Jim Warman Posted April 13, 2009 Share Posted April 13, 2009 This TSB showed up in a broadcast message back about the 1st or 2nd.. It took them wizards almost a week to get it translated into something that allowed us English speaking guys to read it. This TSB 09-07-11 babbles on about reprogramming things without really offering authority to reflash things. While this TSB specifially mentions 0-26-03 as "Other Applicable Articles", it seems more that this TSB is designed to cloud the issues and offered the mothership more opportunities and/or reasons to deny warranty claims and to cook up chargebacks. Anyone else care to comment? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keith Browning Posted April 13, 2009 Share Posted April 13, 2009 I don't know what you are reading but as I look at this TSB I take this AS my authorization to reprogram PCM and FICM modules for the given symptoms and codes. We were previously told we were not allowed to reprogram modules on pre 2006 model trucks without authorization: TSB, FSA or HotLine direction. Well, here it is and this TSB simply updates TSB 07-5-4 and TSB 08-26-3. The warranty status states that a recalibration under this TSB is covered under the provisions of the new vehicle and emissions warranty. Above and beyond the specific DTC's listed the symptoms are pretty broad in my humble opinion: "hard start, no start, white smoke, lack of power and running rough condition after starting cold engine start up." If that isn't sufficient reason to update the modules then what is? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Warman Posted April 13, 2009 Author Share Posted April 13, 2009 Perhaps I'm reading too much into it then... What I see is an opportunity for warranty to abuse a document or two... to deny a claim based on nothing more than how something is worded. Had a FICM claim bounced lately? Just because I'm paranoid doesn't mean Im not being followed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keith Browning Posted April 13, 2009 Share Posted April 13, 2009 I can see a reflash claim bouncing for NOT writing it up "AS PER TSB 09-07-11 and citing one of the listed conditions or DTC's. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff_ Posted April 13, 2009 Share Posted April 13, 2009 I just had a 6.4 reflash bounce for not coding it to a specific tsb. Apparently there is a new edit in ACES to do exactly this as it never used to be a problem. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aaron Posted April 14, 2009 Share Posted April 14, 2009 Wow, a 6.0L repair with the words "AS PER TSB" in the cause/correction statements. You don't say. *dripping with sarcasm* Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G. Bedford Posted April 14, 2009 Share Posted April 14, 2009 I noticed they shaved a tenth from the labor time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keith Browning Posted April 14, 2009 Share Posted April 14, 2009 Wow, a 6.0L repair with the words "AS PER TSB" in the cause/correction statements. You don't say. *dripping with sarcasm* Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Warman Posted April 14, 2009 Author Share Posted April 14, 2009 I'd have to double check but it seems to me tha we are finding that "as per TSB yadda-yadda" is not sufficient.. We are seeing problems as in being told we are following the wrong TSB... though it appears that some TSBs are vanishing into the system... Writing I performed step 3 doesn't appear to be sufficient... instead we write I performed <labour operation>... And let's not forget to write down our old FICM calibration.... oooooh, I guess we didn't do that because we followed TSB 09-07-11 when warranty will insist that we should have followed 08-26-03.. too bad, so sad... here's yer claim back. OK, so you followed 08-26-03.... but warranty says you should have followed 09-07-11... too bad, so sad... here's yer claim back. But, and this is if they feel real magnanimous, you might get a "mercy fuck" in the form of getting paid for the lesser TSB... Yes, Yossarian.... I get the feeling that Catch 22 is alive and well and living in the halls of Fords warranty administration... "That's some catch, that Catch 22".(apologies to Joseph Heller). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keith Browning Posted April 15, 2009 Share Posted April 15, 2009 I'd have to double check but it seems to me tha we are finding that "as per TSB yadda-yadda" is not sufficient... Yes, if you only write "diagnosed and repaired as per TSB #" the claim by all rights should bounce. You still need to write up the general diagnostic steps followed and the test results followed by the repair steps taken. You don't need to be overly verbose but at least minimally accurate. Something close to the labor operation description for example will suffice. Aside from warranty eligibility and whether the TSB is the proper or suitable repair you shouldn't have problems... I would think. Let us not forget that despite the TSB, we still need to cover the basics: "Concern, Cause and Correction" still need to be documented. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LARRY BRUDZYNSKI Posted April 17, 2009 Share Posted April 17, 2009 Keith, as I posted a few minutes ago, it might be a good time to help us out further with a thread to assist with the Warranty claim process. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DwayneGorniak Posted April 17, 2009 Share Posted April 17, 2009 Larry, read the other post and I think you will get a better idea of what is going on. I just replied to that one. As I said in that post, I don't think the procedure is the same for everyone right now during these hard economic times. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eastendpowerstroke Posted April 17, 2009 Share Posted April 17, 2009 Gee I think I heard THIS idea somewhere before???? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LARRY BRUDZYNSKI Posted April 17, 2009 Share Posted April 17, 2009 Yep I just read it and makes sense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keith Browning Posted April 17, 2009 Share Posted April 17, 2009 You guys REALLY want a Warranty forum? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LARRY BRUDZYNSKI Posted April 17, 2009 Share Posted April 17, 2009 It would give you somewhere to put the warranty issues, they seem to be spread through out the forum. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aaron Posted April 18, 2009 Share Posted April 18, 2009 Something to this effect: Inspected as requested. Found RH mudflap loose. Removed mudflap from vehicle and inspected mounting surface integrity. Installed mudflap using aftermarket hardware and inspected alignment. Found alignment not within specifications, adjusted alignment as necessary. Re-checked alignment found within specifications. Road tested mudflap and re-inspected alignment after road test. Found alignment within specifications. Release vehicle to customer. Or something like this... It was a N/C mudflap install on a Tiremaster truck. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.