Anyone received reimbursement for brake failure???

[Thudman]

Yesterday (10/30/09) I received a check from WH for 1001.84. I had submitted a claim for 1645.08 (two separate caliper failure events), but they rejected the the first claim (643.24); ".....as it was due to maintenance and a fuel filter replacement unrelated to a caliper malfunction". I was very careful and meticulous in backing out any unrelated caliper issues in my documentation to WH. Interestingly, the fuel filter was on the invoice that WH reimbursed, but I had backed the P&L (& tax) out of the docs I submitted. ANYway, seems it's too much hassle to resubmit, so I guess I'll accept what I've received. Sorta happily.

Thudman

[WaltF]

I received a check from WCC today for $1522 for replacement of two calipers in Sept 2008. I requested reimbursement for two earlier replacements (Sept 2007) but this was denied. The accompanying letter stated " ...at this time we cannot provide assistance for the Sept 2007 failures...". This leaves a glimmer of hope that these could be considered at a later time??? I'll not hold my breath, but I am certainly pleased to get even partial reimbursement based on the long drawn out investigation and apparent foot-dragging. I hope they consider that in no case did I experience cracked rotors as many have. It seems this would tend to refute the claim of operator error due to improper braking technique. I was able to detect the suttle change in acceleration before serious overheat damage in all cases. The acceleration changes were easily detected while operating in the Florida flatlands.

I filed the claim in June 2009 after receiving the interim recall notice.

[DriVer]

OK! So where's the nobody getting any reimbursement thing happening!

[WaltF]

Driver, I'm still scratching my head over the logic behind denying claims for failures earlier than the cutoff date specified in the interim recall notice. Is it possible that the earlier failure denials indicate a dance between WCC and Bosch as to assignment of responsibility prior to the arbitrary date?

[mythplaced]

Originally Posted by DriVer

OK! So where's the nobody getting any reimbursement thing happening!

Just look up about 30 posts or so...


SHeese....

[DriVer]

Originally Posted by WaltF

Driver, I'm still scratching my head over the logic behind denying claims for failures earlier than the cutoff date specified in the interim recall notice.

WaltF, The logic is defined in the Interim Repair document. Clearly shown are the conditions under which Workhorse will pay claims and reimburse customers. Speaking with people in the know this is what is being done.

Is it possible that the earlier failure denials indicate a dance between WCC and Bosch as to assignment of responsibility prior to the arbitrary date?

I can't speak to timeline however the responsibility rests with Workhorse to accomplish the work which they are doing now. Supplying the fix for the campaign is the responsibility of Bosch and we're waiting for that to happen.

[surfride]

I was on the fence on this issue until Driver quoted an estimated 10% failure estimate for the population. I would like to know how this estimate was determined as it a rather large and as an effected owner, deeply troubling.

If it were me and my claim was denied, I would do a little research to see if there is a regional service manager working in your state, Navistar or Workhorse office. If there is an entity in your state (the RSM’s residence will work), I would then file a law suit in small claims and get the claim up to max 7,500 (California). (The secret sauce -- Small Claims has the same subpoena power as Superior Court.) I would subpoena records on claim payments, warranty claims related to brakes, anything you can think of. I have used this technique, the corp HQ was in NY with an office in San Francisco. I had the office manager in SF served, I knew I was unable to compel him to appear in San Diego court, but the court upheld the request for them to produce records. I had a check in a matter of days.

Another technique is to call the CEO of Navistar. It is extremely unlikely you will get through to the CEO, but what you will get is likely a very friendly administrative assistant to the CEO. I used this technique with BMW and Wawanesa Insurance. I got the numbers I needed for SVP’s and when I called I said I got their number from the CEO’s office, sounds impressive and gets you through. An at fault accident in one day was reversed and my deductable waived as an apology by Wawanesa, BMW replaced four of my radiators on my bikes out of warranty. This works too.

This is David and Goliath time, you need to get creative and become a pain in the butt to Navistar. Do not settle for what some minion answering the phone is telling you.

[mythplaced]

Hmmmm 10% of 51,000 MH

5100 12 ton vehicles with brakes that might fail....

I'm not on the fence, I'm scared to death for the safety of my family in their cars...

[DriVer]

Originally Posted by mythplaced

I'm scared to death for the safety of my family in their cars...

Quite honestly, I'd be scared to death to see an Alpine going down the road because the steering box could fall off plus the brakes might fail killing a family of ducklings crossing the street while going to the pond.

Does that make any sense at all .... NO! I didn't think so.

I'll pull my vehicle off the street when you pull yours.

[jdsr]

Originally Posted by surfride

I was on the fence on this issue until Driver quoted an estimated 10% failure estimate for the population. I would like to know how this estimate was determined as it a rather large and as an effected owner, deeply troubling.

If it were me and my claim was denied, I would do a little research to see if there is a regional service manager working in your state, Navistar or Workhorse office. If there is an entity in your state (the RSM’s residence will work), I would then file a law suit in small claims and get the claim up to max 7,500 (California). (The secret sauce -- Small Claims has the same subpoena power as Superior Court.) I would subpoena records on claim payments, warranty claims related to brakes, anything you can think of. I have used this technique, the corp HQ was in NY with an office in San Francisco. I had the office manager in SF served, I knew I was unable to compel him to appear in San Diego court, but the court upheld the request for them to produce records. I had a check in a matter of days.

Another technique is to call the CEO of Navistar. It is extremely unlikely you will get through to the CEO, but what you will get is likely a very friendly administrative assistant to the CEO. I used this technique with BMW and Wawanesa Insurance. I got the numbers I needed for SVP’s and when I called I said I got their number from the CEO’s office, sounds impressive and gets you through. An at fault accident in one day was reversed and my deductable waived as an apology by Wawanesa, BMW replaced four of my radiators on my bikes out of warranty. This works too.

This is David and Goliath time, you need to get creative and become a pain in the butt to Navistar. Do not settle for what some minion answering the phone is telling you.

Surfride, imo I think the 10% he is using is based on the number of reports to nhtsa compared to the number of chassis built in 2001- 2008. Whats not being said is again, imo, a majority of folks that have had failures dont or didnt know about the nhtsa investigation and once nhtsa completes it and wh has sent the intrim notices out they probly didnt report it or need to. Also its closed anyway so it wouldnt do them any good to report. IMO I believe The % would be larger but we will probly never get the final #'s unless someone uses the infomation act to obtain it. Now on the small claims court, thats is being looked into by folks here and on other sites. Can you imagine thousands of small claims at the same time.

[mythplaced]

D......you are taking all this WAY too personally.....

Again we must agree to disagree....

I AM worried about Alpine steering boxes and brakes (they used Bosch pin slide calipers also) I am worried about Monaco trailing arms....When a defect presents itself and is verified, I want the product REMOVED....Kinda like melamine tainted milk,,,

I WANT the NHTSA to notify ALL owners of defective vehicles and get those unsafe vehicles off our streets....

[mythplaced]

Originally Posted by DriVer

I'll pull my vehicle off the street when you pull yours.

My vehicles have NO defects, as I have had every potentiality (I am aware of) inspected or replaced....

Unfortunately, not all MH owners are aware that they are driving a potential killer, as the NHTSA has not informed them...And not all MH owners read these forums...We are the 1%ers here.

[DriVer]

Originally Posted by mythplaced

Unfortunately, not all MH owners are aware that they are driving a potential killer, as the NHTSA has not informed them...And not all MH owners read these forums...We are the 1%ers here.

Without objection, any motorhome or vehicle may fall in that category at any time with the potential for a serious incident. To tell you the truth when it comes to being plain scared, I'm more afraid of the potential of a drunk driver coming at me from the opposite direction while going to the store than someone in a motorhome.

My vehicle is in like new condition and always ready to turn a wheel.

[mfire1339]

To the fella at NHTSB that came up with the 10% number. Does it mean 10% are designed wrong, or built wrong, or used in the wrong climate, or used improperly or not maintained or What?

Mike