Spowers wrote:
Jeep runs fine 45K on the clock.
My letter was L.O.S.T., stolen, blew away in the wind...whatever.
I have been screwed to many times from "fix it" befor it breaks crap.
I'm with you here.... I definitely have not been in any big hurry to go rushing down to dealer to get this apparent turkey of a fix done. I was surprised that others couldn't get to their dealers fast enough for it.
About having "the dog ate my homework" issue with your notice - I'm not sure that there is anything to worry about. I remember reading another post where the guy called into DCX support and was initially told that if he did not get this work done then it would void his warranty. After further discussion and review, DCX came back and said that this was not the case after all. According to what this guy said in his post - DCX then stated that as long as the vehicle's warranty hadn't expired, the vehicle was still covered even if this F37 CSN had not been performed. Of course this is all second hand hearsay - so take it for what it's worth. I think this guy's post was somewhere in the original "New Customer Satisfaction Recall - F37" thread, if you want to go searching for it. Better yet, call DCX yourself and check it out.
I’m curious as to how DCX isn’t violating the warranty on this one. From a layman’s point of view - my theory on warranties is that when DCX, or any other company, affects a warranty repair - that repair work is required to return the vehicle back to original specifications. In other words - DCX can't go and only partially repair a warranted item and then try to call it good enough.
By DCX's own omission the repairs being done in this CSN, recall, or whatever you want to call it , isn't returning the vehicle back to it’s original specification. It seems to me that this is a violation of the warranty agreement right there. I could be wrong. Like I said it's a layman’s view on it. Any lawyer in the audience that could shed light on this theory?
DCX definitely sold a vehicle with specifications that now can’t be delivered. To me that sounds like fraud. There’s definitely similar cases out there where companies have tried to get away with this sort of thing and lost.