Jeep not helping with lemon

[brpoole93]

The BBB arbitrators are not paid by Stellantis. Funds for the process come from a pool paid into by all of the mfr's. In my experience running customer service operations for a Jeep competitor the arbitrators were generally fair and the process orderly and timely. The difference for us was we tried to resolve matters far before they would ever result in arbitration or litigation. It was most important to retain the customer than it was to save a few bucks and treat them like they were suckers for buying our product. Stellantis does not seem to subscribe to our philosophy.

Oh yeah I don’t actually think they are paid by Stellantis but I do understand where they could be led to favor the corporation that brings them business.
In either case, I’m hoping they will repurchase before arbitration needs to happen.

Sponsored

 

[stonejl]

The BBB arbitrators are not paid by Stellantis. Funds for the process come from a pool paid into by all of the mfr's. In my experience running customer service operations for a Jeep competitor the arbitrators were generally fair and the process orderly and timely. The difference for us was we tried to resolve matters far before they would ever result in arbitration or litigation. It was most important to retain the customer than it was to save a few bucks and treat them like they were suckers for buying our product. Stellantis does not seem to subscribe to our philosophy.

That's great. My experience differs. What I have seen is that the arbitrators are rarely lawyers and have been, in my experience, ignorant of the current state of the law, which is in constant flux and do not understand the "presumption" under the lemon law (which exists in most states). Specifically, once the presumption is triggered, the burden shifts to the mfgr to establish the car is not a lemon. But YMMV and my experience is limited to California.

 

[SoK66]

Correct, the arbitrators come from various disciplines, rarely legal. We found most often they were consumer advocates. The arbitrations aren't legal proceedings, with rules of evidence, etc. It's just the consumer tells their story, the mfr tells theirs and a decision is made. The decision isn't binding on the consumer, just the mfr., so if the consumer wants to pursue litigation after an unfavorable decision they may do so.

 

[rock123]

Arbitration in these slam dunk cases seems like a mistake for the customer. Particularly if it's binding arbitration. You have a right as a consumer to sue Jeep for violating the State Lemon Laws/ Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act. You stand to get a better deal, and you at least have the right of legitimate due process.

Sponsored