D
drery2
Guest
At the start of a recent cross country trip in my 2000 Dodge Ram 3500 and 11.5' camper I encountered a loss of power, a high exhaust temperature and low boost pressure and heavy black exhaust smoke indicating to me a loose turbo boost hose. I pulled into a Dodge dealer in Cottage Grove, OR to see if they could replace the hose for me. Me being disabled, precluded me doing it myself.
The service manager said he could get to it right away and he did. He returned a few minutes later saying my fuel pump was bad. I knew for a fact the fuel pump had nothing to do with my modifications, and since there was heavy black smoke I knew the fuel supply was good. I told him I had done some minor modifications to the engine for safety and longevity, but they had nothing to do with the fuel pump. He replied they could work around the modifications, meaning it would be done under warranty.
When he returned a few minutes later he informed me Chrysler had voided my warranty and would not pay for replacing the fuel pump, and I would have to pay the $600.00 for replacing it. I then asked him how Chrysler knew of my modifications, and he replied that he told them. I asked then if he was familiar with the Magnuson/Moss Act to which he wasn’t. Since this was the start of a cross country trip, I had no other choice but to pay up since they thought this must be the cause of my problem, and I wanted to get back under way.
The Magnuson/Moss Act states: “A warranty could not be voided because of a customer modification unless the dealer could show that the problem was caused by that modification.”
While I was still in the shop I contacted a shop I had done business with previously and they said there was a factory service bulletin out that said on certain vehicles with certain VIN numbers (of which included mine) the lift pump was to be replaced under warranty. I had them fax me a copy to the dealership, and gave it to the service manager who said it didn't apply since my warranty had just been voided because of the modifications I had done to the engine.
The dealer had notified Dodge of the modifications since warranty work doesn't pay as much as work charged to the un-warrantied public.
After the pump was replaced I departed, and found that there was no change in the problem, so I returned to the dealer. He said to bring it back the following morning which I did. They had it about an hour and then told me they could not troubleshoot the problem. and had contacted the Cummin's engine shop in Eugene, OR who said they could get to me right away. At first the young mechanic said I needed a new turbo which they didn't have in stock but could have in by noon the following Monday.
We spent the weekend in their parking lot, and the following Monday the mechanic that had said the turbo was the problem called in sick. Another older mechanic said he would look at it. He said he didn't think it was the turbo.
A few minutes later the mechanic came into the waiting room with the air filter box. A pack rat had built a nest in the air filter box shutting off air and the exhaust brake was sticking partially shut. These problems were corrected and after paying the $334.00 trouble shooting bill we were on our way again.
I feel the lift pump should have been replaced under warranty especially since they were unable to diagnose the problem, and had to send me to another shop where I had to pay the extra $334.00 for correcting the problem.
My question is this. If I take this to a small claims court, can I get a refund on what I had to pay for the lift pump plus what the other shop charged for their diagnosis? Can I get reimbursed for my time and expenses for the four extra days I had to stay waiting for the work to be done? Can I collect any punitive damages? Would I be better off filing this under a civil law suit? Should this be filed with the Federal Trade Commission against Daimler/Chrysler for violating the Magnuson/Moss Act?
Dewey Reynolds
The service manager said he could get to it right away and he did. He returned a few minutes later saying my fuel pump was bad. I knew for a fact the fuel pump had nothing to do with my modifications, and since there was heavy black smoke I knew the fuel supply was good. I told him I had done some minor modifications to the engine for safety and longevity, but they had nothing to do with the fuel pump. He replied they could work around the modifications, meaning it would be done under warranty.
When he returned a few minutes later he informed me Chrysler had voided my warranty and would not pay for replacing the fuel pump, and I would have to pay the $600.00 for replacing it. I then asked him how Chrysler knew of my modifications, and he replied that he told them. I asked then if he was familiar with the Magnuson/Moss Act to which he wasn’t. Since this was the start of a cross country trip, I had no other choice but to pay up since they thought this must be the cause of my problem, and I wanted to get back under way.
The Magnuson/Moss Act states: “A warranty could not be voided because of a customer modification unless the dealer could show that the problem was caused by that modification.”
While I was still in the shop I contacted a shop I had done business with previously and they said there was a factory service bulletin out that said on certain vehicles with certain VIN numbers (of which included mine) the lift pump was to be replaced under warranty. I had them fax me a copy to the dealership, and gave it to the service manager who said it didn't apply since my warranty had just been voided because of the modifications I had done to the engine.
The dealer had notified Dodge of the modifications since warranty work doesn't pay as much as work charged to the un-warrantied public.
After the pump was replaced I departed, and found that there was no change in the problem, so I returned to the dealer. He said to bring it back the following morning which I did. They had it about an hour and then told me they could not troubleshoot the problem. and had contacted the Cummin's engine shop in Eugene, OR who said they could get to me right away. At first the young mechanic said I needed a new turbo which they didn't have in stock but could have in by noon the following Monday.
We spent the weekend in their parking lot, and the following Monday the mechanic that had said the turbo was the problem called in sick. Another older mechanic said he would look at it. He said he didn't think it was the turbo.
A few minutes later the mechanic came into the waiting room with the air filter box. A pack rat had built a nest in the air filter box shutting off air and the exhaust brake was sticking partially shut. These problems were corrected and after paying the $334.00 trouble shooting bill we were on our way again.
I feel the lift pump should have been replaced under warranty especially since they were unable to diagnose the problem, and had to send me to another shop where I had to pay the extra $334.00 for correcting the problem.
My question is this. If I take this to a small claims court, can I get a refund on what I had to pay for the lift pump plus what the other shop charged for their diagnosis? Can I get reimbursed for my time and expenses for the four extra days I had to stay waiting for the work to be done? Can I collect any punitive damages? Would I be better off filing this under a civil law suit? Should this be filed with the Federal Trade Commission against Daimler/Chrysler for violating the Magnuson/Moss Act?
Dewey Reynolds