Ford – do they really listen?

I read in a Toronto Star article a website sponsored by Ford.  It was at: http://fordpby.ca/.

 

I understood it to be a website that encouraged dialogue on various Ford products.  Since Ford did not feel responsible enough to notify the public concerning the faulty window they built into their F150 I went onto this site and wrote a small piece describing the problem.  I was hoping that anyone who read it and had a similar problem could fix their window and prevent further repairs.

 

Well, Ford isn’t really that caring about their consumers.  The webpage has this as an opener:

 

“WELCOME TO FORDPOWEREDBYYOU.CA This site is powered by you – literally. You are the engine that drives it – and your ideas, dialogue, and opinions are the fuel. True, the chassis is built by us, Ford of Canada. But we’re handing over the keys. It’s not our site. It’s yours. You talk. About design, technology, and the environment – areas where automotive culture merges with everyday life. It’s what our powered by you contributors will write about, sparking dialogue and debate. We’ll listen, and occasionally participate, but from here on – the discussions and debates on this site are all powered by you.”

 

Well, they certainly listened but removed my article from the webpage.  So much for a website powered by the consumer – they only let you have the power if you write positive things about how good they are.  Like telling people they are hired and then the next day, yank their chain and tell them, sorry but we aren’t hiring you and too bad you left your job to come to us.

 

Again, does this sound like an ethical company????

Ford – shows true ethics in no-hires

Why I am not surprised about the latest news from Ford.  They go out and entice, yes entice, people to come and work for them.  People were wooed to come and work for them and even quit their jobs and, within 24 hours, are told, forget it.  The economy has shifted and we can’t use your talents.  Like, the Ford brass didn’t know there was an economic turndown a month ago or even 6 months ago. No wonder the auto industry is in dire straits.  Why would anyone go out and start recruiting people when they know the economy is in a downturn and then, wait until the very last minute to say, sorry, but we don’t need you?

 

Now, GM, after the CAW had a protest, has given the workers at the truck plant a real sweetheart deal.  Some will get retirement incentives (plus 65% pension) of up to $100,000 plus a car voucher of $35,000.  Not bad for a company going broke.  Oh, I forgot, they were recently given government money.  So, the GM workers can thank you, the Canadian taxpayer for a nice settlement.

 

Ford, who also was a recipient of government grandeur, seems to be saying to their almost employees – tough.  And the CAW is saying – you weren’t employed yet so we can’t help you.  I mean, why didn’t Ford hire them, make them a CAW member and then lay them off with a nice settlement from the government funding.

 

I can feel for these people and I’d be really pissed if it was me.  Families are disrupted and financial problems just intensified.  These were people making a big change in their lives.  But, not surprising considering this same company builds a truck (F150) with a built in problem – leaky window and then, just lets the consumer foot the bill for fried electronics.  After all the money is spent on Ford parts and labour, hints that maybe your window is leaky.  Nothing official, no written notice or recall, just a hint after a repair.  Oh, and by the way, go somewhere else to fix it and don’t bother us attitude.  Kind of like – come and work for us, quit present job and then, we tell you to bug off and don’t bother us.

 

Ford seems to be run by people who have no foresight, no ethics and a totally “ME” attitude at the top.  I bet the large incentives at the top aren’t shabby.

Ford: Ethics and liability

It’s a cold rainy night and your wife and kids are driving your Ford F150 home from some event.  Kids are active as they normally are and, you wife is trying to drive carefully through the driving rain.  Without warning, the electronics start to act up and, at a critical moment, the wipers fail.  Not seeing the curve your wife and kids end up leaving the roadway and plunging into whatever is off the road.

 

Sounds farfetched?  Here is one of many complaints sent into the United States Department of Transport.

 

“CONSUMER COMPLAINT: ODI Case Number: 10217484

 

Component: ELECTRICAL SYSTEM

 

Details: I HAVE A 2002 FORD F-150 SUPERCREW, ABOUT 6 MONTHS AGO MY ELECTRICAL PANEL STARTED HAVING A MIND OF ITS OWN EVERYTIME IT RAINS. MY RADIO, WINDSHIELD WIPERS, BLINKERS, TAIL LIGHTS AND INTERIOR LIGHTS GO OFF AND ON. I HAVE ALMOST BEEN IN SEVERAL ACCIDENTS DUE TO THIS PROBLEM NOT BEING ABLE TO SEE BECAUSE OF WINDSHIELD WIPERS NOT WORKING AND ALSO BECAUSE OF BLINKERS NOT WORKING. THE PROBLEM IS GETTING WORSE AND I BELIEVE FORD SHOULD FIX THIS SINCE IT IS DEFINETLY SEVERAL LARGE SAFETY ISSUES.

 

Occurrences: 8 Injuries: 0

Fail Date: 02/06/2008 Deaths: 0

Date added to datbase: 2/8/2008”

 

Now, as far as I know, there are no deaths attributed to this problem.  Of course, how many accidents have occurred and there is not a complaint registered regarding the electronics failing, especially if the driver was killed?

 

We are talking about a company that manufactured a vehicle with a built-in fault that creates a problem with the electronics.  At a critical moment, if the electronics start to act up, an accident could happen.  We are looking at a liability issue at least, if not criminal charges in that Ford knew about this problem and has not issued an alert to the public.

 

The United States government and the Canadian government both are aware of the complaints.  They have not directed Ford to issue a recall nor have they notified the public.  As far as I know, this issue has only been broadcast via forums and this blog.

 

Why does it always take deaths for the governments to do something?  Like the Crown Vic fuel tank problem and the Pinto fuel tank problem or the Firestone tire problem.  Nothing was done until people died, even though the problem was known.

 

I only hope that some people at Ford have some ethics and move on this issue before some child is killed.

Ford and government funding – do we get our money’s worth?

Below is a letter I sent to Sandra Pupatello, Minister of Economic Development and Trade.  I also CC’d to the CAW, Ford and the Toronto Star, since they are all sort of mentioned (except the CAW in this one)

 

I read in the July 24th Toronto Star that after the Ontario and Federal governments had given Ford $100 million to convert their Oakville plant, they are being mum on how they plan to continue to spend that funding in the Oakville plant.
 
I am not surprised, as you see they don’t talk to consumers as well.  They built a number of F150 trucks (unknown how many but at least 10 are noted in complaints to the U.S. Department of Transportation) that had the front window improperly installed.  This error allows the window to leak into the truck over time and eventually shorts out and damages the truck’s electronics.
 
This problem has been brought to the attention of Ford but they refused to either compensate the affected owners, issue a recall or, issue a notice to consumers concerning this problem.  What happens is that people are getting their electronics repaired (at high cost I should state) but, aren’t necessarily being told about the window.  If they are, they are told the window is their problem.
 
Now, Toyota had a rust performation problem and they either bought the vehicle, repaired the damage and ,if not rust, gave a 15 year warranty. 
 
I feel that as a taxpayer, that Ford should not be given government funding based on their lack of ethics when it comes to their product and dealings with the consumer.  In addition to this problem, the Ford 5.4 litre engine has shown a weakness in that it blows its spark plugs – another cost being foisted upon the consumer.
 
In the Toronto Star, I noted that Ford did not answer their emails or calls.  Funny, as this is the paper that refuses to disclose, and therefore assist the consumer, their knowledge of the F150 problem. 
 
In closing, I hope that if the government is thinking of assisting the auto industry with more funding, that they ensure that the manufacturer is also looking after the taxpayer/consumer – who ultimately not only supplies the tax funding but also has to foot the repair bills.  Not fair to be double whammied…..
 
For further information please go to: http://fordf150news.wordpress.com/
 
Lance Naismith
 
416-689-7911

Ford and trust earned

In the Tuesday, July 22^nd, 2008 edition of the Toronto Star (the one who refuses to print the story on the Ford leaky front windows), there was a front page story on a bike shop owner who had between 1200 & 1500 stolen bikes in his possession.  Seems he has been paying guys to steal these bikes and give them to him.  God only knows how many total he had stolen but, I guess he was in some small way helping the local economy by hiring these thieves.

 

But, it begs the question – why?  Does he have a bike fetish and just loves to gaze over a crowded room of stolen bikes or even worse, a bike seat fetish?  It doesn’t say but maybe he just wanted to stimulate the bike industry.  Stolen bikes create a need.  A need, as a bike shop owner, he could fulfill.

 

Now, this of course is a total lack of ethics.  Ethics, oh yes.  Ford produced a vehicle with an improperly installed window and never notified the consumers that their electronic repair bills might be caused by this.  I mean, a leaky window allowed water infiltration, which caused the electronics to short out.  Did anyone get a notice?  Of course, by not notifying the consumer, the consumer continues to have their electronics fixed due to the leaky window, which they know nothing about.  Hmmmmmmm…. No, I am not accusing Ford or the CAW of intentionally installing a window improperly in order to create a need for repairs and thus, generate income in the repair part of the industry – an industry that is having a downturn in income.

 

Now, one could extrapolate this and begin to wonder.  In this recession, will the car industry, which is suffering greatly, start supporting thieves so that cars disappear and thus generates a need by the consumer, whose buying is all supported by the insurance industry?  But no, I jest.  I mean, a company that builds a truck with a faulty window, doesn’t inform the consumer and repairs the damaged electronics wouldn’t stoop that low would they?  Never!!  As I was told recently by a CAW executive – they are all hard working individuals and having known some, I agree.  But, I wonder Ford – how can you stimulate car sales to people who have been burned by your policy to not recognize that the window was put in improperly and cost us consumers our money?  Trust is something earned and once lost; it is hard to get back, especially when others continue to build trust within the consumer’s market.

Ford – planned obsolescence?

I’m sitting here in my local garage awaiting the news on my front end alignment – will there be more problems?  I just purchased a new set of tires, B.F. Goodrich having decided to get the same as my original equipment.  Yes, that’s right, original equipment.  Over a 143,000 kilometres on the original set and there was still good tread left.  I only replaced them as they started to crack in too many places, but with their age (over 6 years old) who wouldn’t show age cracking.

 

Now, I find it funny how 4 pieces of rubber outlasted my front end by over 40,000 kilometres.  I had to replace my tie rods at 100K and was just recently told by the dealer, Kennedy Ford, that my ball joints needed replacement.  Another mechanic told me no, so I am waiting for the alignment and see if they suggest the ball joints get replaced.  Almost like waiting for a baby to be born.

 

I was told, after I bought the truck off lease and had the front end replaced, that Ford has a problem with premature failure of the front end.  I can’t substantiate this but, interesting how local garage mechanics seem to all be saying this.  Even my neighbour remarked on the fact I had a Ford when I saw him this morning while enroute to the garage.  Wasn’t nice what he said.  Something about “Fix or Repair Daily”.

 

This began to make me think about planned obsolescence.  My truck was built during that period of time that Ford was closing the truck plant in Oakville.  The only good news to the CAW employees was that it was being replaced by another line – therefore jobs saved.  But what about the recent closing of the GM truck line in Oshawa.  Would you buy a truck from GM now, knowing it was being built by disgruntled CAW workers, knowing their jobs were redundant soon after the truck line closes.  What kind of atmosphere is present on that assembly line?  I mean, Ford couldn’t build my truck right and the guys had future jobs.

 

Planned obsolescence.  We hear about it in other industries and wonder sometimes why things fail.  Ford knows about the window problem but, have you ever seen a recall?   Have you ever received a notice that your window should be checked?

 

Funny, but Kennedy Ford keeps sending me notices that my truck is due for regular service.  Ever since the debacle of the front end and then my electronic problems caused by the improperly installed window, I have favoured a local garage for my servicing.  Kennedy Ford could send me reminders but never sent me anything to warn me that all the electronic repairs might be caused by the leaky window.  I understand Ford sent a memo to the dealers about this (can’t confirm it as Ford won’t even send me a letter confirming my complaint) but, I as a consumer was never warned that my repair expenses were being caused by an improperly installed window.  But, I guess that would mean someone at Ford had ethics, something that seems to be missing in this case.

 

I guess the rule of thumb for buying a vehicle is to check when it was built and what kind of relationship was occurring between the manufacturer and the CAW/UAW.   Does this have some kind of bearing on how your vehicle is built?  Well, they say, don’t buy a vehicle built on a Monday (hangovers, Monday blues) and a Friday (weekend coming up).  Don’t know how true it is but, I wouldn’t be buying a GM or Ford right now due to the cutbacks and the proven lack of concern regarding built in faults.  Toyota might not be perfect but maybe they’ve got it right.  No union and support their vehicles, even after warranty.

 

By the way, just got the news that my front end is alright and my ball joints don’t need to be fixed.  Wonder why Kennedy Ford told me they had to be replaced over 10k ago?  I just found out from a local garage that they’ve noticed a decline in repair business.  With the rising cost of fuel, people are maybe putting off repairs and maintenance.  At over $90/hour for labour, I can understand why.  But, if they’re not built right – like properly installed windows, it is hard to drive when the vehicle starts the road down what some might consider planned obsolescence, especially when no one warns you of the problems.  But then, who ever warns you about planned obsolescence?

Ford – with times getting tough, will quality further decrease?

I just read in the Toronto Star today that Ford was putting off its 2009 model year for the F150.  They are blaming the market dynamics which seem to have slowed down in the SUV/truck category.  GM has discontinued its Oshawa truck line and thousands have been notified that they are being put out of work.  I don’t think I’d be buying a GM truck at this moment, considering the guys on the line will be a little pissed off at the least.  I mean, Ford couldn’t put a window in right and they were selling lots of their trucks and still had their jobs.

 

During the good times, Ford built a truck with a leaky window and refuses to address this matter with consumers.  With truck sales weakening, would you honestly consider buying a truck from Ford when you know that they do such things in good times and are closing down plants and car lines.  I think I’d rather go to Toyota who not only back their product but, seem to be keeping their employees happy and working.

 

I find it interesting that when you go to a car dealership and ask for $500 off on the deal, they plead they don’t have any profit.  But, I just noticed an ad in the paper where they were cutting $10,000 of the price of a SUV.  Must be creative accounting I guess.

 

Or, is the manufacturer giving them a break so they can unload all the non-selling vehicles?  Either way, they still need to make some money and, are they cutting back in areas that will affect quality?  They have already shown that quality isn’t “Number One” in terms of the window problem – so, can you believe they will continue to build in quality as sales decrease?

 

As an aside, I brought this leaky window problem to Buzz Hargrove’s (head of the CAW) attention.  No surprise, but I never got a response to either of my letters.  I guess the union only looks after itself and considers consumers to be not worth talking to in the automobile business.  Unlike the non-union Toyota company.  Seems they listen to the consumer.  Must be a non-union thing I guess.

Toronto Star and Ford – what gives?

I have not written something on this blog for a period of time for a reason.  You see, I thought it would be an interesting story for the press to research and print.  It has all the aspects of a good story – the kind they write on the police, government officials and ordinary people who get into trouble.  It is about an unethical company that is hiding built-in faults with their vehicle.  Let’s face it, the front window was put in improperly – without being primed as it should, and when they found out about it, they did nothing.  Unlike Toyota which came forward and took responsibility for their trucks with pre-mature rusting.

 

Well, was I ever wrong on the ethics of not only Ford but the Toronto Star.  Seems their attitude (and following the Atkinson rules) is only liberal and printable if the persons involved aren’t advertisers.  They just recently concluded an informative four part series on bio-solids.  It’s the stuff from the treatment plant that is left over and then spread around farmer’s fields.  But, I do believe that the bio-solid plants don’t advertise in the Star.  An option they should consider.

 

I brought the Ford fiasco to the attention of an editor at the Toronto Star.  I thought this would be a good article for a paper known for bringing out wrongdoings.  Wrong!!!!.  Oh, he was supportive but when he passed it onto the Wheels section – nada.  Not even a call back to say thanks but no thanks.

 

Mind you, they did an article in support of speed and trashed the O.P.P. commissioner.  They also put in a mindless piece about the tragic death of 3 youths.  The surviving female, pretty, was given front page to tell her story and how great the guys were.  In reality, you had 4 people who had been drinking driving fast down a road and fooling around in the car.  A recipe for disaster and fortunately they didn’t take anyone with them.  But, do a story about the unethical practice at Ford where they build a vehicle that has a leaky window that destroys the electronics and has the potential to cause a death; they won’t put any ink into that.

 

I analyzed one of their Saturday papers. Of the 10 articles on vehicles, four were about Ford products and the others were only single articles on various manufacturers.  Biased?  Oh, and the Ford articles, they were the only ones that a manufacturer supplied transportation costs to the reporters.  And, Ford got the space above the fold (front page top), a place of honour for reporters.  But all the bad news about GM is front and centre.

 

It just seems odd that a paper, the Toronto Star, which prides itself in looking after the little guy and bringing out scandals, refuses to look at this information and disclose the unethical practice at Ford. I mean, they did an article disclosing the fact that those who chose not to pay parking fines are not likely to get caught.  I forgot, the courts don’t advertise in the Star.

 

I know that some people have written letters into the Star regarding the Ford problem but they were in vain. 

 

Maybe a press release about this problem?  Seems a shame that a manufacturer such as Ford can get away with this type of unethical behaviour, while others are brought to task by papers such as the Toronto Star or the government.  One wonders why Ford is immune.