Ford V10motor locked up

[segfault]

It's a shame it's probably too late to file a lemon law claim. You could forget about the engine and make them buy the whole RV back (though I'm not sure how or if the lemon law applies to RV's).

Ray H made a point a few pages back that is not entirely correct. He said that the burden of proof is always on the plaintiff. In certain types of cases, the burden of proof is shifted from the plaintiff to the defendant, such as cases of negligence per se. Unfortunately, that doesn't apply to your case!

 

[Vstrom]

RVs are a royal pain in the *** . The RV is warranted by the coach builder, the chassis by Ford in this case. A buy back is very unlikely since it is considered two separate major systems!
Personally I think by letting the oil go 7000 miles when the recommended interval in that type of service was 3000 is a major blunder. I'm all for the little guy but come on? The warranty requirements were NOT followed then a problem resulted. I really can't blame Ford for denying coverage.
I also know dealers absolutely, positively HATE to work on motorhomes, some even refuse. They have all sorts of access issues because of the way they are built. Ford won't pay them because some coach builder made it take hours extra to do warranty work on an engine that might be relatively simple on say a pickup.

 

[Cathy Covington]

It is apparent that this dealership never intended to work on my RV. that is why they have quoted me 9k to fix it. We have a meeting with the attorney Monday. I will update then if I have anything to update. All I wanted to know is if anyone KNEW if another guy worked on it and he is not Ford certified...can they also use that aginst me???? I don't need another woulda could shoulda lesson...I am aware that many of you are smarter than I am on this subject...it is not my area. I am just trying to pick up from now. I am NOT discontinuing this fight! the weather is starting to turn cold...the tanks in the RV are full...I don't want problems added to my problems!

 

[Mike_dup1]

Here is a line from a GM engine warranty for your info. Most likely other manf. have something similar.

quote:

---

However, before any repairs can be performed under warranty by an independent repair center, a GM dealer must first inspect, and authorize needed repairs as a sublet service.

---

 

[tmorris1]

quote:

---

Originally posted by segfault:
It's a shame it's probably too late to file a lemon law claim. You could forget about the engine and make them buy the whole RV back (though I'm not sure how or if the lemon law applies to RV's).

Ray H made a point a few pages back that is not entirely correct. He said that the burden of proof is always on the plaintiff. In certain types of cases, the burden of proof is shifted from the plaintiff to the defendant, such as cases of negligence per se. Unfortunately, that doesn't apply to your case!

---

If I am not mistaken the lemon law applies to a vehicle that has multiple occurances of a problem or a set of problems. This wouldn't apply in this case.

 

[Ray H]

The fist rule in tort proceedings, other than breach of contract, is that the burden of proof is ALWAYS on the plaintiff. The Covingtons will have to prove by a "preponderance of evidence" that failing to perform the recommended oil change in the severe service interval did not materially factor in their engine's failure. If the Covingtons' attorney plans to contest Ford's decision on the basis of breach of contract (Ford's refusal to honor the powertrain warranty), he's right back to square one - Ford would argue that the Covongtons were, themselves, in breach of contract by failing to service the engine oil according to the terms laid out in the owners' manual and warranty. Rest assured, Ford will call, as expert witnesses, engineers who were personally involved in the design and testing of the V-10 motors with lotsa pretty charts, slides, and impressive techno-babble to overwhelm the jury into submission. Whom will the Covingtons' attorney be calling at $150.00+/hr including travel time plus travel expenses? The Covingtons may spend $12,000.00 or more in court costs, attorney's fees, and expert witness(es) fees over a $9,000.00 repair - and depending on state law, may or may not be recoverable in a counter suit. Now, if you have actual case law to the contrary, segfault, please cite the relevant case number(s). I'm always open to learning.

 

[ekpolk]

Generally, not always, the plaintiff has the burden of proof. You can consider that a good starting point. But there are plenty of situations in which, for various reasons, the law imposes the burden on the defendant. Most notably, a defendant has the burden of proof on any defenses he asserts. I tried a case a few years ago in which the judge shifted the burden to the defense because the defendant had destroyed critical evidence. It was interesting indeed to watch the defense try to prove that it was NOT negligent. So while it is true that the plf generally starts with the burden, it's not always so. This concept is like a block of swiss cheese -- plenty of cheese there, but lots of holes too.

 

[Gary Allan]

quote:

---

The fist rule in tort proceedings, other than breach of contract, is that the burden of proof is ALWAYS on the plaintiff.

---

Sure. The plaintiff, in this case, asserts that Ford will not honor their warranty. There can be no agruement with this assertion.

quote:

---

The Covingtons will have to prove by a "preponderance of evidence" that failing to perform the recommended oil change in the severe service interval did not materially factor in their engine's failure.

---

I don't agree. Ford will have to prove that this is the cause of them failing in specific performance of their agreement to warrant the engine.

 

[ULVER]

This thread has been sad... I really feel for Cathy. I can see Ford playing hardball, but at what cost? The "net" has made us all closer. Good service vs. bad service, can be shared much more easily these days.

***If Ford just bit their tongue, at this moment, and said: "We will fix it!" What would most posters come away with??? I would think Ford would be buying themselves a LOAD of good will toward their product.***

FYI---Ford came out with a 5-20 for EPA/CAFE agenda. It was first shipped to some police agencies, as a conventinal/dino lube. In little time, I heard several departments, had engine failures with low miles. Ford came out with the now, well-known 5-20 synthetic blend.

Whatever...

Pushing 5-20 to 7K is asking for it, under extreme circumstances. BUT I HOPE YOU WIN!!!

Might I suggest: Mobil 1/ROYAL PURPLE/Amsoil>in the future>???

 

[Amkeer]

This post is reminder to me why I WILL NEVER BUY A FORD PRODUCT! NEVER! Its a shame of what could be a GREAT AMERICAN ICON is a sham! From the "ROLLOVER", putting out questionable products that the consumer should eat because it will effect our "BOTTOM LINE". This is not the first person that I witnessed going through a terrible situation like this with FORD.

GOOD MOVE FORD!!!! And may many, many thousands view this thread and see how poor you treat your GREATEST ASSET.....YOUR CONSUMERS!!!!

Maybe someday they will finally get and live up to, "QUALITY IS JOB 1"

 

[Motorbike]

This is a long thread so w/o re-reading the entire thing what had Ford done wrong ?

They will warranty the drivetrain against defective parts or workmanship for 36k miles and in return they ask minimum maintanence be performed to include air filter replacement at X months or miles but of note here it seems oil change mileage is the issue .

Ford asked that the proper oil be used for no more than 3k miles in this vehicle and operating conditions . If this engine came in broke with 2900 miles and low months on the oil change with owners receipts to show the engine had never gone past allowed miles and time since new does anyone think Ford would have denied the claim ?

Think about it . Does 7k miles raise the red flag higher than 2900 miles when Ford see's something like this ?

 

[Amkeer]

Motor,

Without reading a good majority of the thread you will not understand and I am not about to explain it again.

 

[Eddie]

Ford set the rules/recomendations and you did not pay any heed. In addition: you abuse the heck out of your vehicle and now you want someone else to pay for your screw-up?? I don't think so. Sorry to hear about this problem but just sell or replace or you'll end up in a straight jacket and life goes on.

 

[ToyotaNSaturn]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Eddie:
Ford set the rules/recomendations and you did not pay any heed. In addition: you abuse the heck out of your vehicle and now you want someone else to pay for your screw-up?? I don't think so. Sorry to hear about this problem but just sell or replace or you'll end up in a straight jacket and life goes on.

---

Eddie can you prove abuse? If the oil was left in for 4,000 miles, would the issue be any different even though she's over by 1,000 miles rather than 4,000 miles? Ford plays the waiting game with their customers in hopes of NOT paying the claim. I've seen this before. It really sux for the customer,though.

 

[c_rossman]

I seen a rebuilt V10 on Ebay for 2500 bucks with a 36,000 mile warranty. Seems to me this would be your best bet.

 

[Brett Miller]

I'm with Motorbike. How can Ford be expected to honor the warranty when the consumer did not perform the required maintenance?

 

[Amkeer]

If you read the thread you will understand that a UOA was done on the oil and the oil was under no means the cause of failure. So what gives Ford the right to deny a warranty claim on this defective motor? Inform me cause I am all ears...

 

[got boost?]

I've been following this thread, and though we've rehashed things several times here is my understanding of the situation for those just joining. There was a failure of the engine. it was taken to the dealer who decided that the engine failed because the oil change interval wasn't followed, no scientific tests of the oil were done, and no expert mechanical inspection was performed other than looking at bearings.
Is the RV operating under the severe service schedule? apparently, even though miles were mostly highway. would an oil breakdown to the point of damaging the engine under these conditions, probably not, but the dealer took no action to make this determination. are there other well known modes of failure for this engine like what has been described here, that don't involve oil breakdown, yes.

I think Ford should absolutely fix the engine under warranty (even for simple owner loyalty), but they won't because they have for some reason decided alienating current and potential future customers is cheaper than fixing problems. the dealer did what most dealers do, half *** the job then blame the customer for defects.

 

[Ugly3]

Brett Miller - How can Ford be expected to honor the warranty when the consumer did not perform the required maintenance?

Ford does not require any maintenance. Ford recommends maintenance. Just because the recommended maintenance was not followed does not mean the warranty is void. Ford must demonstrate the customer action (or lack thereof) caused the engine to fail.

In this case the oil was tested and found to be within spec. So not following the recommended oil change schedule did not cause the engine to fail.

 

[Ugly3]

Slightly

.

Pennzoil has a 10 year, 250,000 warranty that requires 4,000 mile oil changes. They state every clearly that if you go 4,001 miles between changes you have no warranty.