estimates that repairs to the 15.8 million vehicles it's recalled this year will cost at least $1.7 billion. And that doesn't include any legal costs, fines or victim payouts that it will face.

GM has admitted that its employees knew of an ignition switch problem in millions of its cars about a decade before it ordered a recall in February of this year. The flaw has been tied to at least 13 deaths, though government safety regulators expect that death toll will rise once the investigation is complete.
Critics of the GM bailout say the deal should have been structured so that a portion of future profits would go to repay taxpayers.

"We're certainly glad they're making a profit now, but it would have been nice if there had been clawback provisions to make taxpayers whole," said Scott Hagerstrom, Michigan state director of the Americans for Prosperity, a public interest group opposed to government spending.

GM said that if it paid the Treasury more than it owed under terms of the rescue plan, the automakers' shareholders could sue.

Taxpayers also lost $1.3 billion on the bailout of Chrysler Group, but made money overall on the $700 billion in federal bailouts issued during the financial crisis.

GM's post-bankruptcy profitability is in stark contrast to the $100 billion it lost in the 4-1/2 years leading up to its filing. The bankruptcy helped it reach new labor agreements, and shed debt, non-productive factories and weak brands and dealerships.

"We will always be grateful for the second chance extended to us and we are doing our best to make the most of it," said then GM CEO Dan Akerson on the day the U.S. sold its