Shaun,
Im sure that was a well thought out, and very well put together piece
of informative legal work. However, you lost my interest at...
Misrepresentation occurs when a product is presented, displayed, or
propounded
> to have abilities it doesn't. The Misrepresentation occurred at the
> Dealership and Manufacturer levels. DC showed in ads, in it's manuals and....... Mind you, its not that I don't care. I truly do. But, I guess I just don't care quite as much about it as that! I just bought a new exhuast system, headers back. 3"! Nice system. Paid decent money, well, all money is decent and respectable around my house but you get the point. I'm not happy with it. I thought about going back and demanding retribution. Nah, really, why? To get another muffler? Ahh, I know, big difference. And your right. But the point is, the people that intend to do all that towing aren't really that many. I know, it's not fair. But.. Besides, if you really want to tow with it, what's stoppin ya? Do many people really plan on keeping it long term? You can still tow a jet ski or maybe two! Thats within the limits! Im sure if you tow your car to the track 5 or 6 times a year its not gonna kill it. Just my opinion, please no flames, the suit isnt on. =0)
Eric
Shaun.Hendricks@bergenbrunswig.com wrote:
>
> Well, it really doesn't matter who didn't tell whom. It doesn't matter
> what "disclaimers" DC puts in their manuals/brochures (they aren't worth thier
> legal weight in ink: especially if it's in fine print). Simple legal fact:
> Misrepresentation occurs when a product is presented, displayed, or propounded
> to have abilities it doesn't. The Misrepresentation occurred at the
> Dealership and Manufacturer levels. DC showed in ads, in it's manuals and
> perpetuated the information by supplying FACTORY tow hitches rated at the
> standard Dakota's towing ability. The Dealerships are protected from
> prosecution because they were only supplying the customers with the
> information from the manufacturers. Therefore the manufacturer is totally at
> fault for this.
> Nearly every state in the US supports Misrepresentation suits or a variant
> thereof. The Engineering reasons for the problem are irrelevant to the
> Misrepresentation itself. It may have bearing on what possible solutions the
> court may allow the claimants to follow, but DC is guilty of Misrepresentation
> in a clear cut and dry fashion. A decent law firm could get good compensation
> to R/T owners on this. It's not enough to say "OOPS! Sorry" and brush it
> under the rug. DC needs to offer R/T owners some options:
>
> #1 Buy Back the Truck
> #2 Pay R/T owners for the loss of resale value
> Pay owners for the cost of a hitch (if purchased with truck)
> #3 Roll the owners into another truck of choice (making a fair deal)
> #4 Fix the problem and generate a recall for the trucks to be fixed
>
> #4 may not be workable due to engineering reasons (Though air bags should
> solve any frame/flex problems, or bolting on an additional support plate), but
> by all means, the first 3 are what DC should've offered R/T owners, not just
> the hitch cost. It's just bad karma on DC's part and reeks of some bean
> counters solution to a big problem. I don't own an R/T (almost bought one but
> they only had RC's back then) so it's not really my fight, but I don't want
> R/T owners to think they have to accept what BS DC is handing out. There is
> another way and if I did own an R/T I'd have called an attorney long ago...
>
> Shaun H.
>
> ---original message---
> Hi. This is a great and nobel act, but as Jack and I discussed before,
> it could be a losing battle. Not to be the devils advicate, nor to not
> support my fellow DML'ers, but ever read the fine print at the bottom of
> the brochure's or pckg descriptions? Packages and performance issues
> are always subject to change without informing the customer!
> Technically it is the responsibility of the consumer to be educated on
> what they are purchasing. If you don't ask, you won't know. When you
> pick up your vehicle from the dealer, all they are responsible for is to
> make sure that you know where everything is on the vehicle and how to
> operate all of the functions, i.e. windshield wipers, turn signals etc
> etc.. Now, don't get me wrong. DC screwed the pooch on this one! I
> know, I work there so I get a little deeper into some of the q&a with
> some of the big shots there. It was not an engineering issue, nor a
> design office (where I work) issue but a publishing and PR issue. The
> engineers knew the problem and so did everyone but somehow it didn't go
> through the right channels to get to the publisher. THIS IS ALL THE WAY
> THAT I UNDERSTAND IT AND NOT A DAIMLERCHRYSLER PUBLIC RELATIONS
> TRANSCRIPT TO ANYONE!
> So, the way that they lowered the R/T is by using flat leaf springs in
> back. I Forget the way that they did it in front and I threw away my
> letter on it. The reason that the towing package is restricted is
> because over time of towing heavy loads it will weaken the Frame in the
> leaf area and become a serious safety issue. So yes, it truly is a
> problem, but not a short term one. This obviously would be a long term
> stress problem not something that is just going to break the first
> couple times of towing! At first I thought it was a rear end and/or
> drive shaft angle problem. Guess not.
> Please, understand that I am not a rep of DC, I only work there! I am
> peon! I know nothing!
> Eric
> Shoot, everything that I just said could be wrong too!
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jun 20 2003 - 12:14:31 EDT