Author Topic: Warranty claims fall for Big 3  (Read 1412 times)

Offline Leviathan

  • Car Crazy
  • *****
  • Location: Vancouver
  • Posts: 3195
  • Carma: +0/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • member
    • View Profile
Warranty claims fall for Big 3
« on: June 02, 2010, 04:49:14 pm »
Quote
40% decline in rate of repair work highlights quality improvements
From The Detroit News: http://detnews.com/article/20100601/AUTO01/6010353#ixzz0pjMm6jBx

Chris Matthews, CNBC: "You know, I forgot he was black tonight for an hour"
Jon Stewart: "This guy is one scotch away from being Ron Burgundy"

Offline articsteve

  • Car Crazy
  • *****
  • Location: ON
  • Posts: 15055
  • Carma: +31/-163
    • View Profile
  • Cars: Hobbie Car: 1990 944S2
Re: Warranty claims fall for Big 3
« Reply #1 on: June 02, 2010, 06:18:25 pm »
For example, three GM models -- the Cadillac DTS, Buick LaCrosse and Buick Lucerne -- ranked among vehicles with the fewest problems in the 2010 J.D. Power and Associates long-term Vehicle Dependability Study.


Government Motor's idea of long term vehicle dependability is 3 years.  :rofl2:
“Frankly, we are not going to ever defeat the insurgency,”     Billions for jets and pennies for vets; Harponi is MAGNIFICENT.

Offline TopGun

  • Car Crazy
  • *****
  • Location: Oakville
  • Posts: 3516
  • Carma: +7/-59
  • Gender: Male
  • I'd get a ZR-1...but the interior sucks.
    • View Profile
Re: Warranty claims fall for Big 3
« Reply #2 on: June 02, 2010, 06:32:35 pm »
Government Motor's idea of long term vehicle dependability is 3 years.  :rofl2:

This is a relative measure...so if these rank among vehicles with the FEWEST problems, how is this is a negative?

On a related note, it's no surprise -- Still, GM's Buick and Chevrolet brands lagged Honda, Nissan, Ford, Subaru, Volkswagen, Toyota, Mazda, Hyundai and MINI in a biannual survey of consumer perceptions, conducted by California-based ALG Inc. and published this spring.
 
If it flies, floats or f#%&s...rent it.

CatsEye68

  • Guest
Re: Warranty claims fall for Big 3
« Reply #3 on: June 02, 2010, 06:45:58 pm »
Government Motor's idea of long term vehicle dependability is 3 years.  :rofl2:

This is a relative measure...so if these rank among vehicles with the FEWEST problems, how is this is a negative?

On a related note, it's no surprise -- Still, GM's Buick and Chevrolet brands lagged Honda, Nissan, Ford, Subaru, Volkswagen, Toyota, Mazda, Hyundai and MINI in a biannual survey of consumer perceptions, conducted by California-based ALG Inc. and published this spring.


As Confucius say: "Their eyes are open.... but they do not see."

Offline johngenx

  • Car Crazy
  • *****
  • Location: A space inside my own head where there are only mountains and climbing days...
  • Posts: 10333
  • Carma: +62/-80
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Warranty claims fall for Big 3
« Reply #4 on: June 02, 2010, 06:53:33 pm »
In the last 10 years, reliability has increased for all brands.  This is awesome for buyers.  Build quality is not the big issue it once was.
There has also been a concerted effort by all makes to take on Honda and Toyota.  Consumers showed they'll pay extra for build quality, and everyone's figuring it out now.
No place I'd rather be...

Offline Juke1

  • Drunk on Fuel
  • ****
  • Location: Ottawa
  • Posts: 2226
  • Carma: +2/-27
  • Gender: Male
  • member
    • View Profile
Re: Warranty claims fall for Big 3
« Reply #5 on: June 02, 2010, 07:50:25 pm »
There has also been a concerted effort by all makes to take on Honda and Toyota.

...and exceed...
Any fool can criticize, condemn, and complain - and most fools do. - Dale Carnegie

Diversity is not about how we differ.  Diversity is about embracing one another's uniqueness.  -Ola Joseph

Offline dr_spock

  • Car Crazy
  • *****
  • Location: Canada
  • Posts: 10569
  • Carma: +10/-4
    • View Profile
Re: Warranty claims fall for Big 3
« Reply #6 on: June 02, 2010, 09:10:28 pm »
Less claims should help the Big 3 bottom lines. 

Offline articsteve

  • Car Crazy
  • *****
  • Location: ON
  • Posts: 15055
  • Carma: +31/-163
    • View Profile
  • Cars: Hobbie Car: 1990 944S2
Re: Warranty claims fall for Big 3
« Reply #7 on: June 02, 2010, 09:40:43 pm »
The Detroit News, the defacto PR department for the D3, churns out the lamest, fluffiest, fact-less  "articles" :

The reduction in warranty claims saves the automakers much-needed money -- perhaps several hundred dollars per vehicle sold -- and boosts resale values

..... or PERHAPS not.   ::)

A more relevant "article", way beyond the capacity of the Detroit News, would be to report on to split warranty costs 50-50 GM provision concerns suppliers

DETROIT -- Auto suppliers signing new contracts with General Motors Co. are seeing a curveball: a contract provision that makes suppliers liable for half of GM's warranty costs.

The provision could put suppliers collectively on the hook for more than $1 billion in annual warranty costs. GM expects to owe $3.1 billion for policy, product warranty and recall campaign liabilities in 2010 and another $3.2 billion in 2011, according to its most recent 10-K filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.

GM announced the new policy in mid-April and began to roll out the program to suppliers in North America.

Dan Flores, GM news relations manager, said in a statement that the automaker does not comment on supplier arrangements, noting “generally speaking, we are always looking for ways to improve the working relationship with our suppliers. Those efforts are broad in nature but certainly include exploring ways to improve product quality, reduce costs and improve the way to do business.”

The provision is a move by GM to standardize how it shares its warranty costs with its suppliers. Until now, GM has recouped warranty costs from its suppliers on an ad hoc basis. If GM attributes warranty costs to a supplier's part, GM makes a claim against the supplier, leading to an often protracted back-and-forth to assign responsibility and decide who will pay.

“If GM has designed a way to streamline the process of allocating warranty cost responsibility, God bless them, but in 100 years of automobile manufacturing, automakers and suppliers have not been able to do that,” said William Kohler, senior attorney at Detroit law firm Butzel Long. “They have historically argued and sometimes litigated over who is responsible for warranty costs, because those are very complex and sometimes extremely high-stakes issues.”

But standardizing the process could put suppliers on the hook for regular, hefty bills, so many suppliers are skeptical.

50% of what?

Part of the fight is going to be determining the total of the warranty costs that will be split 50-50. So, while the rule is 50 percent, the question is, 50 percent of what?

Ann Marie Uetz, a partner with law firm Foley & Lardner in Detroit, says some of her clients have agreed to the provision, but many are skeptical about signing the document, saying it's unclear exactly what GM plans to include in the warranty costs to be split.

Suppliers whose parts must be repaired or replaced and are under warranty will pay half of the cost of repairing and replacing those parts, and the cost of supplying replacement parts to be used by dealers in warranty repairs, according to a copy of the contract language obtained by Crain's Detroit Business, an affiliate of Automotive News.

Suppliers will not be on the hook for costs related to recall campaigns, the price markup of service parts, dealer goodwill costs or diagnostics that end up showing no problems, according to the contract.

“Suppliers want a clear understanding of exactly what is going into those warranty costs if they're going to agree to split it 50-50,” Uetz said.

Said Kohler: “This 50-50 split is really a bad idea for suppliers.”

Putting on the hook

Kohler, whose clients have been presented with the contract, said the language is ambiguous and could put suppliers on the hook for warranty costs that were not caused by their components.

The issue could also work its way further down the supply chain. Uetz said that, as a general matter, purchasing practices employed by the automakers are often also employed by their top tier suppliers with their own supply base.

Kohler said the provision may backfire on GM.

“If GM begins abusing this process than suppliers should learn quickly to price in anticipation of unjustified warranty costs being pushed down on them.”


www.autonews.com




Offline TopGun

  • Car Crazy
  • *****
  • Location: Oakville
  • Posts: 3516
  • Carma: +7/-59
  • Gender: Male
  • I'd get a ZR-1...but the interior sucks.
    • View Profile
Re: Warranty claims fall for Big 3
« Reply #8 on: June 02, 2010, 10:08:55 pm »
For example, three GM models -- the Cadillac DTS, Buick LaCrosse and Buick Lucerne -- ranked among vehicles with the fewest problems in the 2010 J.D. Power and Associates long-term Vehicle Dependability Study.


Government Motor's idea of long term vehicle dependability is 3 years.  :rofl2:

Oh OK...so now that we've addressed this rubbish statement, you've moved on to try and find some more...

Ya...this article is much more relevant..."Kohler said the provision may backfire on GM"...or may not.

The Artic-approved article on the proposal to split warranty costs where they were not split before also contains gems like:

  • “This 50-50 split is really a bad idea for suppliers.”, and
  • “If GM begins abusing this process than suppliers should learn quickly to price in anticipation of unjustified warranty costs being pushed down on them.”

Offline articsteve

  • Car Crazy
  • *****
  • Location: ON
  • Posts: 15055
  • Carma: +31/-163
    • View Profile
  • Cars: Hobbie Car: 1990 944S2
Re: Warranty claims fall for Big 3
« Reply #9 on: June 02, 2010, 10:23:52 pm »
Oh OK...so now that we've addressed this rubbish statement, you've moved on to try and find some more...

One man's rubbish is another's treasure.  :)

Offline johngenx

  • Car Crazy
  • *****
  • Location: A space inside my own head where there are only mountains and climbing days...
  • Posts: 10333
  • Carma: +62/-80
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Warranty claims fall for Big 3
« Reply #10 on: June 03, 2010, 12:12:21 am »
There has also been a concerted effort by all makes to take on Honda and Toyota.

...and exceed...

Not on an overall basis.  People around here like to fantasize that Toyota (especially) and Honda (to a lesser point) have somehow begun producing nothing but heaps.  Untrue.  They've had their missteps, but overall, they still build the product lines that are well made.

Offline toolatecrew

  • Drunk on Fuel
  • ****
  • Location: Dartmouth NS
  • Posts: 2551
  • Carma: +0/-0
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Warranty claims fall for Big 3
« Reply #11 on: June 03, 2010, 07:19:27 am »
I saw that article obout the 50 50 cost split.

Wanna be a GM supplier?

Cut margins to the bone.
Be prepared to have accounts recivables drawn out to infinity
Now you get to pay 50% of warranty costs.

Wow where do I sign up?

If no one will supply you parts how do you build cars?

Offline saint_satan

  • Drunk on Fuel
  • ****
  • Location: Holland Landing, Ontario
  • Posts: 1016
  • Carma: +0/-0
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Warranty claims fall for Big 3
« Reply #12 on: June 03, 2010, 08:13:21 am »
I can't speak for Toyota but I have intimate knowledge of 3 generations of Honda Civics.  A long-term GF had a '92 and '97.  My wife currently has an '03.  All 3 cars were bought new.  The '92 was bullet proof, the '97 had power window and A/C woes - and I swear I had a pedal stick 2 or 3 times but could never figure out the cause.  The '03 is, IMHO, a lump.  Cloth trim fell of the doors at 1 month (and still bubbling up elsewhere) , paint peeled off front at 18 months and it has suffered through A/C, suspension and cracked manifold issues all around 100k.

I think regardless of the brand you buy, there is good and bad in all.  It's essential to do your homework...

Offline Sir Osis of Liver

  • Car Crazy
  • *****
  • Location: Regina, Sask
  • Posts: 7336
  • Carma: +41/-40
  • Gender: Male
  • You call this an angry mob?
    • View Profile
  • Cars: 2011 Subaru Outback 3.6R Limited
Re: Warranty claims fall for Big 3
« Reply #13 on: June 03, 2010, 10:36:50 am »
Do we know what the Toyota policy is for supplier liability? I recall Toyota trying to throw CTS under the bus over the sticky pedal issue.

Funny you should mention the Civic. Just this morning I saw a late model Civic on the side of the road with a collapsed front driver's side suspension (broken spring or separated ball joint?). Rocker panel almost on the ground. My co-worker with the 2009 Civic coupe has had a number of issues, mostly minor, but she's disappointed in light of Honda's reputation. I am too because I generally like Honda (questionable styling and snooty dealers aside) and recommended the car to her.
For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring. –
Carl Sagan

Offline TopGun

  • Car Crazy
  • *****
  • Location: Oakville
  • Posts: 3516
  • Carma: +7/-59
  • Gender: Male
  • I'd get a ZR-1...but the interior sucks.
    • View Profile
Re: Warranty claims fall for Big 3
« Reply #14 on: June 03, 2010, 11:48:39 am »
Do we know what the Toyota policy is for supplier liability? I recall Toyota trying to throw CTS under the bus over the sticky pedal issue.

During my time as a summer student at Honda in Alliston (1993), I know they required the suppliers to have office space at the factory.  Chatting with some of the guys, they felt that Honda made the suppliers deal with "all" of the problems.

Offline saint_satan

  • Drunk on Fuel
  • ****
  • Location: Holland Landing, Ontario
  • Posts: 1016
  • Carma: +0/-0
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Warranty claims fall for Big 3
« Reply #15 on: June 03, 2010, 12:09:25 pm »
Sir Osis:

I feel a bit bad too.  At least the failures in the '97 were covered under warranty - the windows were past warranty under "goodwill" (read chronic problem).  The good will was enough to make me recommend Honda again even with my perceived issues with that particular car.  The '03 drives excellent (feels tight) but the trim issues are ridiculous.  It has the attention to detail of a Chrysler Sebring with misaligned trim and poorly place moldings.  The cracked exhaust manifold at 105K is inexcusible.  I have a 10 year old Cherokee with well over 200K with the original manifold.  Heck, I even got 190K out of a POS '87 Tempo before the manifold cracked.

Offline toolatecrew

  • Drunk on Fuel
  • ****
  • Location: Dartmouth NS
  • Posts: 2551
  • Carma: +0/-0
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Warranty claims fall for Big 3
« Reply #16 on: June 03, 2010, 12:56:38 pm »
Had to say this was a little perplexing:

Quote
With the new Chevrolet Camaro, for example, GM deployed a fleet of test vehicles nationwide which were driven for more than 2 million miles. The vehicle's performance was monitored through the onboard OnStar safety and navigation service, which tracked issues that could be resolved before production, Hresko

From The Detroit News: http://detnews.com/article/20100601/AUTO01/6010353#ixzz0poGI9K9I

2 million miles of testing and this happens?

Quote
Sporadic reports have begun popping up in the Camaro5 forums about issues with V8-powered SS models equipped with the manual transmission. It seems that doing a hard launch or using the launch control system occasionally results in a broken output shaft, a serious failure that will most likely leave the car immobile and in need of repair. We spoke with General Motors spokesman Adam Dennison about the problem and, as this is being written, a factory hold has been put on deliveries of manual transmission V8 Camaros while Chevrolet engineering teams investigate the problem.

Based on the reports, the transmission issues may not be related to the launch control system as the failures seem to happen whether or not launch control is engaged. The Camaro SS uses the Tremec 6060 six-speed gearbox – the same transmission fitted to the Dodge Viper, Mustang GT500, Corvette Z06 and other performance cars – so this is likely a manufacturing issue with a batch of gearboxes.

Dennison told Autoblog that an engineering meeting is being held this evening to identify the cause and establish a timing for the fix – and a recall seems likely. In the meantime, if you have a manual model Camaro SS, you might want to go easy on the launches for now – and if you have one ordered, you'll have to wait a bit longer
http://www.autoblog.com/2009/07/13/breaking-early-camaro-ss-manual-transmission-failures-reported/

Offline johngenx

  • Car Crazy
  • *****
  • Location: A space inside my own head where there are only mountains and climbing days...
  • Posts: 10333
  • Carma: +62/-80
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Warranty claims fall for Big 3
« Reply #17 on: June 03, 2010, 01:02:30 pm »
Personally, I do think suppliers should be sharing in warranty costs.  If the design came from the brand, and the design is the defect and the parts are made to spec and the manufacturing errors are within spec, then the brand should eat it.

But, if the supplier is making crap, then they need to pony up.  An example comes from Mercedes from some time ago.  Some electrical components were made by different suppliers.  In the case of cruise control amplifiers, the VDO units were garbage.  (Well, most of the VDO stuff was junk, so who would have thought the cruise amplifiers wouldn't be...)  If Bosch can produce the MB spec units with low failure rates and VDO cannot, well, shouldn't VDO eat the cost of replacing them?  I could never understand why Mercedes never dropped VDO or Hirschmann from their supplier list.  Compromising pics somewhere!

Same went for Radios.  The Blaupunkt produced units were garbage, the Alpine built ones excellent.  Same unit, different suppliers.

What about if the supplier designs the part as well?

I don't think there should be a "50:50" formula, but it certainly needs to be a part of the supplier agreement...

Offline drederick

  • Enthusiast
  • **
  • Posts: 488
  • Carma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Warranty claims fall for Big 3
« Reply #18 on: June 03, 2010, 01:03:36 pm »
There has also been a concerted effort by all makes to take on Honda and Toyota.

...and exceed...

Not on an overall basis.  People around here like to fantasize that Toyota (especially) and Honda (to a lesser point) have somehow begun producing nothing but heaps.  Untrue.  They've had their missteps, but overall, they still build the product lines that are well made.

Heaps? do you mean vehicles that had to be removed from sale and production stopped because of safety issues? I wouldn't call them heaps, rather, poorly engineered vehicles.

Can you actually say that your Rolla is any better made than anything made by any other manufacturer? or an even better example - is it even better than a previous generation Rolla?
blah blah blah Toyota blah blah blah I feel your pain; you've got a GM, it's worth squat and you owe on it. 

Dude, if the displacment is EXACT, it's not "all new".  The intake is different, the VVT is now on both sets of valves  In the automotive world "all new" often means somewhat different

Offline drederick

  • Enthusiast
  • **
  • Posts: 488
  • Carma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Warranty claims fall for Big 3
« Reply #19 on: June 03, 2010, 01:23:11 pm »
I saw that article obout the 50 50 cost split.

Wanna be a GM supplier?

Cut margins to the bone.
Be prepared to have accounts recivables drawn out to infinity
Now you get to pay 50% of warranty costs.

Wow where do I sign up?

If no one will supply you parts how do you build cars?

ahem Toyota threw CTS under the ship during that little safety misstep of the gas pedal...... why again would anyone want to be a Toyota supplier?

In fact - didn't Toyota say they were going to take a further 30 percent away from parts costs.... so the supplier is gonna have to eat that and get screwed publicly when Toyota gives them a contract and they produce the exact part Toyota wants and then the part Toyota asks for turns out to be dangerously unsafe.... wonderful.