2015 5.0 on Fire literally

[Ivabign596]

A car bursting into flames after being worked on is not necessarily a warranty thing. If the tech made a mistake, he works for the dealership (not ford like you think) and the dealership is at fault. Ford has no responsibility.

Again, two separate businesses. Two separate entities. That can't be argued. Anyone who sees it any other way is, frankly, wrong.

OK, since you guys seem to be in the know, I have a couple questions. If the tech didn't make a mistake and the dealer insists it's a warranty issue or manufacturing defect, what then? You mention that Ford isn't at fault if the dealer messed up, so if the dealer can prove they acted correctly wouldn't that mean that Ford is ultimately accountable? Who makes the call when the dealer and Ford are pointing fingers and hiding behind red tape?

I always thought that Ford dealers were a retail store for Ford Motors (kind of like an Apple store). They don't make the product and run essentially a franchise that reported and was accountable up to Ford Motors. Ford has a franchise package--a compilation of legal, operational and marketing agreements and practices that stipulate your guidelines for doing business under the brand name. And, if these guidelines aren't met they can stop selling cars to the dealer and even strip them of their dealership. But you're saying that they are separate business's and totally separate entities, so how does that work exactly? Just curious...

Sponsored

 

[P4RKER]

OK, since you guys seem to be in the know, I have a couple questions. If the tech didn't make a mistake and the dealer insists it's a warranty issue or manufacturing defect, what then? You mention that Ford isn't at fault if the dealer messed up, so if the dealer can prove they acted correctly wouldn't that mean that Ford is ultimately accountable? Who makes the call when the dealer and Ford are pointing fingers and hiding behind red tape?

I always thought that Ford dealers were a retail store for Ford Motors (kind of like an Apple store). They don't make the product and run essentially a franchise that reported and was accountable up to Ford Motors. Ford has a franchise package--a compilation of legal, operational and marketing agreements and practices that stipulate your guidelines for doing business under the brand name. And, if these guidelines aren't met they can stop selling cars to the dealer and even strip them of their dealership. But you're saying that they are separate business's and totally separate entities, so how does that work exactly? Just curious...

To answer the easy question first I did not say ford is not at fault in this matter period I have simply argued with people stating ford needs to step up without proof of fault or ford and the dealer are the same thing. I have no clue who is at fault.

Second point dealerships buy cars from Ford and then resell them. They do not sell cars for Ford they buy cars and are a true middle man. Ford does not have any say in what they ultimately sell cars for they can only make recommendations (MSRP). unless a dealership is just absolutely beyond terrible awful their lack of sales will most likely push them out of business before an OEM does. This is how places can be mega malls and sell multiple car lines and also buy used cars and resell them that aren't Ford. You would never see an Apple store selling used Samsungs since they ARE Apple.

 

[lasvegasron]

The remains are sent to the Camero factory!

 

[SVTFreak]

OK, since you guys seem to be in the know, I have a couple questions. If the tech didn't make a mistake and the dealer insists it's a warranty issue or manufacturing defect, what then? You mention that Ford isn't at fault if the dealer messed up, so if the dealer can prove they acted correctly wouldn't that mean that Ford is ultimately accountable? Who makes the call when the dealer and Ford are pointing fingers and hiding behind red tape?

I always thought that Ford dealers were a retail store for Ford Motors (kind of like an Apple store). They don't make the product and run essentially a franchise that reported and was accountable up to Ford Motors. Ford has a franchise package--a compilation of legal, operational and marketing agreements and practices that stipulate your guidelines for doing business under the brand name. And, if these guidelines aren't met they can stop selling cars to the dealer and even strip them of their dealership. But you're saying that they are separate business's and totally separate entities, so how does that work exactly? Just curious...

Parker already addressed most of this and he is right.


I will say (AGAIN) how it's supposed to work. The individuals insurance is supposed to handle the claim initially. They should take care of him. The , it's up to them to proceed (or not if they decide) to prove what went wrong. Bring in engineers, crash experts, whoever, to investigate. During this time it is highly unlikely that anyone else (meaning ford or dealership) will have any access to the vehicle. Once something is proven, then the insurance company would take it up with either the dealership, ford, or the individual (I'm going to throw that possibility in since modding is common in this car). That's how they system is supposed to work.

I had an accident once because a part failed on a car I built. The insurance company sent an engineer to my home and he determined what happened (I already knew). Even though they found fault in a companies part, they paid me for the car (had my check 2 days after the accident). They persued for reimbursement and they represented me when needed. THATS how it's supposed to happen and that's the difference between a good insurance company and a bad one. Many will try to push their own customer to the side and make them wait while they investigate, which could take months, to avoid putting that money out.

I've never said ford wasn't at fault. I've only said that they shouldn't be blamed until they are known to be at fault. Same with dealership. Or owner. If the owner don't get prompt service and satisfaction, it's his insurances companies fault. That part is very very cut and dry.

Keep in mind also, if he wasn't paying for rental car coverage, he shouldn't get one. Again, it's not fords responsibility, nor the dealerships. If you want rental coverage in the case of something like this, you better make sure you have it in your insurance.

 

[cush]

Ford is NOT paying the tech. The dealership is. Two separate businesses. Two separate entities. So no, if it can be proven it was the dealership, that is NOT fords responsibility then. If nothing can be proven, then it's the individuals insurance. It's their burden to prove if it's dealership or fords fault and persue them for reimbursement.

People here seem to be having a hard time understanding the system and how it works.

It's the old GUILT by association theory.... But some people making statements here seem to think that Ford has no influence over the actions of a dealership or their technicians, and that is a bad assumption.

 

[Ivabign596]

Parker already addressed most of this and he is right.


I will say (AGAIN) how it's supposed to work. The individuals insurance is supposed to handle the claim initially. They should take care of him. The , it's up to them to proceed (or not if they decide) to prove what went wrong. Bring in engineers, crash experts, whoever, to investigate. During this time it is highly unlikely that anyone else (meaning ford or dealership) will have any access to the vehicle. Once something is proven, then the insurance company would take it up with either the dealership, ford, or the individual (I'm going to throw that possibility in since modding is common in this car). That's how they system is supposed to work.

I had an accident once because a part failed on a car I built. The insurance company sent an engineer to my home and he determined what happened (I already knew). Even though they found fault in a companies part, they paid me for the car (had my check 2 days after the accident). They persued for reimbursement and they represented me when needed. THATS how it's supposed to happen and that's the difference between a good insurance company and a bad one. Many will try to push their own customer to the side and make them wait while they investigate, which could take months, to avoid putting that money out.

I've never said ford wasn't at fault. I've only said that they shouldn't be blamed until they are known to be at fault. Same with dealership. Or owner. If the owner don't get prompt service and satisfaction, it's his insurances companies fault. That part is very very cut and dry.

Keep in mind also, if he wasn't paying for rental car coverage, he shouldn't get one. Again, it's not fords responsibility, nor the dealerships. If you want rental coverage in the case of something like this, you better make sure you have it in your insurance.

SVT, I respect yours and Parker's opinions, and I don't disagree with the usual flow of an investigation.

For this case though, a new car (that wasn't modded) driving home from the dealer after being worked on for a warranty issue, catching fire to the point where it was totaled, and neither Ford or the dealer offering to do ANYTHING to help. Well, I have a problem with that. If it was a heavily modded car I would say the owner was part of the problem and you certainly share the blame. But in this situation the guy that did nothing wrong is getting bent over. You don't know if he had GAAP insurance or rental coverage, but in this case he shouldn't need them (IMO).

I also get annoyed when I see large companies hiding behind red tape and legalese, to avoid taking responsibility. It would cost Ford next to nothing to at least try to set this guy up with a new ride, but instead of that they're doing nothing, won't even do an investigation because it's too expensive (and they probably suspect they're at fault). In my opinion Ford would WANT to investigate this just to make sure it was an isolated incident and not a manufacturing defect that could happen again causing them even greater liability. Thankfully no one was hurt when the car caught on fire, next time they might not be so lucky.

For this particular case I also don't see why Ford shouldn't ultimately be held responsible. Even if it was the Tech's fault, he is Ford trained and certified and Ford certainly has the leverage to force the dealer to take responsibility if they're at fault. A buddy of mine was a distribution manager for Chrysler for several years and if you don't think the car manufacturer has leverage over the dealership, well you're wrong.

Maybe it's not right to do a rush to judgement and blame Ford, but in this particular case to expect them to get involved and support the customer, is in my opinion, reasonable and something that would be in their best interest.

And, finally, if this happened to you or Parker (I hope it doesn't) I doubt you guys would be so calm or accepting of the crap sandwich you're being fed. If this had happened to me not only would I be posting in forums and exhausting all options with Ford and the dealership, but I'd also have an attorney and updating contacts I have in the local news media. But, that's just me...

 

[SVTFreak]

First off, the guy that got "bent over" was done so by his own insurance.

Secondly, the tech isn't necessarily ford trained. Not all of them are and judging by what he supposedly had done to the car, it's highly possible he wasn't. Again, two separate businesses.

Thirdly, ford probably couldn't get access to the car. Access to things like that are highly controlled. The owner likely couldn't even get to it. So how can they investigate?

Lastly, read again. This did happen to me. I totaled a 65k cobra replica due to a faulty part. My insurance took care of me. I've been through it.

What you're suggesting is akin to saying ford (or the dealership) is guilty until proven innocent. Due course, my friend. Due course.

 

[P4RKER]

SVT, I respect yours and Parker's opinions, and I don't disagree with the usual flow of an investigation.

I'm going to go ahead and stop you right here. SVT and I have both made it very clear we have not stated opinions about what happened as we have not seen the vehicle. We have both however provided the facts as to how a system is setup and how a system is implemented. These are not opinions these are concrete and written out as the way things are done. If you don't like that they are facts that is one thing but they are and that's what has been established. A system is setup to cover all circumstances so for you to say "in this instance though" is exactly why there is a system.

Your opinion that he shouldn't need rental or gap insurance makes no sense either. If Ford should just "step up" why would anyone ever get either of those?

Finally if this happened to me I would be pissed (as I mentioned about 14 pages ago) but I would also understand who was screwing me over and pick a fight with the proper party. The insurance company owes this guy a car. Period. They can fight for their own money back. This happens to me I would be in my insurance agents office until I was handed a check. That's why you have insurance so you don't have to fight the big corporate guys. A system is in place for a reason.

 

[Ivabign596]

I'm going to go ahead and stop you right here. SVT and I have both made it very clear we have not stated opinions about what happened as we have not seen the vehicle. We have both however provided the facts as to how a system is setup and how a system is implemented. These are not opinions these are concrete and written out as the way things are done. If you don't like that they are facts that is one thing but they are and that's what has been established. A system is setup to cover all circumstances so for you to say "in this instance though" is exactly why there is a system.

Your opinion that he shouldn't need rental or gap insurance makes no sense either. If Ford should just "step up" why would anyone ever get either of those?

Finally if this happened to me I would be pissed (as I mentioned about 14 pages ago) but I would also understand who was screwing me over and pick a fight with the proper party. The insurance company owes this guy a car. Period. They can fight for their own money back. This happens to me I would be in my insurance agents office until I was handed a check. That's why you have insurance so you don't have to fight the big corporate guys. A system is in place for a reason.

We're going to have to agree to disagree...

The insurance company didn't cause this mess, they're trying to clean it up (at this point I'm thinking you guys maybe work for Ford, because if I were them blaming the insurance company is what I'd recommend too), the insurance company (IMO) is not the bad guy here, they didn't sell / repair the car that went supernova on the OP.

It's a reasonable expectation that in 2015 you should be able to buy a car, and have it fixed without it burning to the ground. I would also be leaning heavily on the insurance company, but once again, they didn't cause the problem, they're just trying to do what's best for me.

The problem was either caused by Ford (defective car) or the dealer (defective service) and I would be doing everything in my power to get to the answer of exactly what happened. This wasn't just misaligned body panels or squealing brakes or some other annoyance. This was a serious potentially life threatening issue. That's why Ford should 'step up' in a situation like this. If that meant bringing media heat on Ford to get them to take action (when they were ignoring the situation) so be it. The way I look at it if this was a defect I'd like to have this corrected before it happened to someone else, who might lose much more than just a car...

And, Starbucks and Ford are separate companies. Ford and a Ford dealer, not so much. One can't exist without the other.

Finally, just because you guys share an opinion, doesn't make you right or wrong, just means you're in agreement. My approach would be to go after the people that caused the problem, not the ones that were trying to help clean it up.

 

[P4RKER]

I will state one more time, calling an actual FACT an opinion just because you don't like it does not make it any less a FACT. The reason we are "in agreement" is we both know the facts and are stating them for other to read we didn't pull it out of our butts.

The reason it's the insurances problem is the guy has insurance on the car which means they pay him right away when the issue occurs and they fight with Ford over whether the dealer or Ford needs to pay them back. Making the OP wait for all of that red tape is the insurances fault. Your desire to personally go after Ford is fine but that doesn't make it the correct process. You can go after anyone you want I would just recommend not paying for car insurance since that's part of what you pay them to do.

You also really need to look into OEM and dealership relationships because you are grossly incorrect with how it works.

 

[SVTFreak]

We're going to have to agree to disagree...

The insurance company didn't cause this mess, they're trying to clean it up (at this point I'm thinking you guys maybe work for Ford, because if I were them blaming the insurance company is what I'd recommend too), the insurance company (IMO) is not the bad guy here, they didn't sell / repair the car that went supernova on the OP.

It's a reasonable expectation that in 2015 you should be able to buy a car, and have it fixed without it burning to the ground. I would also be leaning heavily on the insurance company, but once again, they didn't cause the problem, they're just trying to do what's best for me.

The problem was either caused by Ford (defective car) or the dealer (defective service) and I would be doing everything in my power to get to the answer of exactly what happened. This wasn't just misaligned body panels or squealing brakes or some other annoyance. This was a serious potentially life threatening issue. That's why Ford should 'step up' in a situation like this. If that meant bringing media heat on Ford to get them to take action (when they were ignoring the situation) so be it. The way I look at it if this was a defect I'd like to have this corrected before it happened to someone else, who might lose much more than just a car...

And, Starbucks and Ford are separate companies. Ford and a Ford dealer, not so much. One can't exist without the other.

Finally, just because you guys share an opinion, doesn't make you right or wrong, just means you're in agreement. My approach would be to go after the people that caused the problem, not the ones that were trying to help clean it up.

The insurance company didn't cause the mess. They never do. Their JOB and what YOU PAY THEM FOR is to clean up other people's messes. So you're wrong.

That is a reasonable expectation but things happen. That's what INSURANCE is for.

You don't need the answer. You need your money. Again INSURANCE.

Ford and dealer can exist without each other. Unfortunately, that's not how it works. My dealer sells Chevy, dodge, Kia, Toyota, etc also. Not sure what your point is but it's wrong.

We don't share an opinion. We share knowledge of how it works. Not sure where Parker learned it but I learned first hand. Very intimately also.

Get pissed and scream and holler and yell and try to make ford look bad all you want, it's not there responsibility. It's the owners insurance company. THAT is who you should dealing with and them only.

You would do nothing but piss a bunch of people off and get doors shut in your face. You would get them to do anything, and possible hurt your chances of seeing any help from NON RESPONSIBLE parties.

Now if an investigation led by the owners INSURANCE COMPANY found ford or the dealeship (SEPARATE ENTITIES) at fault, then go ahead as release the dogs.

I do not work for ford (as stated pages ago). Have no desire to. I only know how the system works.

 

[Ivabign596]

I know this was for the 2.3, but maybe Ford does have a problem, or is this the insurance companies fault too???

http://www.edmunds.com/car-news/2015-ford-mustang-recalled-for-fire-risk.html

 

[Grimace427]

I know this was for the 2.3, but maybe Ford does have a problem, or is this the insurance companies fault too???

http://www.edmunds.com/car-news/2015-ford-mustang-recalled-for-fire-risk.html

728 cars involved in the recall, none of which have actually caught fire, and you're ready to blame Ford for the destroyed car in this thread based off of that?

 

[Ivabign596]

728 cars involved in the recall, none of which have actually caught fire, and you're ready to blame Ford for the destroyed car in this thread based off of that?

So, Ford issues a recall that their cars may catch on fire, and one of them actually does, yep, nothing to see here...

 

[SVTFreak]

I know this was for the 2.3, but maybe Ford does have a problem, or is this the insurance companies fault too???

http://www.edmunds.com/car-news/2015-ford-mustang-recalled-for-fire-risk.html

You are seriously reaching now. That recall means nothing about the model at hand.

This is NOT a 2.3L ecoboost. Therefore, that recall means jack.

Go back and try again, sport.

So, Ford issues a recall that their cars may catch on fire, and one of them actually does, yep, nothing to see here...

No. One of them didn't catch on fire.

Again, try again. That point is completely invalid.

If you where a lawyer, you would be starving.

Sponsored