Jeep Garage  - Jeep Forum banner

Is my 2014 Laredo a Lemon?

Tags
2014
4K views 18 replies 7 participants last post by  DanPorges 
#1 ·
I have sent a Lemon Law Letter to Jeep with the following list of services attempts and repair results. I am not sure if they care or if this will qualify as a "Lemon", but I really love my Jeep...I just cant justify sticking with a vehicle with this number of problems for the entire 39 month term of my lease if this is going to keep up.....

· October 10, 2013
o Prior to taking final delivery of the vehicle I test drove it. I had ordered the vehicle from the factory so it was not on the lot for me to have done so prior to leaving my deposit for the purchase. I notified my sales rep, Tyler, that the steering wheel was not centered at that time and asked that it be remedied before I take final delivery. I delayed my deliver in expectation that this was done
· October 28, 2013
o Steering Wheel was not centered when I picked the vehicle up so I scheduled an appointment and brought it in. Waited for the vehicle and when I took it for a ride upon its supposed completion, found the issue was not resolved at all
· October 28, 2013
o Steering wheel still not centered. Brought back on same day and was told that I wasn’t looking at the wheel correctly. Tech again attempted alignment and when I took the car for a ride on the local roads it seemed to be adequately resolved. Within about 2 days I had contacted the dealer service department again to let them know the issue had returned and seemed worse than before
· October 30, 2013 –
o Steering Wheel STILL not aligned to center and seems to have become worse
§ Upon completion, manager took it for a drive and issue seems to have been corrected through alignment
o Steering wheel vibration, seems like a tire is out of balance
§ No longer evident as may have been a side effect of alignment issue
o Transmission severely “slams” at very low speeds (highway traffic) during 1st-to-2nd, 2nd-to-3rd and downshifts on the above. When coming to a stop from low speeds the transmission drops into 1st gear unexpectedly and causes the vehicle to lurch forward, feels as though someone has bumped the car from behind when it happens.
§ Was told by manager that this is a known issue and “not technically out of spec” as Chrysler is supposedly working on a software update to remedy the issue
· December 30, 2013
o Vehicle brought back in for another attempt at fixing steering wheel issue. Though it was fixed previously it seems to have returned to a crooked state over time since the last attempted repair
§ Dealership conducted a 4-wheel alignment this time (not sure why this was not done previously) and found the rear end to be significantly out of spec. Once fixed this seems to have alleviated the problem
o Transmission seems to be getting worse. Now when I accelerate I feel a vibration off the line which goes away at speed. No matter what speed I am traveling at the shifts are EXTREMELY abrupt and rough and seem to be getting much worse as the mileage of the vehicle increases
§ Software update conducted and dealer advised a part was being ordered (A pressure valve) for the transmission that has been identified as improving the issue in other similar vehicles to date
o Satellite Radio cuts out intermittently with no reason or warning on open roads with no visible disruptions to the signal
§ Dealer conducted a software update on the audio system, but no noticeable improvement has been seen
o Driver seat is clicking and squeaking over bumps and around corners as though something in the seat frame is loose or has come apart
· January 20, 2014
o Vehicle being brought back to dealership for another attempt to resolve the transmission issues. The valve ordered on 12/30 will be installed
o Upon the completion of the rear alignment on 12/30 a new noise has started in the rear suspension, described as a rubber and metal friction sound. Tech believes it to be one or more bushing of the left rear shock and will plan to replace during this visit
o Seat was not addressed during the 12/30 visit and will be addressed during this effort.
 
See less See more
#7 ·
Thanks, I agree the seat is not worthy of the lemon law, but I added to my letter for good measure of the shear number of problems. MA Lemon Law coveres "Defects effecting the Safety and potential Resale Value", so the steering wheel qualifies as both, the transmission is at least the latter if not both, the seat may only be the latter and that could be stretching
 
#3 ·
Try a better dealer. You seem to be suffering from issues that many early 2014's suffer. The tranny has a software update (TSB# 21-007-13c) that should have solved the rough shifting. The Sat radio problems are solved by a replacement of the shark-fin antenna (TSB# 08-089-13). Both of those are known issues and should have been solved by the dealer. Take a look at WK2Jeeps and see what bulletins are effecting you, print them out and demand action from the dealer.
 
#6 ·
The dealer may be the problem, but they are also routinely the highest rated Mopar dealer in all of New England.
The TSB for the software update was applied and did nothing to remedy the problem. The satelite radio only included a software update for my VIN in the TSB, the antenna is supposedly already updated on later models, though I have my doubts.
 
#4 ·
Did you research your state's Lemon Law at all, or did you start with the letter?

Have you researched your state's Lemon Law yet, or was your second step to ask on an internet forum?

Just wondering. :confused:


---
 
#5 · (Edited)
Did you research your state's Lemon Law at all, or did you start with the letter?

Have you researched your state's Lemon Law yet, or was your second step to ask on an internet forum?

Just wondering. :confused:


---
I researched it alot and have actually had one car declared a lemon previously. The deal in MA is simple, any 1 repair attempted 3 times or any combination of repairs causing 14 days of time with the vehicle in the shop. The steering wheel not being centered and them not being able to repair this originally was worthy of the letter as it had been 4 documented attempts without resolution. They fixed it on the "final repair attempt" visit. Now the transmission has been in for 3 repair attempts and January 20th will be the 4th and final for that defect.
For clarification, my question is not whether this is legally a "lemon" as the process of declaring a vehicle as such is based on the 3+1 repair attempt rule, but whether this is a list typical of the Grand Cherokee for 2014 (specifically where mine is NOT an early model, ordered form the factory in September) so that I can better assess whether I should escalate the claim to the MA Consumer Protection Agency who presses the Lemon Law claims forward as an advocate.
 
#10 ·
ANSWER: Your car is a lemon if the law allows it to be declared a lemon. The OP has already had one vehicle declared a lemon and apparently the law offers no protection against predatory customers.

I own a WK (my third Jeep) and I read the WK2 forums to get an idea of what to expect from the next model. I can tell you that everything listed is either a known defect with current solutions or solutions in-progress, or else completely pissant.

Is this why genuine safety defects are ignored, because predators like this go to town on the slightest shimmy? If the law allows this kind of behavior, then the the law is at fault; followed by the customer; followed by the inattentive dealer (maybe they're just tired of all the whining); and in FOURTH place would be the manufacturer, IMO.

Go get 'em!
 
#11 · (Edited)
ANSWER: Your car is a lemon if the law allows it to be declared a lemon. The OP has already had one vehicle declared a lemon and apparently the law offers no protection against predatory customers.

I own a WK (my third Jeep) and I read the WK2 forums to get an idea of what to expect from the next model. I can tell you that everything listed is either a known defect with current solutions or solutions in-progress, or else completely pissant.

Is this why genuine safety defects are ignored, because predators like this go to town on the slightest shimmy? If the law allows this kind of behavior, then the the law is at fault; followed by the customer; followed by the inattentive dealer (maybe they're just tired of all the whining); and in FOURTH place would be the manufacturer, IMO.

Go get 'em!
I am a little offended by the post here. I am not in any way a predatory customer and expect a new car, especially one that costs $40k, to at least be free of visible defects when I purchase it from the dealership.
My first vehicle that was declared a lemon was a 2006 Honda Civic. It had a vibration in the steering column that was found to be due to a broken weld in the chassis which was declared unrepairable after 5+ attempts and Honda Motors of America getting involved.... so they bought my car back. I gave them every attempt feasible to fix it and they simply could not

On my WK2, The steering wheel being crooked is not just a minor annoyance, if I attempt to drive the car straight by placing the wheel where it should be I aggressively was drifting into another lane or oncoming traffic. I can obviously keep it at an angle to avoid this, but what happens when my wife drives the car who isn't used to this, or when I go to trade the car in or sell it this would be a visible issue that would detract from the sale price. Now that this issue has been resolved, that's off my list, but I am on my 4th attempt to repaid the sever slamming of the transmission into gear and lurching at a stop the downshift into 1st is causing. This is a known issue, but their software update, version D, did not resolve it and in fact has added an additional problem. The dealer is now going to try the valve replacement that some other posters have advised, but this is still a safety and value-impacting defect so I would again hardly call myself predatory.
This is 100% the manufacturer's fault. They have not built a product free of defect and have not been able to figure out how to fix it. I'm sure this is a large portion of the reason they kept delaying the Cherokee's release this summer/fall as they kept retuning the transmission before release. If they had done the same in building the Grand Cherokee and not just rush to get the sales started we would not have a 400+ posting thread on here focused solely on this defect.
To someone who is not on this forum and who is not aware of the known defect of the WK2 8-spd, this will have an impact on the sale price or trade in value of my Jeep. I have given Chrysler 3 attempts and counting, and I am willing to work with them, but it is not correct to say they are not at fault if the dealer has done exactly what they have been told (all TSB's, all parts, etc) and the issue is still not resolved.
 
#12 ·
Well, I'd like to see your original post restated to include only what you think your "lemon law" issues are, and not other things added in for "good measure". That way I won't get so confused. Until that, here are my comments just picking at random:

1. No warranty that I'm aware of protects the buyer's resale value. Nor am I aware of any lemon law that protects it, but I've already slapped my forehead numb, so I'm certainly ready to be educated on that point.

2. Perhaps I was once again not reading carefully when you talked about the steering wheel being off center, when you meant to say that the steering pulls, a clear safety issue?

3. Regarding your previous lemon car, thank you for clearing this up. A safety issue is a safety issue. It seems remarkable to me that given how few cars nationwide are bought back over safety issues, that you would have two of them in so short a time?

4. Certainly I'm an outsider here on the WK2 forum, but like I said I'm taking an active interest in what may be my next car. I agree there seem to be quite a few issues here, but I've also seen solutions and solutions-in-progress, and some disagreement over whether some of these problems exist in the first place.

I'm sorry I have so very little patience with people who have given up trying to solve problems, especially with a car they at one point liked enough to buy for $40k or more. And like I said, if the lemon law allows you to throw this car back for the listed defects, well then the law's at fault, IMO.

Good luck!
 
#13 ·
1. No warranty that I'm aware of protects the buyer's resale value. Nor am I aware of any lemon law that protects it, but I've already slapped my forehead numb, so I'm certainly ready to be educated on that point.

2. Perhaps I was once again not reading carefully when you talked about the steering wheel being off center, when you meant to say that the steering pulls, a clear safety issue?

3. Regarding your previous lemon car, thank you for clearing this up. A safety issue is a safety issue. It seems remarkable to me that given how few cars nationwide are bought back over safety issues, that you would have two of them in so short a time?

4. Certainly I'm an outsider here on the WK2 forum, but like I said I'm taking an active interest in what may be my next car. I agree there seem to be quite a few issues here, but I've also seen solutions and solutions-in-progress, and some disagreement over whether some of these problems exist in the first place.
1: Its not a warranty.... Its a law.... Here is the link to the law:
New and Leased Car Lemon Law
....and here is a little summary paragraph which proves that point:

The Massachusetts Lemon Law protects consumers who have serious defects in their new cars. The law defines a lemon as a new or leased motor vehicle that has a defect which substantially impairs the use, market value, or safety of the vehicle, and which has not been repaired after a reasonable number of attempts. (M.G.L. c. 90, §7;7N1/2 ) If your new or leased vehicle has a substantial defect that still exists or recurs after a reasonable number of repair attempts, then you may have the right to a refund or replacement vehicle. Keep in mind that not all car problems are serious enough to qualify under the Lemon Law.

2: My comment was if the steering wheel was attempted to be held straight it would cause a severe divergence in direction. So someone not expecting the wheel to be crooked, like my wife, would be at risk of accidentally going the wrong direction.

4: If you can honestly read through the forums and not agree that Chrysler took some shortcuts in getting these vehicles out I would be very surprised. I have been a lifetime Jeep owner and have never had one with this number of challenges that were not easily addressed by a dealer. I am also a lifetime forum member for a variety of different jeep sites, though new to Jeepgarage, and have never seen the outcrying over the same repetitive issue dismissed as "predatory customers". I would love to have my Jeep fixed and as promised by the company that manufactures it..... that is not inclusive of a transmission problem. My only reason for sending the Final Repair Attempt Letter to Chrysler is because the TSB's and Warranty repairs are not getting the job done and I want to at least have Chrysler's attention on a Corporate Level to the issues of my specific vehicle so that I am protected from being stuck in a 3 year lease with a vehicle with unresolved problems.
 
#14 ·
1. "Market value" . . . my head is swimming! I could rant for hours on the topic of a "consumer" protection law that protects market value, but in brief, the law is at fault (IMO). Go ahead and exploit it to the fullest--it's your right!

2. I don't think you're going to get anywhere with your argument about steering wheel orientation, but I was dead certain about #1, and look how that went!

4. This is what got me involved in the thread in the first place: Whatever the company's doing in cutting corners, what does that have to do with your right to shove a purchase back at them?

ANSWER: If the law allows it to be declared a lemon, then it's a lemon.
 
#15 ·
1. "Market value" . . . my head is swimming! I could rant for hours on the topic of a "consumer" protection law that protects market value, but in brief, the law is at fault (IMO). Go ahead and exploit it to the fullest--it's your right! 2. I don't think you're going to get anywhere with your argument about steering wheel orientation, but I was dead certain about #1, and look how that went! 4. This is what got me involved in the thread in the first place: Whatever the company's doing in cutting corners, what does that have to do with your right to shove a purchase back at them? ANSWER: If the law allows it to be declared a lemon, then it's a lemon.
If the company cuts corners and ships a defective product, the consumer should haves every right to "shove" their purchase back at them. Chrysler isn't giving away JGCs though they are aggressively priced compared to their European competition which isn't exactly problem free either.

Why are you so anti-consumer?
 
#16 ·
Okay, but what about my consumer rights?

Everytime the law empowers a new elite class of victim, the rest of us have to pay for it, and not just in higher car prices. When a consumer in one state is able to throw back a car for market value concerns, yes, the rest of us have to pay for that car--Chrysler is not a charity. But when a law steps in to regulate a market, the company stops building products for the consumer and starts bulding products for the law. And the marketplace always moves faster than the law.

When highway safety is at issue, it's a good thing that a car company is required by law to put seat belts and air bags in a car. Similarly, even though I'm not throwing my own car back, I benefit from knowing that the car coming towards me on the highway doesn't have a steering defect.

But how do I benefit if the law protects resale value and/or purely cosmetic issues? ANSWER: I benefit only by joining in the Gold Rush and throwing back a car I'm tired of soon, before the law comes to its senses.

In the OP's case, I think he's simply frustrated with a really lousy dealer, and may be exercising the nuclear option somewhat too early, IMO. And yes, I suspect buyer's remorse is playing a role here.
 
#17 ·
Okay, but what about my consumer rights? Everytime the law empowers a new elite class of victim, the rest of us have to pay for it, and not just in higher car prices. When a consumer in one state is able to throw back a car for market value concerns, yes, the rest of us have to pay for that car--Chrysler is not a charity. But when a law steps in to regulate a market, the company stops building products for the consumer and starts bulding products for the law. And the marketplace always moves faster than the law. When highway safety is at issue, it's a good thing that a car company is required by law to put seat belts and air bags in a car. Similarly, even though I'm not throwing my own car back, I benefit from knowing that the car coming towards me on the highway doesn't have a steering defect. But how do I benefit if the law protects resale value and/or purely cosmetic issues? ANSWER: I benefit only by joining in the Gold Rush and throwing back a car I'm tired of soon, before the law comes to its senses. In the OP's case, I think he's simply frustrated with a really lousy dealer, and may be exercising the nuclear option somewhat too early, IMO. And yes, I suspect buyer's remorse is playing a role here.
You benefit because Chrysler has more incentive to improve the quality of its vehicles. If an auto company knowingly ships a defective product it is a form of consumer fraud.
 
#18 · (Edited)
I am certainly not JUST frustrated by a lousy dealer, actually my dealer has been fantastic in their responsiveness and has applied every TSB and other fixes as identified by Chrysler. I will admit the seat is a nuissance, not a defect. However, Chrysler has responded to my letter and is now keeping my GC at the dealer as they have identified the defective transmission and Steering rack/alignment to be repeat "defects" and they are officially making a "final repair attempt" under the Mass Lemon Law.
John, your perception and qualification of the issues I have raised as being a predatory consumer is highly mistaken. Yes, the steering wheel not being straight would be a detraction from market value only, but the repetitive nature of this issue coming back after repair attempts make this a safety issue as well. The transmission shifting problems, obviously a KNOWN issue per Chrysler's repeated attempts to reprogram them via TSB's, is both a market value issue as well as a safety issue. the upshift from 1st to 2nd was abrupt and annoying, but if i was already accelerating you could make the claim it was only a minor issue. The downshift, however, into 1st was so abrupt that when coming to a stop at an intersection, if my foot was not FIRMLY on the brake pedal beyond what would normally be required the downshift would cause the whole truck to lurch forward a couple of feet. I would say that is a significant safety issue.

NONE of my issues, removing the seat squeaking as I have admited, are purely cosmetic. Also, the "Lemon Law" is not the "nuclear option". If I sued Chrysler and forced them to take the car that could be said, but the Lemon Law is solely in place to force a company to take responsibility for defects in its product. Chrysler can fix my vehicle and I will be very happy as I do love my Jeep....no one is saying they should take the truck back and burn it. It seems to me as though you dont quite understand the Lemon Law based on these comments.

And FYI, no buyers remorse. If my truck has to be replaced I want either another Grand Cherokee or a Durango.
 
#19 · (Edited)
One additional point about the law covering Market Value.... The parents of a good friend of mine were the owners of a 2007 Toyota Camry XLE V6. They had that car for nearly 4 years, in the course of which they had 3 recalls, 10 TSB, and a variety of other challenges. They were impacted by the recall for the floor mats, the one for the gas pedals, and there was a TSB (not sure why this wasnt a recall) for an engine oil cooling system failure that actually caused their vehicle to need to have the entire motor rebuilt, both bottom and top end, at 64k miles. Yes, Toyota stepped up and covered this under warranty even though it was outside of the coverage, but only because they knew it was a TSB that had been missed....
That all said, when they went to trade the car in for a new vehicle they were blind sided by a HUGE reduction in the fair market value of the car. A 2006 Camry, at the time, was worth close to $4k more than their 2007. They also found this to be a factor on the 2008 that a friend of theirs had. Another person they knew had a 2009, just after most of the recalls, and had no such issue.
Under the NJ Consumer Protection and Lemon Laws, where they live, they were not able to file to protect them against severely impacted market value that was caused by the manufacturer themselves. They joined a class action law suit against Toyota that was settled recently for a very substantial number. In turn, they were given about $5,000, realistically about the difference in what the car should have been worth had Toyota not made a severely defective product.
You can easily make the argument that not all of these are safety issues, you can even say that as they were all repaired without cost to the owner that they were "whole" in terms of the quality of the car. But John, per your statement, the law should not have done anything to provide for them coverage of significant money lost due to manufacturer negligence??? The NJ and Federal courts disagreed, thankfully.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top