[net.consumers] Chrysler Customer Satisfaction Board-update

joec@u1100a.UUCP (Joe Carfagno) (02/21/84)

I received a letter from the Board saying that it asked Chrysler for
its position on my problem (see earlier article for details).  That
same day (at 5:00 pm!!!!!), I received a call from the factory rep.
(remember him, the one who never returned my many phone calls...).
He offered several excuses in an attempt to get me to say something
to use against me.  For example, he said the engineering staff thinks the
engine skip is caused by the emission controls mandated by the federal
govt.  I disagreed, as I have ridden in several other New Yorkers that
do not skip.  Then he tried to get me to admit that the skip was small,
and therefore, I could live with it.  To this I responded that I did not
spend $14K for a car with a skip in it.  Using the words from New Jersey's
Lemon Law, I reminded him that the skip "significantly impairs the value
and use of the car".  Would you spend $14K for a car if it had a teeny-weeny
skip in the engine?  The rep. should have submitted his position by now.
I expect to hear from the board soon.  Stay tuned for the hopefully
happy ending to this story.