Ford will not pay for radiator
Thread Starter
|
Junior User
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 97
Likes: 0
From: Northern Illinois
Ford will not pay for radiator
Last fall I had to have the radiator replaced on my 08 F250 --it was leaking due to a bad crimp on the lower drivers side. A problem long known to Ford and addressed in Aug of 2007 - for radiators that had not been installed. Those of us who had trucks in service prior to that- were pretty much ignored while I can only assume Ford hoped for the best <?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com
fficeffice" /><o
></o>
At the time of the failure my truck had 32K miles but was 45 days out of the 36 month warranty. I call the Customer Relations Center and was to "sorry" (Ford wins) - I added the Ford wins part. <o></o>
Wrote a letter and received a response today - which coveys "we told you on the phone we weren't going to pay & we meant it"<o></o>
I am disappointed EDITED
Edit by Crazy001: Discussing lawsuits or other legal actions is against the guidelines.
fficeffice" /><o></o>At the time of the failure my truck had 32K miles but was 45 days out of the 36 month warranty. I call the Customer Relations Center and was to "sorry" (Ford wins) - I added the Ford wins part. <o
></o>Wrote a letter and received a response today - which coveys "we told you on the phone we weren't going to pay & we meant it"<o
></o>I am disappointed EDITED
Edit by Crazy001: Discussing lawsuits or other legal actions is against the guidelines.
Last edited by Tom; Jan 29, 2011 at 07:31 PM. Reason: Legal actions are against the guidelines!
Super Moderator
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 37,379
Likes: 1,863
From: Frederick, MD
i suppose that some of this might have also been due to the venturi-T recall not being performed before the in-service date?
Mine venturi T was done within a few days after me buying the truck. I now have almost 47K/1200 hours and I have the orginal radiator.
Mine venturi T was done within a few days after me buying the truck. I now have almost 47K/1200 hours and I have the orginal radiator.
Super Moderator
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 25,479
Likes: 742
From: Isanti, MN
Unfortunately radiators going bad are a common problem with this engine. Unless you have an extended warranty they will not cover it after the 3/36 warranty has expired.
It stinks, but there isn't much that can be done about it now.
It stinks, but there isn't much that can be done about it now.
Post Fiend
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 12,123
Likes: 35
From: N. Fort Worth, tx
we at the dealer were able to do that do to a miswriten tsb at the time. that tsb has sence changed and is no longer valid. ford caught there mistake.... at least on the writing of the tsb
Senior User
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 495
Likes: 6
From: Snohomish, WA
Trending Topics
Logistics Pro
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 3,787
Likes: 102
From: Georgia
Last fall I had to have the radiator replaced on my 08 F250 --it was leaking due to a bad crimp on the lower drivers side. A problem long known to Ford and addressed in Aug of 2007 - for radiators that had not been installed. Those of us who had trucks in service prior to that- were pretty much ignored while I can only assume Ford hoped for the best <?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-comfficeffice" /><o></o>
At the time of the failure my truck had 32K miles but was 45 days out of the 36 month warranty. I call the Customer Relations Center and was to "sorry" (Ford wins) - I added the Ford wins part. <o></o>
Wrote a letter and received a response today - which coveys "we told you on the phone we weren't going to pay & we meant it"<o></o>
I am disappointed EDITED
Edit by Crazy001: Discussing lawsuits or other legal actions is against the guidelines.
fficeffice" /><o></o>At the time of the failure my truck had 32K miles but was 45 days out of the 36 month warranty. I call the Customer Relations Center and was to "sorry" (Ford wins) - I added the Ford wins part. <o
></o>Wrote a letter and received a response today - which coveys "we told you on the phone we weren't going to pay & we meant it"<o
></o>I am disappointed EDITED
Edit by Crazy001: Discussing lawsuits or other legal actions is against the guidelines.
FTE Stories
Ford Trucks for Ford Truck Enthusiasts
10 Things Every Truck Owner NEEDS (2026 Edition)
Michael S. Palmer
Rezvani's Latest Post-Apocalyptic Monster Is a Ford F-150 Raptor Underneath
Verdad Gallardo
Top 10 Most Expensive Ford Trucks Ever Sold on Bring a Trailer
Joe Kucinski
2027 Ford Super Duty Buyer's Guide (Every Model, Engine, & Package)
Brett Foote
Top 10 Ford Truck Tragedies
Joe Kucinski
AEV FXL Super Duty - the Super Duty Raptor Ford Doesn't Make
Brett Foote
Lobo Vs Lobo: Proof the F-150 Lobo Should Be Even Lower!
Michael S. Palmer
Ford's 2001 Explorer Sportsman Concept Looks For a New Home
Verdad Gallardo
10 Best Ford Truck Engines We Miss the Most!
Joe Kucinski
Thread Starter
|
Junior User
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 97
Likes: 0
From: Northern Illinois
<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-comfficeffice" /><o> </o>
Yes a contract is a contract - but the poor crimp was a known defect - corrective actions were taken by Ford to re-inspect radiators not yet installed. Yet this left some truck already in service without any corrective actions. Known defect - with some trucks ignored = negligent. I will continue to pursue next level actions to seek an equitable resolve.<o></o>
<?xml:namespace prefix = v ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" /><v:shapetype id=_x0000_t75 stroked="f" filled="f" path="m@4@5l@4@11@9@11@9@5xe" oreferrelative="t" o:spt="75" coordsize="21600,21600"><v:stroke joinstyle="miter"></v:stroke><v:formulas><v:f eqn="if lineDrawn pixelLineWidth 0"></v:f><v:f eqn="sum @0 1 0"></v:f><v:f eqn="sum 0 0 @1"></v:f><v:f eqn="prod @2 1 2"></v:f><v:f eqn="prod @3 21600 pixelWidth"></v:f><v:f eqn="prod @3 21600 pixelHeight"></v:f><v:f eqn="sum @0 0 1"></v:f><v:f eqn="prod @6 1 2"></v:f><v:f eqn="prod @7 21600 pixelWidth"></v:f><v:f eqn="sum @8 21600 0"></v:f><v:f eqn="prod @7 21600 pixelHeight"></v:f><v:f eqn="sum @10 21600 0"></v:f></v:formulas><vath o:connecttype="rect" gradientshapeok="t" o:extrusionok="f"></vath><o:lock aspectratio="t" v:ext="edit"></o:lock></v:shapetype><v:shape id=Picture_x0020_2 style="VISIBILITY: visible; WIDTH: 255.75pt; HEIGHT: 192pt; mso-wrap-style: square" type="#_x0000_t75" o:spid="_x0000_i1026"><v:imagedata src="file:///C:\Users\DEWAYN~1\AppData\Local\Temp\msohtmlclip1\ 01\clip_image001.jpg" o:title="IMG_9823 - Copy"></v:imagedata></v:shape><o></o>
<v:shape id=Picture_x0020_3 style="VISIBILITY: visible; WIDTH: 255.75pt; HEIGHT: 192pt; mso-wrap-style: square" type="#_x0000_t75" o:spid="_x0000_i1025"><v:imagedata src="file:///C:\Users\DEWAYN~1\AppData\Local\Temp\msohtmlclip1\ 01\clip_image002.jpg" o:title="IMG_9824"></v:imagedata></v:shape><o></o>
fficeffice" /><o> </o>Yes a contract is a contract - but the poor crimp was a known defect - corrective actions were taken by Ford to re-inspect radiators not yet installed. Yet this left some truck already in service without any corrective actions. Known defect - with some trucks ignored = negligent. I will continue to pursue next level actions to seek an equitable resolve.<o
></o><?xml:namespace prefix = v ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" /><v:shapetype id=_x0000_t75 stroked="f" filled="f" path="m@4@5l@4@11@9@11@9@5xe" o
referrelative="t" o:spt="75" coordsize="21600,21600"><v:stroke joinstyle="miter"></v:stroke><v:formulas><v:f eqn="if lineDrawn pixelLineWidth 0"></v:f><v:f eqn="sum @0 1 0"></v:f><v:f eqn="sum 0 0 @1"></v:f><v:f eqn="prod @2 1 2"></v:f><v:f eqn="prod @3 21600 pixelWidth"></v:f><v:f eqn="prod @3 21600 pixelHeight"></v:f><v:f eqn="sum @0 0 1"></v:f><v:f eqn="prod @6 1 2"></v:f><v:f eqn="prod @7 21600 pixelWidth"></v:f><v:f eqn="sum @8 21600 0"></v:f><v:f eqn="prod @7 21600 pixelHeight"></v:f><v:f eqn="sum @10 21600 0"></v:f></v:formulas><vath o:connecttype="rect" gradientshapeok="t" o:extrusionok="f"></vath><o:lock aspectratio="t" v:ext="edit"></o:lock></v:shapetype><v:shape id=Picture_x0020_2 style="VISIBILITY: visible; WIDTH: 255.75pt; HEIGHT: 192pt; mso-wrap-style: square" type="#_x0000_t75" o:spid="_x0000_i1026"><v:imagedata src="file:///C:\Users\DEWAYN~1\AppData\Local\Temp\msohtmlclip1\ 01\clip_image001.jpg" o:title="IMG_9823 - Copy"></v:imagedata></v:shape><o></o><v:shape id=Picture_x0020_3 style="VISIBILITY: visible; WIDTH: 255.75pt; HEIGHT: 192pt; mso-wrap-style: square" type="#_x0000_t75" o:spid="_x0000_i1025"><v:imagedata src="file:///C:\Users\DEWAYN~1\AppData\Local\Temp\msohtmlclip1\ 01\clip_image002.jpg" o:title="IMG_9824"></v:imagedata></v:shape><o
></o>
Thread Starter
|
Junior User
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 97
Likes: 0
From: Northern Illinois
I am upset that there was a known defect that Ford's corrective action plan left some trucks in the field without addressing the issue - and that I ended up with one of those units. I wouldn't be nearly as upset if it was your truck.
Super Moderator
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 37,379
Likes: 1,863
From: Frederick, MD
check your PM's.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Kart18
1987 - 1996 F150 & Larger F-Series Trucks
437
Mar 14, 2018 05:20 PM
AL_AWAJI
Excursion - King of SUVs
11
Dec 9, 2012 09:21 PM
bobbytnm
1948 - 1956 F1, F100 & Larger F-Series Trucks
57
Jul 26, 2011 08:00 PM
RÖENTGEEP
1994.5 - 1997 7.3L Power Stroke Diesel
15
Dec 22, 2008 07:02 PM
