Here I am

Engine/Transmission (1998.5 - 2002) Has DaimlerChrysler Taken You For a Ride?

Attention: TDR Forum Junkies
To the point: Click this link and check out the Front Page News story(ies) where we are tracking the introduction of the 2025 Ram HD trucks.

Thanks, TDR Staff

Engine/Transmission (1998.5 - 2002) Help with exhaust brake

Engine/Transmission (1994 - 1998) 2wd grinding noise...

Status
Not open for further replies.
... my thoughts about the Cummins Diesel Engine Limited Warranty—as it applies to model year 1999, 2000, 2001 (and possibly others) Rams sold in the United States.

Disclaimer: I am not licensed to practice law anywhere. What follows are my thoughts, observations, and experiences.

At six years, ten months, twenty-one days with 130,737 miles on the clock the VP44 on my model year 2000 Cummins/Ram died. I knew the VP44 was still covered by the Cummins Diesel Engine Limited Warranty so I took my truck to the local five star dealer for the repair.

Ask about the Cummins Diesel Engine Limited Warranty on this site and you're almost guaranteed to hear that it's five years/100,000 miles—beginning at delivery. That is, the 3 year/36,000 mile Basic Warranty and the Cummins Diesel Engine Limited Warranty run concurrently. Dodge service writers, service managers, and dealership owners, along with personnel at the DaimlerChrysler 800. 992. 1997 number seem to want you to believe that's how it is. A very few of us have posted a different interpretation—that these two warranties run consecutively. The usual reaction to these posts is silence or ridicule. My favorite thread where the Cummins Diesel Engine Limited Warranty is mentioned is thread 152260 especially the 13th post, by one of our northern members.

Why did I think I was still covered by the Cummins Diesel Engine Limited Warranty? I've read my Warranty Information booklet, these pages in particular: Page 1 , Page 4 , Page 6 , Page 12 , Page 13 , Page 20. Identical text appears in at least the 1999, 2000, & 2001 Warranty Information booklets. I'd also read Code of Federal Regulations, Title 16, Part 701. I suggest you read it completely. §701. 3 (Written Warranty Terms) seems to tell manufacturers the rules they must follow if they offer a written warranty—pay particular attention to §701. 3a and §701. 3a(4).

My layman's interpretation is this:
  • D/C doesn't have to warrant anything, but if they do, they must follow the rules in the linked Code of Federal Regulations, Title 16, Part 701.
  • The warranty has to be in a single document in simple and readily understood language—my Warranty Information booklet—so what D/C has in their computers is meaningless.
  • The Basic Warranty and the Cummins Diesel Engine Limited Warranty run consecutively.
  • The graph in the front of the Warranty Information booklet only shows the duration of various warranties—not when they begin.
As expected, my five star dealership saw things differently!

When I went to retrieve my truck I heard "the computer shows... " story—the repair would not be covered under any warranty. I asked that my receipt indicate that I had asked about the warranty: Receipt Page 1 , Receipt Page 2. With my wallet $2743. 67 lighter I retrieved my repaired truck.

A call to the DaimlerChrysler 800. 992. 1997 number the next morning convinced me that D/C is well aware of the wording in my Warranty Information booklet. When I asked if my repair was covered by any warranty the person I spoke to regurgitated the same "the computer shows... " story I'm sure others have heard. When I specifically asked what the Warranty Information booklet said I sensed a change of attitude. The customer service lady refused to look at anything other than her computer, refused to allow me to talk to a supervisor, and refused to talk about the warranty issue any further. She would, however, be glad to discuss any other concerns I had with my truck! Was I getting stonewalled?

Later in the day I made two trips to my five star dealer but was unable to see the dealership owner. I did get to hear "the computer shows... " story two more times from two different people so my efforts were not a total waste.

I figured my easiest path to a warranted VP44 was through the five star dealer so I sent him this Demand Letter. Six days later I was in his office with my Warranty Information booklet. The meeting was friendly, I stuck to my position, and left with the promise that my dealer would call D/C and see what he could do.

Twenty minutes after leaving his office he called me at home. DaimlerChrysler was trying to wiggle out of their warranty obligation—I needed to bring in my service records since I had done all maintenance on my truck and D/C had no record of maintainance on my truck. I brought him my maintenance records.

A week later he called me at home again. DaimlerChrysler was still trying to wiggle out of their warranty obligation—if I brought in receipts for the fuel filters I had installed, D/C would pay for the VP44. I brought him my fuel filter receipts.

Several weeks later I received the November surprise via U. S. Mail.

You can access Ram warranty information for 1997-2007 from this page.


Edited 17 January 2007 to replace dead link
Edited 31 March 2007 to add Ram warranty information link
Edited 13 April 2007 to replace dead link
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Good Job!!! Glad to hear it worked out for you. It's Really sad that customer service means that the customer must do all the work!!
 
I wonder if this issue is logged into D-C's computer system with a "help ticket" number or "Trouble ticket" number... akin to something we receive here at work when we call in with computer problems. The ticket gets logged into the system and can then be used for reference in other cases.



Point being that if there is such a reference and another similar situation arises, it might expedite resolution of the situation in the customer's favor if they can reference #xxxxxx... . or maybe mentioning specific customer's name and/or VIN.



Thank you Thomas for your diligent detective work. I believe the majority of folks, including myself, expected that the warranties were concurrent, rather than consecutive.





Tim
 
The way I see it, there are still TDR members with model year 1999 Cummins/Rams with coverage remaining under the Cummins Diesel Engine Limited Warranty. Might come in handy with a KDP, cracked #53 block, or a dead VP44 problem.
 
isb360 said:
... I believe the majority of folks, including myself, expected that the warranties were concurrent, rather than consecutive...

Concurrent may even have been DaimlerChrysler's intention. However, using the "consecutive type" language for at least three years and printing the very specific (specific to only one of the many warranties in the book) "When it Begins" language sure makes it look like D/C intended "consecutive" .
 
Great thought Thomas.



If you run a 3yr/36k warrantee consecutive with 5yr/100k warrantee, that means 8yr/136k total (in essence), so by that logic, anyone who took delivery of their truck on or after 11/28/1998 that meets the mileage limitation should be covered, right?
 
isb360 said:
Great thought Thomas.



If you run a 3yr/36k warrantee consecutive with 5yr/100k warrantee, that means 8yr/136k total (in essence), so by that logic, anyone who took delivery of their truck on or after 11/28/1998 that meets the mileage limitation should be covered, right?





awe crap... that means my problem may have been covered under waranty... . Oh wait, I don't keep good enough records to be able to show proof of filters I've bought. #@$%!
 
Congratulations, good work. I have a question though, did DC ever concede that your warranty manual was correct, or do you think they did as most companies do and settled to keep from incurring the expense of going to court (usually much cheaper)? 5 or 6 hours of a high end attorneys time will easily eat up the amount of money they reimbursed you and most companies will quickly settle when they know you're not going to drop the issue.
 
mcsinfl said:
Congratulations, good work. I have a question though, did DC ever concede that your warranty manual was correct, or do you think they did as most companies do and settled to keep from incurring the expense of going to court (usually much cheaper)?

In either case, they (DC) implicitly admitted that the service was covered when they reimbursed Thomas. This could, perhaps, be used as leverage by others in a similar situation.



EDIT: To me, it sounds like DC knew they were obligated to pay. If they really thought they were right, going to court would seem to be better. Get that case settled by a judge, and never have to visit the issue again. As it is, it looks like they've opened themselves up to a potentially large number of claims. Surely they would've seen that future liability, and didn't think they could avoid it by a victory in court.
 
mcsinfl said:
did DC ever concede that your warranty manual was correct

Did you mean did DC ever concede that your (Thomas') interpretation of the warranty manual was correct ?



I ask because the Warranty Information Booklet is, by federal law, the only thing that can possibly be correct.
 
mcsinfl said:
... do you think they did as most companies do and settled to keep from incurring the expense of going to court (usually much cheaper)? 5 or 6 hours of a high end attorneys time will easily eat up the amount of money they reimbursed you and most companies will quickly settle when they know you're not going to drop the issue...
No attorneys, high end or otherwise, allowed in small claims court here.


jeepit said:
Yes, 2002 warranty book reads the same :D
Four years in a row—sure sounds like they mean it. I wonder why D/C fights it?
 
Thomas said:
Four years in a row—sure sounds like they mean it. I wonder why D/C fights it?

Seems obvious: they fight it because a) they know they're obligated, b) they know they're going to eat it on the KDP, #53 cracks, and VP44, and c) they're presuming that most consumers will, inexplicably, think (and agree to) "concurrent".
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top