"still just me" <wheeledBobNOSPAM@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:qk6rn3lmhknbvpolrtno0me48ossdb68ps@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> On Wed, 2 Jan 2008 20:33:26 -0600, "Ray O"
> <rokigawaATtristarassociatesDOTcom> wrote:
>
>>> "Recalls" these days are generally only for safety related items. If
>>> the manufacturer won't be sued, they typically just issue a TSB, or
>>> perhaps have a "service campaign" for significant issues that they
>>> feel will hurt their reputation or really piss off the customers. They
>>> only "recall" when absolutely necessary or ordered to do so.
>>
>>A special service campaign, or SSC, is the industry term for a recall.
>
> Perhaps for certain manufacturers, but there are also "service
> campaigns" that are not recalls. They are conducted by manufacturers
> that are fixing known defects or potential defects voluntarily. In
> addition, there are "service campaigns" that are "do it if the car is
> in for other warranty service but don't call the customer in".
When an automaker fixes known defects or potential defects voluntarily,
they
are called (at least in Toyota's case) a special policy adjustment, or
SPA.
It is illegal in most states for the dealer to perform any work on the
customers car without the customer's consent, whether it is customer pay,
warranty, SSC, or SPA work and a violation of the automaker's service
policies. If the customer is not going to be charged for the work, there
is
no reason for the dealer to do it on the sly - the will simply call the
customer and say that they found a potential problem, and would the
customer
OK it if the repairs will be paid for the by automer?
>
> From personal experience I don't think Nissan and Toyota ever do it -
> not sure about the Ford group included in the crosspost.
>
A Toyota dealer that routinely did work without the customer's consent
would
soon be audited by the district service manager or a warranty auditor
from
the national office and charged back for those unauthorized repairs.
--
Ray O
(correct punctuation to reply)
|
