Abiggunz
Junior Member
- Joined
- Jun 24, 2022
- Posts
- 17
- Reaction score
- 13
- Location
- New Windsor N.Y.
- Ram Year
- 2019
- Engine
- 5.7 etorque
Just wanted to share a problem I'm having with my $64000 2019 Ram Limited 1500 etorque with only 35000 miles on it..This should have been a recall..but it cost me over $1400 because FCA dosent want to pay for their mistakes
Ramcares case number 83345637
To FCA please read..
/ Mfg communication number 23-016-21
Associated pdf from Ram: https://static.nhtsa.gov/odi/tsbs/2021/MC-10194060-9999.pdf
Water leak rear of cab rear seat or headliner
NHTSA ID numbers 10193998 and 10175683 / Mfg communication number S2023000024 Rev A
Associated pdf from Ram: https://static.nhtsa.gov/odi/tsbs/2021/MC-10193998-9999.pdf
There is a TSB for this issued 4/27/20. The case number is the same as the communication number. A recall will only be issued for safety concerns. A Technical Service Bulletin (TSB) will be issued for known problems which are not a safety concern. A TSB isn't required to be repaired, so many times they aren't checked or fixed unless the consumer, like me, reports the problem. Likewise, if not addressed during the warranty period, they are typically* up to me to fix and/or pay for. (* more on this below)
This is unlike a recall which will have safety implications and thus it must be repaired regardless of model year or mileage. This is why FCA sends things out in the mail urging us to have the vehicle inspected/repaired. This covers them against legal claims if the affected part fails and causes injury/death. But this DOES have safety issues! This is a 48 volt battery. Water and electricity together could cause multiple safety issues.There could be a short or electrical or computer failure.. Shutting the vehicle down while driving or worse yet starting a fire inside the cab of the truck..
FCA well knows it's a common problem and they've got a TSB on it However, they feel a leaking window/roof does not pose a safety concern so there isn't a recall for it.This absolutely IS a safety concern for all Etorque models!! There's a potential for the leak resulting from a manufacturer defect and they're actively repairing that very issue on my truck.
This defect is known to cause the rear seat area to accumulate water/moisture.This leak is a known issue, then shouldn't the etorque system be shielded from the potential risk of water exposure? That should not be on me I didn't alter the vehicle, drive through deep water, or somehow create damage to the covered part. It's a manufacturer defect plain and simple. It happens to be where the etorque battery is located. Water is obviously bad for electronics. Therefore the logical and reasonable person would conclude that the defect has cause the failure of the etorque system.
So what about that warranty. Obviously the leak is outside the 3 year/36K mile warranty. My truck was purchased in November or 2018. However a vehicle warranty guarantees (or "warrants") that the part is free from defects related to the manufacture or craftsmanship of the vehicle/part. In this case, a manufactured or assembly issue has caused water incursion and the subsequent failure of the part. I would argue that the etorque, which is still under warranty, failed due to a manufacture/craftsmanship defect. In which case it should be covered by the warranty on that part.
When I first reported this to the dealership it was a low voltage warning light that happened multiple times. They said maybe the problem was the 12 volt battery. I told them if that's what the problem is I'll pay for a new one. I was charged $341.73 for a new 12 volt battery plus a diagnostic fee. I brought it back with the same problem so I paid for a battery I didnt need..Then I was told of the real problem at hand..The dealership covered my parts under a goodwill policy but they charged me $1081.25 for the labor costs..And they made it seem like they were doing me a favor..I'm disabled and on a fixed income..The total price this problem cost me is a whole month of my disability income..To me that's an atrocity.......
THIS PROBLEM IS DANGEROUS!! It should be recalled and reengineered BEFORE a fatality or multiple fatalities occur!!
Please do the right thing and fix this problem and reimburse me the $1422.98 that this FCA mistake cost me.
Ramcares case number 83345637
To FCA please read..
/ Mfg communication number 23-016-21
Associated pdf from Ram: https://static.nhtsa.gov/odi/tsbs/2021/MC-10194060-9999.pdf
Water leak rear of cab rear seat or headliner
NHTSA ID numbers 10193998 and 10175683 / Mfg communication number S2023000024 Rev A
Associated pdf from Ram: https://static.nhtsa.gov/odi/tsbs/2021/MC-10193998-9999.pdf
There is a TSB for this issued 4/27/20. The case number is the same as the communication number. A recall will only be issued for safety concerns. A Technical Service Bulletin (TSB) will be issued for known problems which are not a safety concern. A TSB isn't required to be repaired, so many times they aren't checked or fixed unless the consumer, like me, reports the problem. Likewise, if not addressed during the warranty period, they are typically* up to me to fix and/or pay for. (* more on this below)
This is unlike a recall which will have safety implications and thus it must be repaired regardless of model year or mileage. This is why FCA sends things out in the mail urging us to have the vehicle inspected/repaired. This covers them against legal claims if the affected part fails and causes injury/death. But this DOES have safety issues! This is a 48 volt battery. Water and electricity together could cause multiple safety issues.There could be a short or electrical or computer failure.. Shutting the vehicle down while driving or worse yet starting a fire inside the cab of the truck..
FCA well knows it's a common problem and they've got a TSB on it However, they feel a leaking window/roof does not pose a safety concern so there isn't a recall for it.This absolutely IS a safety concern for all Etorque models!! There's a potential for the leak resulting from a manufacturer defect and they're actively repairing that very issue on my truck.
This defect is known to cause the rear seat area to accumulate water/moisture.This leak is a known issue, then shouldn't the etorque system be shielded from the potential risk of water exposure? That should not be on me I didn't alter the vehicle, drive through deep water, or somehow create damage to the covered part. It's a manufacturer defect plain and simple. It happens to be where the etorque battery is located. Water is obviously bad for electronics. Therefore the logical and reasonable person would conclude that the defect has cause the failure of the etorque system.
So what about that warranty. Obviously the leak is outside the 3 year/36K mile warranty. My truck was purchased in November or 2018. However a vehicle warranty guarantees (or "warrants") that the part is free from defects related to the manufacture or craftsmanship of the vehicle/part. In this case, a manufactured or assembly issue has caused water incursion and the subsequent failure of the part. I would argue that the etorque, which is still under warranty, failed due to a manufacture/craftsmanship defect. In which case it should be covered by the warranty on that part.
When I first reported this to the dealership it was a low voltage warning light that happened multiple times. They said maybe the problem was the 12 volt battery. I told them if that's what the problem is I'll pay for a new one. I was charged $341.73 for a new 12 volt battery plus a diagnostic fee. I brought it back with the same problem so I paid for a battery I didnt need..Then I was told of the real problem at hand..The dealership covered my parts under a goodwill policy but they charged me $1081.25 for the labor costs..And they made it seem like they were doing me a favor..I'm disabled and on a fixed income..The total price this problem cost me is a whole month of my disability income..To me that's an atrocity.......
THIS PROBLEM IS DANGEROUS!! It should be recalled and reengineered BEFORE a fatality or multiple fatalities occur!!
Please do the right thing and fix this problem and reimburse me the $1422.98 that this FCA mistake cost me.