Help with 1992 Recall Notice

There's no such thing as it "using the check digit". If the VIN is written
correctly, it's a VIN. If it's not, even if only one digit is mistyped,
it's a collection of 17 random and meaningless alphanumerics.

 

And you still drive, eh?

 

Yabbut. I just took a look, and on the web site you are only prompted
for the last eight digits of the VIN -- this doesn't include the check
digit, so an error is very, very possible. It returns the whole VIN
(and a description of the vehicle) as part of its response.

I'll agree this is an almost unbelievably stupid way for it to be set
up -- and I don't think I would have believed it if I hadn't just
tried it myself. But it is what they do.

 

'04 Pacifica - embossed black on black, extremely easy to read;
'96 T&C LXi - embossed charcoal gray on charcoal gray, extremely easy to read;
'93 GC Laredo - embossed silver on silver, extremely easy to read;
'91 Accord - etched silver on blue, extremely easy to read.

Better have your eyes checked, Art!

 

If that were the case, you'd think that the message would say something
to that effect, i.e., "Recall and Satisfaction Notification information
on this vehicle not available", or "Recall and Satisfaction Notification
information on model years before 1989 not available".

But I'm not surprised at anything that modern business does. However,
if that's the case, the consumer is knowingly misinformed about
something that could (maybe not in this specific instance) be a safety
related issue - i.e., led to believe that their vehicle has had an
important recall done when in fact it possibly hasn't - as is apparently
now the case for the OP - left not knowing - or actually mis-informed by
the database that's supposed to inform). More MBA's at work - would
have taken 30 more man-hours of budget to set it up right, so they
didn't. Might mean a few more injuries or deaths, but what the hey.

Bill Putney
(to reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
address with "x")

 

Several of the cars you posted have vertical windshields compared to the
300M and probably limit reflections and make the plate easier to read. As
for my Toyota, check one out in a parking lot some day. The background
watermark makes it very difficult to read. In fact the dealer always go for
the door plate when I bring it in.

 

Your wasting your time trying to explain that to Dan. I tried in a previous
post. As someone posted a few days ago, he must be off his drugs again.

 

x-no-archive: yes
(OH CRAP .. just noticed a mistake I made writing D-C, I wrote my Gran
Fury was an 1982 instead of a 1987 )well, I used the dodge.com to get to
Dal-Chrysler ..I Don't want to even call the 800 # I am just so tired of
this mess. Since everything on the recall relates to the stupid EPA and
the emmisons test and it's not a safety issue.. ( I finally called my
brother and asked him what parts needed to be replaced ) I've just about
worried enough and I sure will not go near a Dealership. anyhow
sure do thank ya'll for your help !
just got this reply from D-C :

"Thank you for your recent email to DaimlerChrysler Motors regarding
your
Gran Fury."
Our records do not go back that far. Please call our Recall Department
at 800-853-1403.
Thank you again for your email."

NOTE: Please do not use the 'Reply' function of your email system. If
you have a need to respond to this message, please visit us at our reply

form (link provided below). Our system is NOT able to accept any emails
at this address.

For any future communications related to this email, please refer to the

following information:
REFERENCE NUMBER: 12465424
REPLY LINK:
http://www.chrysler.com/wccsapp/wccs/brand_forms/us/reply.jsp?trk_ID=KMM1527871C0KM&



Sincerely,

Chris
Senior Staff Representative
DaimlerChrysler Customer Assistance Center


Original Message Follows:
------------------------
Form Selected:
--------------
Category: Recall Information
Brief Description:
------------------
Recall on my 1982 Gran Fury, issued in 1992 ! ! !
Comments:
---------
I was informed yesterday when I had my car inspected (It ALWAYS passes
easily) that I had recall on my Gran Fury. ISSUED IN 1992 ! ! ! ! This
is
the first Time I've heard about this. It's recall 515. Spark Control and

A/T something. I can't even find any records online of this recall. I
don't want a new car,this one is still just perfect. Good as new with
only
40,450 actual miles. Let me know if this is important. Or maybe the
recall is
obsolete. I never have any problem passing the TX emissions test
thank you

 

Just one question: D'you like to breathe?


-DS

 

No, I would actually be surprised if it did say this.

It is rather common in the computer industry for programmers to use a
single somewhat generic error message for just about every error that
a user encounters. Most often this is because the organization that
contracts with the programmers doesen't supply complete data as
to what the errors are supposed to be, and when they happen. In
particular in this case, it could be that they don't supply data older than
1989 because in 1989 they changed databases, or it also could be
that they have a policy of only retaining recall data in that particular
database for 15 years. The programmer that wrote the application
for the website most likely only knows how to program and probably
never bought an auto part at an auto parts store in his or her life. Almost
certainly they wouldn't even know that it is usual for automakers to
declare obsolescense on model years after a certain date, and so wouldn't
even suspect that a failure to retrieve records might be due to records
that were deliberately purged, rather than just that the vehicle queried
was OK on the recall lists.

Ted

This is true. Now, I have to ask - have you or anyone even bothered to
e-mail Chrysler about the recall response on their website? All it would
take is to simple change the wording on the error message from:

"No Incomplete Recalls or Customer Satisfaction Notifications Exist"

to

""No Incomplete Recalls or Customer Satisfaction Notifications Exist, or
the vehicle is too old to be listed in this database, please contact a
local Chrysler dealership to verify your vehicle"

to take care of the problem. If you haven't, then you have no moral
highground to bitch about it.

You might consider that a telephone call to a dealership isn't much more
reliable as you are totally dependent on the competence of the person
operating the recall computer program at the dealership. The service
advisor at the dealership might make the exact same assumption - that
the recall on the car was completed - rather than guessing that the lack
of response on his program is due to a database purge, and just to be
sure, he should call into the national recall center.

And then what are you going to do if someone at a dealership hands out
bad data over the phone? At least the website is somewhat verifyable
so that if someone does get killed as a result, the lawyers are going to
have a chance of holding someone at Chrysler accountable - rather than
trying to make a case in court that so-and-so said the car was fine over
the phone!!!

Ted

 

Believe me - I am very aware of that. That doesn't make the practice
right.

Yes, and in their minds, that is a cost effective solution. It helps
them come in budget but they forgot that the original goal was to help
the end user who paid for a working product that isn't to get it working
right. All so they can say "We don't understand why people complain
about our product and our tech support! We spent $X on creating a
troubleshooting guide and web site, and just because it is worhtless in
actually troubleshooting and correcting problems, they're going to
complain!"

In

If that is truly the case, that just illustrates the stupidity of how
they went about creating the data base. If they really left it up to a
programmer to come up with the substance of the messages that the system
spits out, then that is stupider than I thought. How difficult is it to
tell the programmer "Hey - if the vehicle being inquired about is older
than 19XX, then respond with this message "...". You'd think that one
of the first steps would be to sit down with people who knew this end of
their business and develop a flow chart. But that probalaby costs too
much money.

Ummm - they could tell the programmer that and have him inorporate it
into the database.

You want me to personally contact every company every time I see some
stupid error of omission in some of their technical support literature
or web pages? And if I don't do that, I'm never able to make any
comments or judgements about how stupid their practices are when I know
good and well it is almost by design that those bits of misinformation
are there? Should I go through a Haynes manual and find every error
that it has, document it and inform them of the fact and believe that
they will fix the problem? And if I don't do that, I have no right to
tell people that I don't like Haynes manuals and why? And throw on top
of that that 99 times out of 100, based on past experience, they aren't
going to fix the problem, if for no other reason that they have no
budget to make system changes like that anymore (it would be number
11,327 on their list of priorities for errors that they already know
about). Sorry - I used to think I could save the world, but stopped
doing that many years ago. I have myself and a family to take care of.

Yeah - the next step is to close down that site because all it does is
expose them to liability risk, never mind that the consumer needs the
information. More MBA-think.

Bill Putney
(to reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
address with "x")

 

Happened to check the VIN of my father's new Saturn wagon. The windshield
VIN plate was so clear to read it was almost blinding. My eyes are fine for
those of you who were worried. LOL