Used nearly all of the 2500 allowed characters, done and good idea.

 

EMAIL I JUST SENT:

SUBJECT: 6.7L Power Stroke Disel Warranty Claims

My Ford Owner Experience:

- 1991 Ford Explorer
- 1995 Ford Explorer
- 2000 Ford Super Duty - 7.3L Power Stroke Diesel (Lariat)
- 2004 Ford Super Duty - 6.0L Power Stroke Diesel (Lariat)
- 2005 Ford Explorer
- 2006 Ford Super Duty - 6.0L Power Stroke Diesel (Lariat)
- 2011 Ford SUper Duty - 6.7L Power Stroke Diesel (King Ranch)
- 2013 Ford Explorer Limited - ON ORDER

As the owner 7 Ford vehicles (Soon to be 8), I have been VERY CONCERNED about Ford Motor Company not honoring significant warranty claims on the 6.7L PSD Engine.

I am an active participant on Ford Truck Enthusiasts, 1948-2011 Ford F150, Super Duty & SUV owners community and information source. Covers F100, F-150, F250, Bronco, Ranger, Explorer, Expedition, Lighting, Escape and More and have have been absolutely horrified by the way some of Ford's best customers have been treated by having valid warranty claims rejected for little to know reason.

ISSUE #1:

Ford Truck Enthusiast (user name Ricatic) had to pay $10,000 for a major fuel system problem when his High Pressure Fuel Pump (HPFP) exploded from within. I know Rick personally and know that he got me and 16+ others guys guys to take the leap on the new 6.7L Engine. His warranty was rejected because the first Ford dealer found water in his fuel. Rick never had a "Water In Fuel" indicator light on and he drained his fuel separator regularily. Ford claims the fuel sample had water in it but the fuel tank did not. Ford rejected the warranty because he couldn't prove the Water In Fuel light didn't come on. Ford couldn't prove that it did. Customer out $10,000.00 - SHAME ON FORD.

Issue #2

Ford Truck Enthusiast (user name Randito) picks up his truck from the West Texas dealer today after a $23,000 repair for apparently having water injested through his air filter causing a engine valve to break and causing catastrophic damage to his engine. NOTE: Texas is in a major drought. I seriously doubt that any one these days who has a 6.7L PSD in Texas could ingest enough water through his air intake to damage a vehicle - because of the drought. If he drove through a lake, river ,etc, there would be other signs of user negligence. This is not the case. SHAME ON FORD.

Both indications lead me to believe the the dealers have less than skilled technicians out there working on these $60,000 vehicles which concerns me greatly. I sent this email because i want FMC to know that when you treat one customer (your best customers) like this, we all hear about it. Social Media is a great communicator.

We are watching you Ford Motor Company!!

 

You guys are kinda putting crazy 001 on the spot here.

He has said this site can not be used for a place to gang up on/attack Ford
which is totally understandable.
Suggest to save the Ford contact place in your favorites and each quietly do thier own thing.
I fcontinues will probably get the thread locked or worse deleted??

 

From Toms' own post #238......

Yup, if it's an actual attempt to contact them I have no issue with it.

 

IMO, sharing an email i sent from a different site is not putting anyone on the spot.

After personally owning 7 (soon to be 8) New Ford Vehicles, i think i have earned the right to share my comments to the group. Power To The People

 

OK guys, whatever, but please understand I am not defendinfg Ford here..
I am very POd over these issues cause
"I work at a Ford store" amd this hurts bad.

 

Wont send without vin and miles. Help I saved my letter/

 

I would have the same questions, unless he is being sold a re-man engine, and if that is the case Randy needs to start al over again.

 

Given light of these two recent issues I would absolutely agree with this. In fact, if I have an engine failure which exhibits symptoms similar to these two cases, I would be very inclined to pull the tank before it goes to the dealer and do my own inspection.


I think your idea is ludicrous. I had over 21 years of Class A line expierence. Thre is no reason for a "competent" tech to not use warranty when available. My job was always easier when I did not have to justify to a customer a component repair. And trying to save money on a repair was not an issue either.

Dealerships have different warranty guideline based on their history.
A dealer with a high rating from the factory will have very loose guidelines when it comes to repairs, e.g., customer comes in with an engine failure - it gets fixed. Many times with no parts having to be returned.

Poor history and everything has to be approved before repairs and all parts have to be returned.

Those are two extremes and dealerships have a rating from the top to the bottom with different standards for each level.

I've worked at all levels, and as a tech's point a view, working for a respected dealer, both with the customer base and the factory is far better then the alternative.

 

Been there done that and got the t-shirts. And for those that think all dealership techs are incompetent or crooks need to walk a mile......

And for those that don't know, check out - diagnostic time is so minimal that it can be very difficult to just look at vehicles and let them sit.

 

See above, the factory has the ultimate say.


With all you have read I don't think a plausible reason has been given yet, either here or the other two 6.7 forums that have shown similar valve issues.

The pictures I have seen across the net of the valves all look similar. And really gets me wondering why the FoMoCo hasn't stepped up, fixed the vehicles, got the parts back and do some reverse engineering.

Same with the fuel issue.

I would think it is better to spend a few hundred grand on a few vehicles and testing then to potentially spend 5000-10000 on a few hundred thousand vehicles.

 

The core charge was on a new motor, he paid it so that he could KEEP his old one. Had he not kept the old one, there wouldn't have been a core charge. I think he made the right decision, how else would he be able to continue fighting if the offending motor was melted downmor otherwise disposed of?

 

Should be:
New engine - no core charge
Re-man engine - core charge, in case "core" is not returned or is unusable, like in having a non repairable cracked block.

If the engine is new there is no reason to pay a core charge to keep parts that are rightfully yours once you pay the bill.

And federal consumer laws dictate that.

 

VERY WELL SAID!!!

Being almost twenty years into this profession, I too have worked at my share of different dealerships with varying degrees of ratings as far as warranty was concerned, and I can tell you firsthand from working at one where EVERY work order was on manual review, it SUCKED for the tech and the customer. For the tech, having the stress of worrying whether or not he is going to be paid for a repair put through under warranty, or have it charged back because he didn't "dot his 'I's' and cross his 'T's'" the way the manufacturer "wants to see it", and this is AFTER the customer has his vehicle back REPAIRED, and not knowing (or likely not even giving a rat's tail at that point) that the tech who did his repair is now out the time he has into it. THIS is the very reason, I and I'm sure most techs will carry a "no pay no play" attitude toward the manufacturer regarding vehicles coming in needing warranty work. Where it sucks for the customer, is having to wait for all the "red tape" to clear before repairs FINALLY commence. I hope this clears things up for some of you.

 

If you direct the comment to "public affairs" it does not require VIN, just a valid email address.