It is currently 25 Jun 2017, 21:06

GMAT Club Daily Prep

Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.

Customized
for You

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Events & Promotions

Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

In December of 1987 an automobile manufacturer pleaded no

Author Message
Manager
Joined: 15 Nov 2006
Posts: 218
Location: Ohio

Show Tags

10 Apr 2007, 15:34
00:00

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

42% (02:02) correct 58% (01:19) wrong based on 95 sessions

HideShow timer Statistics

374. In December of 1987 an automobile manufacturer pleaded no contest to criminal charges of odometer tampering and agreed to pay more than \$16 million in civil damages for cars that were test-driven with their odometers disconnected.
(A) cars that were test-driven with their odometers disconnected
(B) cars that it had test-driven with their disconnected odometers
(C) its cars having been test-driven with disconnected odometers
(D) having test-driven cars with their odometers disconnected
(E) having cars that were test-driven with disconnected odometers
VP
Joined: 03 Apr 2007
Posts: 1342

Show Tags

10 Apr 2007, 19:40
nitinneha wrote:
374. In December of 1987 an automobile manufacturer pleaded no contest to criminal charges of odometer tampering and agreed to pay more than \$16 million in civil damages for cars that were test-driven with their odometers disconnected.
(A) cars that were test-driven with their odometers disconnected
(B) cars that it had test-driven with their disconnected odometers
(C) its cars having been test-driven with disconnected odometers
(D) having test-driven cars with their odometers disconnected
(E) having cars that were test-driven with disconnected odometers

D
A,B,C,E->eliminated because damaged are paid for someaction/violation
Manager
Joined: 15 Nov 2006
Posts: 218
Location: Ohio

Show Tags

11 Apr 2007, 15:49
OA is D. Thanks guys
Intern
Joined: 28 Apr 2010
Posts: 1

Show Tags

23 May 2010, 11:14
hey guys

could you please explain what's wrong with E?
VP
Joined: 17 Feb 2010
Posts: 1491

Show Tags

25 May 2010, 10:26
E is wrong because it conveys that the automobile manufacturer was asked to pay damages for having cars....which is incorrect.

the manufacturer was not asked to pay damages for cars but for some action/violation (doing test driving on cars with their odometers disconnected)

(D) having test-driven cars with their odometers disconnected
(E) having cars that were test-driven with disconnected odometers
Manager
Joined: 20 Nov 2009
Posts: 166

Show Tags

22 Jul 2010, 08:51
The charges were for something (for having cars). If you say for cars, it doesn't relate that he has done something.
_________________

But there’s something in me that just keeps going on. I think it has something to do with tomorrow, that there is always one, and that everything can change when it comes.
http://aimingformba.blogspot.com

Manager
Joined: 20 Nov 2009
Posts: 166

Show Tags

22 Jul 2010, 11:18
cars that it had test-driven with their disconnected odometers. In this sentence we don't know if their refer to cars or manufacturers. Therefore, B should be eliminated.
_________________

But there’s something in me that just keeps going on. I think it has something to do with tomorrow, that there is always one, and that everything can change when it comes.
http://aimingformba.blogspot.com

SVP
Joined: 16 Jul 2009
Posts: 1512
Schools: CBS
WE 1: 4 years (Consulting)

Show Tags

16 Oct 2010, 07:51
aiming4mba wrote:
The charges were for something (for having cars). If you say for cars, it doesn't relate that he has done something.

But A does not say for cars...it says "for cars that were..." , so there is an action for which the charges were applied.

Could anybody explain a bit more whats wrong with A?
Thanks.
_________________

The sky is the limit
800 is the limit

GMAT Club Premium Membership - big benefits and savings

Manager
Joined: 24 Aug 2010
Posts: 189
Location: Finland
WE 1: 3.5 years international

Show Tags

16 Oct 2010, 08:56
gauravnagpal wrote:
seekmba wrote:
E is wrong because it conveys that the automobile manufacturer was asked to pay damages for having cars....which is incorrect.

the manufacturer was not asked to pay damages for cars but for some action/violation (doing test driving on cars with their odometers disconnected)

(D) having test-driven cars with their odometers disconnected
(E) having cars that were test-driven with disconnected odometers

why is B wrong!!

Another reason why B is wrong is because of meaning error.
You don't say "disconnected odometers" rather "odometers disconnected". There is a subtle but a clear difference between the two and to preserve the intended meaning of the author, we reject B. For the same reason, we reject E.
SVP
Joined: 16 Jul 2009
Posts: 1512
Schools: CBS
WE 1: 4 years (Consulting)

Show Tags

14 Nov 2010, 11:10
Nobody is going to clarify this?

noboru wrote:
aiming4mba wrote:
The charges were for something (for having cars). If you say for cars, it doesn't relate that he has done something.

But A does not say for cars...it says "for cars that were..." , so there is an action for which the charges were applied.

Could anybody explain a bit more whats wrong with A?
Thanks.

_________________

The sky is the limit
800 is the limit

GMAT Club Premium Membership - big benefits and savings

Senior Manager
Status: Can't give up
Joined: 20 Dec 2009
Posts: 311

Show Tags

14 Nov 2010, 22:25
noboru - http://www.beatthegmat.com/automobile-m ... ent=Boston

The best I can help. I went for A too..now looking around why it is wrong.
Now reading the sentence over and over again makes me feel that A changes the meaning of the sentence.

One guy has very well said, prep+noun+participle if a BIG NO in GMAT (We all know that by now), this is in A.
SVP
Joined: 16 Jul 2009
Posts: 1512
Schools: CBS
WE 1: 4 years (Consulting)

Show Tags

15 Nov 2010, 13:13
amma4u wrote:
noboru - http://www.beatthegmat.com/automobile-m ... ent=Boston

The best I can help. I went for A too..now looking around why it is wrong.
Now reading the sentence over and over again makes me feel that A changes the meaning of the sentence.

One guy has very well said, prep+noun+participle if a BIG NO in GMAT (We all know that by now), this is in A.

Thanks, but that doesnt solve my doubt.

Both A and D have "with their odometers disconnected", so why do you say that it is only wrong in A? and BTW, that would be "prep pron noun part", which is different from what you are stating.

The suposed explanation for choosing D rather than A is that you need an action for which the manufacter had to pay damages, and D says "for having cars bla bla bla" and that is an action. In A it says "for cars..." and that is not an action. However, my point is that A says "for cars that were bla bla bla" and that is also an action for which the manufacturer could have had to pay.

Can anybody clarify?
Thanks.
_________________

The sky is the limit
800 is the limit

GMAT Club Premium Membership - big benefits and savings

Intern
Joined: 18 Aug 2009
Posts: 41
Location: United States
Concentration: Finance, Entrepreneurship
GMAT 1: 740 Q49 V42
GPA: 3.29
WE: Engineering (Consulting)

Show Tags

15 Nov 2010, 16:42
noboru wrote:
amma4u wrote:
noboru - http://www.beatthegmat.com/automobile-m ... ent=Boston

The best I can help. I went for A too..now looking around why it is wrong.
Now reading the sentence over and over again makes me feel that A changes the meaning of the sentence.

One guy has very well said, prep+noun+participle if a BIG NO in GMAT (We all know that by now), this is in A.

Thanks, but that doesnt solve my doubt.

Both A and D have "with their odometers disconnected", so why do you say that it is only wrong in A? and BTW, that would be "prep pron noun part", which is different from what you are stating.

The suposed explanation for choosing D rather than A is that you need an action for which the manufacter had to pay damages, and D says "for having cars bla bla bla" and that is an action. In A it says "for cars..." and that is not an action. However, my point is that A says "for cars that were bla bla bla" and that is also an action for which the manufacturer could have had to pay.

Can anybody clarify?
Thanks.

noboru, I originally went for option A as well, but thinking about it a little more changed my thought. Option A is actually says "pay fines for cars with their..." whereas option D says "pay fines for having cars with their..."

Option A is ambiguous because it could seem like the manufacturer is paying a fine for civil damage for any car that was test driven with ....

I hope I'm clear
Manager
Joined: 16 Jul 2010
Posts: 148

Show Tags

16 Nov 2010, 04:02
noboru wrote:
amma4u wrote:
noboru - http://www.beatthegmat.com/automobile-m ... ent=Boston

The best I can help. I went for A too..now looking around why it is wrong.
Now reading the sentence over and over again makes me feel that A changes the meaning of the sentence.

One guy has very well said, prep+noun+participle if a BIG NO in GMAT (We all know that by now), this is in A.

Thanks, but that doesnt solve my doubt.

Both A and D have "with their odometers disconnected", so why do you say that it is only wrong in A? and BTW, that would be "prep pron noun part", which is different from what you are stating.

The suposed explanation for choosing D rather than A is that you need an action for which the manufacter had to pay damages, and D says "for having cars bla bla bla" and that is an action. In A it says "for cars..." and that is not an action. However, my point is that A says "for cars that were bla bla bla" and that is also an action for which the manufacturer could have had to pay.

Can anybody clarify?
Thanks.

You're right. You do need an action for which the manufacturer had to pay. So the answer is D.
Manager
Joined: 16 Jul 2010
Posts: 148

Show Tags

16 Nov 2010, 04:07
*The manufacturer was made to pay not for the cars but for driving the cars in an illegal manner.
SVP
Joined: 16 Jul 2009
Posts: 1512
Schools: CBS
WE 1: 4 years (Consulting)

Show Tags

17 Nov 2010, 13:50
Werewolf wrote:
*The manufacturer was made to pay not for the cars but for driving the cars in an illegal manner.

Of course the manufacturer was not made to pay for the cars, but for cars that were bla bla bla

I think that the point here is not that but that A can be interpreted as if those cars could be of OTHER MANUFACTURER!

Thoughts on that?
_________________

The sky is the limit
800 is the limit

GMAT Club Premium Membership - big benefits and savings

Manager
Joined: 16 Jul 2010
Posts: 148

Show Tags

17 Nov 2010, 20:47
noboru wrote:
Werewolf wrote:
*The manufacturer was made to pay not for the cars but for driving the cars in an illegal manner.

Of course the manufacturer was not made to pay for the cars, but for cars that were bla bla bla

I think that the point here is not that but that A can be interpreted as if those cars could be of OTHER MANUFACTURER!

Thoughts on that?

I'm lousy at explaining things but my point was that the manufacturer was being punished for performing the action of driving those cars in an illegal manner. A implies that the manufacturer was punished for some specific cars (cars that were test-driven with their odometers disconnected) and not for other cars.

I don't think ownership of the car is an issue here. Every answer choice fails to explicitly mention the owners of the cars except an obviously wrong choice C (its cars).
Manager
Joined: 26 Dec 2009
Posts: 136
Location: United Kingdom
Concentration: Strategy, Technology
GMAT 1: 500 Q45 V16
WE: Consulting (Computer Software)

Show Tags

30 Dec 2010, 14:09
I went with E. I think D changes the meaning of the actual sentence.
Manager
Joined: 19 Dec 2010
Posts: 137

Show Tags

01 Apr 2011, 03:14
D because it refers to what teh damages were paid for...correctly
Intern
Joined: 07 Nov 2011
Posts: 31

Show Tags

28 Dec 2011, 02:04
any forum moderator ...pls clarify the doubt ....what is wrong with a) ...???
Re: In December of 1987 an automobile manufacturer pleaded no   [#permalink] 28 Dec 2011, 02:04
Similar topics Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
1 The first National bank of Boston pleaded guilty in a 9 19 Jun 2009, 12:10
In December of 1987 an automobile manufacturer pleaded no 11 16 Apr 2008, 20:40
The financial crash of October 1987 demonstrated that the 3 16 Mar 2008, 10:35
4 The first National Bank of Boston pleaded guilty in a 3 10 Mar 2008, 04:54
In June of 1987, The Bridge of Trinquetaille, Vincent van 1 20 Jul 2007, 14:27
Display posts from previous: Sort by