posted 06-02-2005 08:00 PM                  

NHTSA = National Highway Transportation Safety Administration is what I believe the initials represent.

While you may have valid quality complaints,,,
Peeling wheels, a broken clock spring, weak hood supports or leaking shocks have nothing to do with SAFETY while driving on a HIGHWAY.

posted 06-02-2005 09:24 PM                  

There will be no recall for the items mentioned so get used to it. It is what it is.

disclaimer:
This is not meant to upset anyone, it's just that it's beating a dead horse.
Oh, and no animals were harmed creating this disclaimer

posted 06-03-2005 12:23 PM                  

quote:

---

Originally posted by Larry Lord:
Peeling wheels, weak hood supports, leaking shocks or a broken clock spring seems to me to be a far cry from having your car stall while traveling 65 mph in traffic on a freeway.

NHTSA = National Highway Transportation Safety Administration is what I believe the initials represent.

While you may have valid quality complaints,,,
Peeling wheels, a broken clock spring, weak hood supports or leaking shocks have nothing to do with SAFETY while driving on a HIGHWAY.

---

posted 06-04-2005 08:07 AM                    

everyone is different...

i agree, if its stalling and someone could get hurt because of it.....they have to fix it or it will cost them in court....if quality suks..and they don't fix it... no big loss in their eyes, because customers are a dime a dozen....

I'll say no more on it... i have ditches to dig

posted 06-04-2005 03:59 PM                  

quote:

---

Originally posted by 99prowler99:
How about peeling rims also???

---

No, I don’t believe there’s a snowball’s chance in h#$% of getting wheels replaced by NHTSA action since there is no way that peeling chrome can be considered a safety issue.

However, with all of the discussion that’s taken place, I have yet to see mention of “The Implied Warranty of Merchantability” or liability for “Latent Defects”. I believe if someone is diligent enough, they could get Chrysler to replace everyone’s wheels (including center caps). Window regulators would also fall into this category.

Here’s what I found on the web. Do with it as you will:

quote:

---

LATENT DEFECT, n.
“A hidden flaw, weakness or imperfection in an article which a seller knows about, but the buyer cannot discover by reasonable inspection. Generally, this entitles the purchaser to get his/her money back (rescind the deal) or get a replacement without a defect on the basis of "implied" warranty of quality that a buyer could expect ("merchantability"). Even an "as is" purchase could be rescinded if it could be shown the seller knew of the flaw. (See: warranty, implied warranty).”

---

1. It is easy to prove that a “hidden defect” exists since new wheels have peeled in the box.
2. Chrysler knew there were multiple occurrences of this hidden defect (constituting a “latent defect”?) when the second occurrence of chrome peeling was reported.
3. “Latent defects” have been interpreted to apply if the seller or manufacturer SHOULD HAVE known about the defect. A reasonable person would expect a company of the size and stature of Chrysler TO KNOW how to produce (or procure under contract) a wheel that doesn’t peel.
4. Personal opinion (just that this didn’t come up on a quick search) – inadequate design and engineering, by industry standards, can also produce a hidden/latent defect – think window regulators, wheel center caps, front shocks, hood props, . . .

quote:

---

IMPLIED WARRANTY OF MERCHANTABILITY
“Some warranties are "implied" by law. An implied warranty is a promise that the good will have characteristics or uses that the maker, distributor, or seller do not expressly state. An implied warranty assumes that the product is fit, safe and will perform the function for which it was purchased.

The implied warranty most useful to consumers is the "implied warranty of merchantability." It requires that goods be of "fair-average quality". The implied warranty of merchantability is interpreted so that sales contracts contain an implicit provision that goods sold under the contract are of the quality of other goods sold on the market and that the goods are reasonably fit for the use in which they were intended.”

---

1. “fair average quality” – is the average chrome wheel expected to peel in the box even before it is installed?
2. “quality of other goods sold on the market” – same as above
3. A reasonable person would expect that wheels would last the life of the car (or at least as long as the paint, and certainly as long as the 7-year extended warranty, AND AT LEAST AS LONG AS THE 3/36 WARRANTY)
4. Personal Opinion: As far as the functionality requirement, what is the function of a chrome-plated wheel? I believe that a reasonable person would expect a standard wheel to perform as a wheel and a chrome wheel to perform as a good-looking wheel. This is similar to the function of jewelry – if it doesn’t retain it’s looks, it has lost its functional value – just as peeling silver on silver-plated jewelry would fail to perform under this warranty.

Although used cars may be sold “As Is” (still able to prove “latent defect” if the seller knew about a problem), it is difficult to disclaim the “Warranty of Merchantability” on a new car regardless of the written warranty. I have more information on this if anyone is interested.

posted 06-04-2005 04:13 PM                    

Grrowl... this is top notch and contains no bias one way or the other... anyone with flaking wheels should print this off and hand a copy to anyone that notices the defect and asks questions about "why don't you do something about it ?"

posted 06-04-2005 04:15 PM                    

quote:

---

Originally posted by halicat:
..

I'll say no more on it...

---

apparently I lied ...