Disappointed with poor quality control

[bgenlvtex]

Training, incentives, bonuses, contract extensions, etc.

I don't expect to change your mind, nor am I trying to be argumentative; just trying to have a rational discussion.

I'm in the same field, but are you suggesting that FCA should pay a bonus for Cletus to successfully deliver to the dealer and then Chip get it to the line unscathed?

Are you ready to pay for that?

Sponsored

 

[futzin']

I'm in the same field, but are you suggesting that FCA should pay a bonus for Cletus to successfully deliver to the dealer and then Chip get it to the line unscathed?

Are you ready to pay for that?

OK, fine then: a penalty for poor service, whatever. Sheesh.

I just feel like companies that supply, transport and sell the car's brand represent the brand as well. I also feel like the manufacturer (and the consumer) should not turn a blind eye here. The dealers/contractors livelihood should hinge on success as well, yes? Shared responsibility/reward . . .

 

[bgenlvtex]

OK, fine then: a penalty for poor service, whatever. Sheesh.

I just feel like companies that supply, transport and sell the car's brand represent the brand as well. I also feel like the manufacturer (and the consumer) should not turn a blind eye here. The dealers/contractors livelihood should hinge on success as well, yes? Shared responsibility/reward . . .

I don't disagree that it should be a "team".

Reality however is that to meet market demands FCA is using the lowest common denominator to deliver their product. Then, some dildo who an't pass a drug screen and get a better job is doing the pre=delivery.

Is that a travesty? Maybe.

But what it is not, in any way is a problem with manufacture, which is in the real world what FCA has any control over.

FCA charges $1500 to deliver a vehicle using Cletus, additional controls on that will cost more. Cool, I'll pay it.

But then once it is in the dealers possession, all bets are off. The individual ( notice I'm careful not to assume gender here) who is doing pre-delivery probably isn't doing that because quantum physics got boring.

At some point, the buyer has to accept that they are ultimately responsible for final inspection, and if it is borked tell the dealer what needs to be fixed.

The OP position, which you seem to support at least in a limited fashion is absolutely horse shit.

 

[Renegade]

Thanks for allowing at least 1% open for credible salespeople. When things happen like this, I would, as a sales person; and if the vehicle came off the transport truck like that, at least make notes on the bill of lading and depending on the severity, have the repairs made or try to return due to damages. The buyer should have the option to accept the vehicle after corrections were made or decline to purchase. I hope this sounds fair and allows for the customer to decide what they would like to do. Because I did not see what happened from Supplier Park to the dealer It is difficult for me to know what happened and the condition. I have a Launch Edition, and have seen vehicles dropped off without being inspected after hours that were not acceptable and had to spend time to correct the situation instead of trying to assist customers in purchasing a vehicle. That causes me to lose money by trying to take care of something that I will never be paid for doing. That is part of my job and how I choose to live. Good luck. Thanks.

Obviously, I exaggerated. From your presence here, I can clearly give you more credit than the average sales guy. No offense to you intended.

 

[futzin']

I have no opinion about who caused the damage to the OP's truck. I do take some issue to the buck being completely passed on these types of issues to the manufacturer's transporters / dealers / suppliers / etc. I feel like the manufacturer should ensure a quality experience throughout. Perhaps that's not the industry norm; I truly don't know. Maybe it's the norm for the maker to not give a care what happens after the unit leaves the yard because profits are currently high. Maybe some makers accept responsibility throughout because of a will to succeed; maybe not. I have limited experience with buying new vehicles (one Toyota, one Dodge).

Do I feel like FCA / Jeep can improve their quality control? Yes.
Do I currently own an FCA product? Yes.
Am I strongly considering another? Yep.

 

[Uparms]

Here is an exciting view point, comparing this 3 page rant that started with a valid question and opinion about quality control, and then led the OP to refer to the great population of owners on this forum as KnotHeads. You could also cross reference to the 3 pages of 49 entries that had the word "quality control" in them, if you do a global search using "Quality Control". Of those 49, 9 were from this rant, some of the others did refer to the JT and some referred to other vehicles. 49 is a heck of a small number for a high volume site like this forum.

I think most of us are glad you declined the vehicle and I think the majority have not seen anything close to the issues you had. You'll find out when the new one arrives!

We will get the best view of general quality control when the big reporting agencies start to share owner satisfaction breakdowns after the first year of production.

Glad you declined it.

(First time i ever unchecked "Watch This Thread" and "Receive Email Notifications").

 

[Bowerss2]

 

[NC_Overland]

I don't disagree that it should be a "team".

Reality however is that to meet market demands FCA is using the lowest common denominator to deliver their product. Then, some dildo who an't pass a drug screen and get a better job is doing the pre=delivery.

Is that a travesty? Maybe.

But what it is not, in any way is a problem with manufacture, which is in the real world what FCA has any control over.

FCA charges $1500 to deliver a vehicle using Cletus, additional controls on that will cost more. Cool, I'll pay it.

But then once it is in the dealers possession, all bets are off. The individual ( notice I'm careful not to assume gender here) who is doing pre-delivery probably isn't doing that because quantum physics got boring.

At some point, the buyer has to accept that they are ultimately responsible for final inspection, and if it is borked tell the dealer what needs to be fixed.

The OP position, which you seem to support at least in a limited fashion is absolutely horse shit.

It is a solid point, to the OP’s point that FCA charges a $1500 destination charge on their MSRP. Two of the new cars that I purchased recently had an $875 and an $895 destination charge. Our Jeeps come from where? Toledo? Those came from Germany. An Audi and a BMW.

 

[bgenlvtex]

I have no opinion about who caused the damage to the OP's truck. I do take some issue to the buck being completely passed on these types of issues to the manufacturer's transporters / dealers / suppliers / etc. I feel like the manufacturer should ensure a quality experience throughout. Perhaps that's not the industry norm; I truly don't know. Maybe it's the norm for the maker to not give a care what happens after the unit leaves the yard because profits are currently high. Maybe some makers accept responsibility throughout because of a will to succeed; maybe not. I have limited experience with buying new vehicles (one Toyota, one Dodge).

Do I feel like FCA / Jeep can improve their quality control? Yes.
Do I currently own an FCA product? Yes.
Am I strongly considering another? Yep.

Your simply implying that a failure to deliver the vehicle in pristine condition, somehow suggests that FCA doesn't care, or has failed in some way to mitigate circumstances which are entirely beyond their control.

That is simply not true.

 

[Adawg1203]

The issue I have with the OP is, he's taking his issue (3 scratched wheels, 3 scratches in the paint, and a soaked passenger floor board) and blaming it on poor quality control. Let's say the OP is right in their assessment and ONE vehicle did slip through QQ. That hardly justify's poor QQ at FCA. Guess what. It happens.

How many of us Gladiator owners took deliver of our vehicles with 3 scratched wheels, 3 paint scratches and a soaked passenger floor board??? I'll wait................Time's up..............I bet damn near none of us. So what does that say about QQ??

The overwhelming majority of us (assumption) took ownership of a brand new JT that was 99.9% perfect (I don't think anything is ever 100%). Why are we Knot Heads, or JEEP LOVERS, defenders of poor FCA QQ, or anything else?? The OPs experience seems to be isolated at best.

Now that all being said, I don't think any of us would purchase a brand new vehicle with the kinds of defects that were pointed out. Whether that be a Jeep or any other branded product. The smart play would be to move on and look at another vehicle that doesn't have those issues. Leave the defective vehicle on the lot. period.

In my view the OP lost all credibility (with me) the moment he started with the name calling and spewing of venom at folks who offered a different perspective. If you (OP) can't have a two way dialogue, or even process different points of views, why even post anything to begin with???

Maybe it is true what others have pointed out, the OP is a troll.

 

[one2doo]

My salesman said that it is his responsibility to make sure that doesn’t happen. Switch wheels and get scratches fixed before the customer arrives.

 

[NC_Overland]

My salesman said that it is his responsibility to make sure that doesn’t happen. Switch wheels and get scratches fixed before the customer arrives.

It’s actually the dealership’s responsibility to try to mitigate the damages as much as possible to not inconvenience the customer or as little as possible. That’s a customer service thing. They have zero control of who is used for transport unless it’s a dealer trade. However, a good sales person will take it upon themselves to unsure a good experience for their customer and build and maintain that relationship.

 

[Nate]

I get the disappointment, been there. Could more have been done? Sure At some point there will be one that fell through the cracks... it happens. Unless a life was lost it's no big deal and making a theatrical spectacle of it is not going to get sympathy from any rational individual here.

 

[DAVECS1]

I would think the dealer, regardless of where the damage happened would be willing to fix it up, in order to make everyone happy. A dealer who does not have the time, or ability to rectify scratches, in a cost effective manner in order to make a customer feel whole, may not be a great dealer. My Ram and Jeep dealer has replaced windshields, repainted body panels, even done a cut buff and detail on an entire vehicle, just so I would be happy with my new car and come back. When I bought my gladiator off the showroom floor they put new tires on it and added new sound deadening to the freedom top as the factory stuff was not up to spec. Stuff is gonna happen the dealer is the last line of defense and is ultimately the customer interface. They should not come to you and say FCA wont play ball, that is unprofessional.

 

[Gobi Wan K]

What I find interesting, and nobody has even commented on, is that the OP judges his lack of FCA quality control on mechanical issues that happened after delivery. Yes, I have heard of a few, and that is just a few, people having some sort of engine trouble. Most of them have been misfire issues. But I am not sure how that relates to scratches and a wet floor. I will hold FCA's feet to the fire for not addressing some issues here and there but I don't think a check engine light after delivery is quality control. They don't have a crystal ball. I don't think they are intentionally or maliciously delivering defective vehicles. Could they be better, sure. I did see one that got to the dealer with one LED drl and one incandescent drl. It was pretty obvious. But it is also a first model year and most manufacturers have hiccups that first year. But I just don't get the basis for this allegation.

Sponsored