Brand

Actually you accepted all risk and responsibility when you chose to drive with a none latched my door.

Why do you care what percent of doors are affected? It wouldn't change anything.

Lenn

I mentioned that I don't disagree with anyone that the locks are a pain and should be handled. I also think with something as common as this, the dealership should just fix it whether or not the vehicle is displaying the symptoms at the time of visit. I simply offered info from their standpoint, which I also outlined. Dealerships and manufacturers would lose their asses if they just went ahead and performed every TSB on every vehicle "just because".

There are three mindsets involved in every situation with a warranty concern. The customers "emotional" standpoint, the manufacturers "financial" standpoint, and the dealerships "prescribed" direction (as outlined by the manufacturer).

Kantuckid

iTrader: (1)

Actually, I don't care, again, that's what "I" said?
hello...

I, honestly speaking, fail to understand the need to replicate a door latch issue, that must be frozen in order to secure a supposed fix. there's a certain reality involved herein that makes it silly to suggest that the customer has responsibility to make that situation reappear, given that it's occurred often enough to make for a TSB, even if some here feel the % is too small for Ford to take it very seriously.
I'm not bothered that contributors exercise their knowledge of the vehicle industry here unless the attempt is toward making me out to be foolish for wanting a fix or insinuating that I'm out to bankrupt the mfg. over a mysterious problem that's gone bye bye for the day.
I didn't arrive at a dealer pissed and hell bent on a repair, I'm both a reasonable person and knowledgeable about vehicle repairs (beyond the average customer by far) and the business as a whole.
Lots of taking sides and how the dealerships can't do this or that w/o them or Ford going broke, or your dumb for driving when it happens, etc. have taken place in this thread.
I should have stayed in the larger thread that was primarily others who had experienced the problem.

skeksis

I suppose the customer can only be emotional and not be rational with actual experiences that the manufacturer and dealer don't know and are ignoring?

And you forgot the fourth mindset, the "gotta keep my sponsors happy" standpoint.

I also love the doublespeak, that there's only a small number of vehicles that experience the issue, and it's easy enough to fix that an owner can DIY, but Ford will go bankrupt if it has to fix them all.

Oh, and the failed understanding of money, that's also great. If forecast expenses are built into the price, that means those expenses can be incurred without a net loss on the transaction. So no, using "buffer" money does not mean a loss, as profit was already baked in with that buffer being consumed. To look at it any other way would be to ignore reality and basically discourage any profit seeking activity outside of a vacuum. Only once the costs exceed the revenues would losses occur.

Lenn

I assume you are referring to me or this site when you talk about "sponsors". Please, enlighten us about what you think. I'll then politely inform you of how (if my assumption is correct) you are mistaken.

As for the consumer, rationale is emotion. How is my statement incorrect? Rational thoughts are normally tied to desire. If you want something to happen, you'll rationalize it to fit your agenda.

Look, I spent a decade in the auto dealer business. I've spent nearly a decade on this forum and nearly 8 years running it. I've seen countless accounts of customers wanting something that dealer/manufacturer protocol just won't allow. Some dealers bite the bullet and satisfy the customers demands even if they don't fit their prescribed course of action. Don't mistake that as they're *required* to satisfy the customers demands. If I were in this situation, I'd want the exact same thing as the OP and most people. "Just fix it, you know it's a problem, so address it." I'm also not naive and know that the dealer has certain requirements to meet before a warranty claim will be paid. Either meet those requirements- in this case, verify the complaint, or risk Ford not paying the dealership for the repair and thus, the dealer takes it on the nose. Extrapolate that over the thousands of trucks that could experience this problem, you begin to see the cost involved with customer appeasement without verification.

Martian

Keeping the sponsors happy is the least of our worries, at least in our case (the forum). The contrary is true - the SPONSORS have to keep our USERS happy, or they get the boot.

skeksis

Your statement is incorrect because that is not what those words mean. Rationale is not just an emotional basis, it is an underlying reason, either logical or emotional. Rational and rationale are not interchangeable. There is Nobel winning research on decision theory differentiating rational and emotional criteria for choices.

In classical economics, the underlying assumption was that choices were made on a rational basis, but we know that is not true. Universally. It is disingenuous to suggest that the customer is emotional and the dealer & manufacturer are not. The very suggestion that a disproportionate number of service requests would be from customers who are not actually experiencing the problem is supposition based on emotional and irrational thoughts and suspicions applied to an entire population with no justification. The heuristics developed in implementing the approval system is based on the same. This is not a comparison of ranting low information customers and a system of machine precision with perfect knowledge of underlying factors. This is an interaction among people who fundamentally do not want to accept blame or pay costs. There is justification used on all sides to avoid negative association. Customers, dealers, and manufacturers all want to be correct.

I see no reason to state that customers are actively trying to waste time & money on unnecessary services, or that dealerships are universally trying to short change customers. But, the truth lies in the middle, where the story of a single individual can be believed or rejected, hopefully based in something greater than ingrained bias, and the actions of the dealer or manufacturer can be seen as good or bad, from the perspectives of engineering, service after the sale, r&d, and responsible management of capital and intangible marquee value for future growth prospects.

The purpose of a business is not customer service, it is to generate profits. It just so happens that in customer facing operations in a competitive market, customer service is key to profitability. But not all customers have to be satisfied in order to grow & remain profitable. If I were writing a formal analysis in this dealer, as I do full time, I would do open source research on overall customer satisfaction or formal complaints taken to professional organizations, but I wouldn't care about individual complaints. But, I'm not on the clock in this thread. I'm not in any position to care about the profits earned on components of known issue. I am not going to bother to defend a business when it does no consumer any service. They can make it right to begin with, or they can make it right after the fact. I find reasoning and excuses to not make it right purely untenable. Fix it if there is a problem. If it costs you money to do so, then use that as motivation to avoid the problem to begin with moving forward. As a consumer, why in any way apologize for shortcomings in your purchase? Was earning the money for that purchase just that easy? Are the opportunity costs of what you could have done with that money instead just that low?

Brand

No, that is not what you said. The words you used were some risk and not all all risk. Below is what you said.

I don't see how Ford can be held liable if you knowingly choose operate your vehicle in an unsafe manor with doors that will not latch. While that is a huge inconvenience it is not a safety issue that would rise to a recall.

Phyer Phyter

TSB = Technical Service Bulletin. It is not an automatic warranty or hidden warranty. TSB's will specify certain vehicles and models. Parameters could be built at a certain plant, a specific trim level, a specific production date window and so on. It is not a safety recall issue. All a TSB is a diagnosis that was determined where other vehicles may exhibit the same condition. It is an aid to help a technician to diagnose an issue quicker and lays out the steps required to rectify the issue. Even tho' your vehicle may fall with in the parameters that the TSB applies to does not mean your vehicle will experience the condition the TSB addresses or that it should automatically get that TSB correction. The condition needs to be verified. Just the same as if you go to the Dr for a stomach ache and you swear its appendicitis and demand the Dr take out your appendix. Oops - its not your appendix - you were just severly constipated.

There are 3 Dealership levels. (There was when I pulled wrenches).
One level can perform warranty work with out prior authorization. May need to keep certain parts for spot auditing to ensure dealership is performing legitimately needed warranty work.

Another level is where the Dealerships is required to get pre-authorization if warranty work is over a specific $$ amount. Again may have to keep certain parts for a specified length of time for spot auditing.

3rd level is that a dealership must get prior authorization on any warranty repair and keep all parts for verification.

Corp may ask for the parts to be returned to determine the cause of the issue and whether a product needs to be updated or amended to prevent future issues. When Dodge 1st came out with the Getrag transmissions in the diesel trucks they needed the tech to confirm the condition and then crate the transimission and send back to corp so the engineers could determine the issue and do an engineering correction. Future transmissions would come from the factory with that engineering change. Afterwards techs could do the repairs at the dealership level once the engineers were satisfied the condition was effectively corrected.

Dealerships over time may move from one level to another and back. Corporate tracks warranty repairs by dealerships and regions. Florida would likely see very few frozen door locks while Wisconsin dealers could see quite a few. One dealer might be high on a certain claim and do lots of one specific repair where others don't. THey will look into why that is. I remember in the '90's Dodge 2.2 and 2.5L engines were prone to head gasket leaks. I know one dealership that tried claiming head gasket jobs on every 2.2/2.5L engine that came in their shop. Chrysler put a stop to that pretty quickly. If it could be demonstrated that the vehicle needed it then sure, it was done. Not just because it fit the parameters of the TSB.

The TSB is not a lifetime warranty. When you bought your vechicle the mfgr contracted with you to provide a warranty that covers specific components for a specified period, mileage or time - which ever occurs 1st. If your vehicle has lasted the warranty period with out needing a specific TSB they have fulfilled their obilgation to you regarding the warranty offered and accepted.

Martian