Sorry to hear about your problems but that's the problem with a used coach. If the proper maintenance isn't done then it's up to you to take that in to consideration before purchase. The old saying "If it breaks in half as you leave the lot you own both halves" comes to mind.
You weren't the original owner. You were 3 years out of warranty. Monaco still sent you a rather expensive replacement part for free. I would count my blessings, thank Monaco and move on.
The party to blame is the original owner. Expecting Monaco to make owners behave and do what is right is unreasonable. There is plenty of evidence out there that some owners trash there units and trade them in or sell them. Also evidence that many treat their rv's like gold and do everything to prevent breakdowns and wear.
A lot of pre-purchase investigation is the best deterrent and even then we often get bit. Just move on. How many other companies will jump in and give out free replacemnt parts after being out of warranty for 3 years? Monaco has been more than fair.
First of all, sorry to hear about your troubles Stuart. Second, how can you who posted not support Stuarts position? You would be singing a different tune if it happened to you! Because your sitting back at your puter with a good trans in your unit, its okay, just as long as its not you. I think the selling dealer should be held respondible as much as Monaco, after all, they could have checked for open tsb's and recalls. They have a service dept that is suppose to go over and prepare the unit, right? Remember, this has nothing to do with owner negligence, this guy is most certainly a victim here. I think Demartini needs to step up and put pressure on Monaco and together find a positive resoloution for Stuart and restore some Goodwill here. ( I have read good things about Demartini helping people out in similar situations, what have they said?) There is a lot of blame to go around, but not to Stuart.
Good luck.
Monaco seems to be covered legally, I think its a tough shot to take for you to have to pay for the damage yourself but I can also understand Monaco's reluctance in setting a legal precedent by covering this repair. I will certainly add Monaco to my list of coaches I will not consider, but that is the risk you take in buying used. Its a shame, but I think you are going to just have to bite the bullet and pay for it yourself.
A warranty is a warranty they run out, the coach was used it's the chance you take buying used. How many dealers do you think would check to see if a recall was taken care of prior to taking a unit in trade. who knows what's involved in physically checking to see if the repairs were made? There could be a good deal of shop time involved in removing radiator/trans cooler.
Rob and Karen kids Kevin 10 and Kayla 8
06 HR Ambassador 40 DST
05 Odyssey Toad
MrHavasu wrote: First of all, sorry to hear about your troubles Stuart. Second, how can you who posted not support Stuarts position? You would be singing a different tune if it happened to you! ... There is a lot of blame to go around, but not to Stuart.
A) nobody has "blamed" Stuart except for his failure to check for recall work - obvious to some of us but maybe not to others.
B) My tune would not be different if it was me. He bought a used coach out of warranty. He wants (and a couple of posters support) Monaco to take care of his problem but the questions is what is their fault. As I read it they notified this "Paul Evert" the next owner claims he never heard about it so Stuart got left holding the bag.
My Question: How is Monaco responsible for this beyond the parts and labor for the ORIGINAL recall which they would have to do anyway?
An important point that is being missed here. THIS WAS NOT EVER A RECALL!. This was handled as a TSI {technical service information}. There is a significant difference both legally and in practice. As Stuart has now found out.
The manufacturer during the course of business evidently found there to be a significant incidence of failure in a particular supplier part and informed dealers of the problem and put a finite limit on the period they would pay for correction. Unfortunately the repair did not get accomplished on this unit during the time. Stuart was the third owner of the unit and the warranty was three years out of date.
Limits are limits and established for cause. There is not a manufacturer out there that I can not point to a similar refusal to fix something out of the warranty period. This becomes more in play when we get down to second and third owners on a unit. The original contract of ownership was with the original owner and to expect a "goodwill" adjustment two more owners down the line and three years after warranty is in my opinion past the point of reason.
I keep hearing warranty and recall. This is not a warranty claim or request for extension of warranty. This is NOT a warranty issue.
And it is NOT a recall in the classic sense, although is sure smells like one. The difference is a recall is mandated by the NHTSA, a TSI escapes that scrutiny and is driven by the manufacturer. When this TSI was initiated, Monaco had JB Radiator on the hook to pay both the campaign fix, and any transmission failures that occurred, like mine. Monaco, unfortunately, accepted the stipulation of a time limit from JB Radiator in exchange for their agreement to fund the recall plus any damages.
So, let’s get in agreement it is not a recall and it is not a warranty claim. What it is, however, is very poor ongoing efforts to monitor field conformance to mid level issues of serious consequence. This coach was covered by the TSI until the time limits ran out. But for every Monaco contact with this coach thereafter, whether dealer or direct customer communication, no Monaco system existed to raise a flag that the TSI was never complied with. My selling dealer did not advise me, my new owner registration with Monaco Tech Support produced no warning, as did not two or three calls to tech support for assistance on some wiring issues. And most importantly, while spending three days at the Monaco Harrisburg facility concluding with the trip home and loosing the transmission, there was not a word about an unresolved TSI.
Also consider is this. When I first called Monaco on February 17th following the failure of the transmission, I felt that while Monaco should own some of the responsibility for the transmission repair, so should I. And I proposed that Monaco split the repair with me. While only Monaco knew and could have divulged the information necessary to have saved my transmission, by the same token it was out of the TSI time frame and it was not a new coach. So I should accept some responsibility as well, right? Seem reasonable to me, but not to Monaco.
Magic bus,
How can he check the tsb or recall status if Monaco will not disclose it? What difference does it make if he is the 3rd owner? How is a known defect any different with a 3rd owner? Two dealers missed it, how is Stuart supposed to be any better about catching it? The unit was was only 3 years old when he bought it right? What am I missing here?
Offline
