Oh, Shaun. I just wanted to tell you that I really appreciate your
attitude toward this post. You really show great character. It would
be nice to have you, or people like you in a management position!
Thanks for the maturity! Seriously.
Eric
Shaun.Hendricks@bergenbrunswig.com wrote:
>
> Eric:
>
> I'm not flaming you or anyone else in particular. I have a pet peeve
> though, it's not taking responsibility for your actions or product. Because
> we are a free-market society, we have the ability to boycott or not buy bad
> products. When the country was first started, this was thought to be enough
> to "police" companies that made poor items. The truth is, consumers needed
> even more protection, why? Because you are absolutely right, there's nothing
> stopping you from doing what you want with your R/T even in light of DC's
> "Retroactive Specifications Changes" but it places all the burden of
> consequencial damage on you, the owner. This isn't something you had control
> over when you bought the R/T, you thought it might tow your house if you
> wanted it too, but instead, a year or so after you've made that investment, DC
> says, "Heh, we lied... tough luck."
> The laws against this kind of thing are clear cut and strict. Joe Schmoe
> attorney could win this case. A good law firm could get punative damages. A
> great one could cut off DC's head and hand it to them on a platter. Any Jury
> would find DC totally at fault for this. DC is banking on the fact that there
> are few R/T owners who bought the truck with the idea of towing with it (like
> you point out) and that none of them will care to take it to a legal issue.
> So you are proposing the corporate line of thought by suggesting that "it's
> not worth it". So many companies nowadays rely on this apathy to avoid
> responsibility for their products or actions. I'm sorry to see it from a
> supposedly "forward thinking" company like DC. It's a throw-back to
> neanderthal accountant thinking.
> My point is simple, if the R/T owners do nothing about this issue, their
> inaction affects not only them but future DC approaches to this kind of
> problem. If DC gets away with it once, they'll keep doing it until they are
> forced to pay. If they get nailed to the wall the first time, then if it
> happens again, maybe they'll think twice about doing the right thing.
> Corporations are bottom line entities, you have to make the doing the right
> thing be cheaper than doing the wrong thing.
>
> Shaun H.
>
> ---original message---
> 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
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jun 20 2003 - 12:14:32 EDT