5 yr 100k warranty a joke ??

[Tman]

Hey John, I'm sorry to hear about the issues with your rig... I would try to exhaust all possibilities working with Ram corporate to get your truck repaired under warranty. And if they refuse to repair it under warranty then I would take the truck back to dealership with keys in hand, and say here ya go, its your worry now, not mine! No way in hell would I pay 40k and then turn around and pay another 20-30k out of pocket to have an engine and misc components replaced. It's far better to be out 5k, with what you already have paid on the truck, then to be out 60-70k. Your credit will take a hit, but I would rather have that than my wallet taking that kind of hit...Hopefully, everything will work out and Ram with honor the warranty and fix your rig. But, I would definitely have a plan in place in case everything goes south... Good luck John.

Trevis

 

[Outdoors76]

Wait a minute. He buys the truck used from the dealer. It sounds like it is still under warranty. He has a warranty failure, and the selling dealer and warranty say,,,the prior history of this truck is now owned by the member. FBS. If the member maintained his required maintenance while he owned it, THEN THE DEALER OWNS THE PROBLEM. John if I understand this correctly,,my pov, it is time to go hard. Give Ramcare a chance to investigate, they are common sense and competent. But have a bull dog attorney ready.

x2

a dealer cannot sell you a truck that is unwarrantable, with a warranty then tell you later the warranty is not usable because they sold you a truck with a voided warranty with no way for you to have known this....

call a lawyer...

 

[Ramnewbie]

I'm no lawyer but the way I understand it is if the used vehicle is sold with just balance of factory warranty the dealership is not taking any responsibility for prior use. Now if it was CPO that would mean dealer would be on the hook because they supposedly verified that everything was up to ***** before it was resold. JMO.

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk

 

[mohemipar]

I'm no lawyer but the way I understand it is if the used vehicle is sold with just balance of factory warranty the dealership is not taking any responsibility for prior use. Now if it was CPO that would mean dealer would be on the hook because they supposedly verified that everything was up to ***** before it was resold. JMO.

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk

This is right. The thing is, the original warranty doesn't mean you are guaranteed a fix if it goes against the terms in the small print, regardless of what # owner you are. If they are saying the truck was damaged due to negligence of the first owner then that carried on to you as the second owner because you bought the truck. The factory warranty has the same terms it did when the truck was new. None of that changed just because the truck itself changed owners. Now disputing the dealerships diagnosis and cost of the service is a whole separate issue. Can't really go anywhere on this diagnosis though, since Chrysler came to this themselves. The situation definitely sucks for the OP, but you can still get boned by used vehicles even with a warranty.

 

[gears49]

Wait a minute. He buys the truck used from the dealer. It sounds like it is still under warranty. He has a warranty failure, and the selling dealer and warranty say,,,the prior history of this truck is now owned by the member. FBS. If the member maintained his required maintenance while he owned it, THEN THE DEALER OWNS THE PROBLEM. John if I understand this correctly,,my pov, it is time to go hard. Give Ramcare a chance to investigate, they are common sense and competent. But have a bull dog attorney ready.

It's unfortunate that this has happened but a warranty covers manufacturer's defects. It does not cover maintenance issues or lack thereof. This is why you need to keep meticulous records of every service/repair visit. As a service advisor, I know the manufacturer will pick everything you've done to the vehicle apart looking for an excuse to not provide warranty service. Minor things they might let slide, but something as costly as this, they will dissect the records. As a previous reader stated, seek an independent shop. They may be able to resolve the issue for a lot less money.

 

[SYKRAMMAN]

7 pages of responses and the op never replied so guess he’s good then!

 

[Hootbro]

7 pages of responses and the op never replied so guess he’s good then!

Guys like him are opinion shopping. Probably did not get the opinion that solves his woes.

I have found in my experience moderating a couple of other boards that about 50% of registered members will have less than 10 posts with most of those being 1 or 0 posts.

 

[KarnivoolFan]

You have my deepest sympathies. This also confirms my beliefs that I should buy a vehicle like this brand new.

 

[Random_Walk]

Every now and then in my job i run across homeowners mad because the home inspector didn't catch something that is now costing the new owner a lot of money, Some things are so invasive it can't be seen in a routine inspection. To the OP this is a nightmare scenario. Makes me wake up screaming in the middle of the night kind. I feel for him and hope his situation has a good outcome.

To be fair, at least in the homeowner's situation, he can sue the seller for damages and if it's within a year of the sale, pretty much win (depending on state laws, of course.)

 

[Random_Walk]

You have my deepest sympathies. This also confirms my beliefs that I should buy a vehicle like this brand new.

Depends. This is why (at least in recent years) I usually buy a used vehicle with less than 20k on the odometer.

That makes it old enough to have been broken-in, the bugs worked-out, and the worst of the depreciation curve over with... but it's still new enough to perform perfectly, and I ultimately get to control what does and doesn't get done on the thing over the majority of its lifetime.


I've bought vehicles with more than 100k on the odo before, but usually because 1) I was a young broke-ass, and 2) I knew I could generally repair the thing if needs be. (And no matter what, I almost always saved up the cash to do just that --or to buy another car/truck/jeep/whatever if needed-- as my budget permitted.)

Nowadays, with the tech and the insanely high cost of parts? Yeah, not really in the mood to do that anymore.

 

[Trail Ryder]

not sure but i dont think a credit report helps see a cars history

Sorry, I meant to state Experian AutoCheck, not Equifax.

 

[mtnrider]

7 pages of responses and the op never replied so guess he’s good then!

He finally replied (nothing useful) to this same exact thread on the Cummins forum. Think he got pissed off at some of the responses he got and disappeared after that. What ever. If you don't have the time to come back on and answer peoples questions I guess you really didn't need advise or help after all.

.

,

 

[four bye]

Warranty? 4000 miles in one year? Previous dealers performed the maintenance? Sounds like a job for a hungry lawyer. I worked for dealerships for 37 years, and I see the games still continue. Advise... Let the bank what you're up against, and do not remove the vehicle from the dealership you purchased it from.

 

[huntergreen]

Warranty? 4000 miles in one year? Previous dealers performed the maintenance? Sounds like a job for a hungry lawyer. I worked for dealerships for 37 years, and I see the games still continue. Advise... Let the bank what you're up against, and do not remove the vehicle from the dealership you purchased it from.

Great advice, never thought about informing the Lean holder. They will have a nice legal team to protect their investment.

 

[huntergreen]

Great advice, never thought about informing the Lean holder. They will have a nice legal team to protect their investment.

Now if the op would come back, he would be able to use this advice.

 

[Hootbro]

The bank note money owed and getting warranty service are two different legal worlds even if your loan is through Chrysler Credit. You cannot leverage one against the other.

 

[Fitz-0518]

That is true , as stated. However "Holder in do Course" says the financial institution can not enforce payment when the product financed is not as represented or warrantied. Borrower must notice the lender of the dispute, with the seller of the product. One other way this law protects consumers. If the product causes damage or harm to the borrower the lender (holder of the contract) can be named as a defendant. Buyers of contracts have in their financing agreement with the seller/dealer a repurchase agreement. When the lender investigates the notice from the borrower and determines that the borrower has a claim, seller must repurchase immediately.

 

[mtofell]

I don't know why everyone has their panties in a bunch about the OP not coming back. This is a great thread and a topic I never thought about or realized could occur. Lots of great info from experienced folks. I started out thinking OP has a great case. Now, not so sure. Even with fine print if OP is willing spend enough money he will get something from FCA. If OP files a suit for 200K claiming loss of use, fraud, and a whole bunch of other things the manufacturer will eventually be willing to at least split the repair. I'm not saying it's right but it's the way things work with lawsuits. In my industry I routinely see suits filed for 500K, insurance company thinks they are getting off easy by settling for 50K. Whether or not there is any basis for the suit is somewhat irrelevant. Again, I'm not saying I like or agree with. It's just the way the legal world works.

 

[baum]

I agree the OP is not coming back. he is just bashing...

Not to mention he never stated it was a CPO. Who knows what dealer he got it at. yes its being serviced at a chrysler dealer now.

 

[markusaf81]

I don't know why everyone has their panties in a bunch about the OP not coming back. This is a great thread and a topic I never thought about or realized could occur. Lots of great info from experienced folks. I started out thinking OP has a great case. Now, not so sure. Even with fine print if OP is willing spend enough money he will get something from FCA. If OP files a suit for 200K claiming loss of use, fraud, and a whole bunch of other things the manufacturer will eventually be willing to at least split the repair. I'm not saying it's right but it's the way things work with lawsuits. In my industry I routinely see suits filed for 500K, insurance company thinks they are getting off easy by settling for 50K. Whether or not there is any basis for the suit is somewhat irrelevant. Again, I'm not saying I like or agree with. It's just the way the legal world works.

I would like an update, but my panties remain unbunched, lol.