NHTSA Complaint #762471 — 2001 FORD F-550 SD

WE RECEIVED A RECALL NOTICE TO HAVE OUR LOCAL DEALER (TOWNE FORD) CHECK THE VALVE STEMS IN OUR 2001 F-550. ON JANUARY 23, 2002, THE CHECK WAS PERFORMED AND WE WERE TOLD NO REPLACEMENTS WERE NECESSARY. ON MARCH 25, 2002, ONE OF OUR THREE MAN CREWS WAS TRAVELING ON THE FREEWAY AT 60-65 MPH AND EXPERIENCED WHAT THEY DESCRIBED AS A BLOWOUT OF THE RIGHT FRONT TIRE. THEY WERE ABLE TO PULL SAFELY TO THE SIDE AND CALL A LOCAL TIRE SERVICE COMPANY TO HAVE THE TIRE SERVICED. WHEN THE TECHNICIAN ARRIVED, HE WENT STRAIGHT TO THE VALVE STEM AND SAID HERES YOUR PROBLEM, WE SEE THIS ALL THE TIME WITH THESE BIG FORDS. WHEN THE CREW ARRIVED THAT EVENING TO REPORT THE INCIDENT, I WAS ON THE PHONE RIGHT AWAY TO TOWNE FORD, BELIEVING THAT THE RECALL HAD POSSIBLY BEEN INSUFFICIENTLY ADDRESSED AND THAT AT A MINIMUM, WE SHOULD EXPECT REIMBURSEMENT FROM FORD FOR THE EXPENSE OF THE EMERGENCY SERVICE CALL. I WAS TOLD TO BRING IN THE VALVE STEM AND ORIGINAL SERVICE INVOICE FOR REIMBURSEMENT. UPON ARRIVING AT TOWNE WITH OUR VALVE STEM AND SERVICE INVOICE IN HAND, WE WERE TOLD THAT THERE WOULD BE NO REIMBURSEMENT FOR THIS INCIDENT. AFTER OUR OBJECTION, THE SERVICE MANAGER AGREED TO CONTACT FORD MOTOR COMPANY AND GET BACK TO US. TWO DAYS LATER WE RECEIVED WORD THAT FORD MOTOR COMPANY WOULD PROVIDE 80% REIMBURSEMENT AND THAT THEY WOULD NEED THE VALVE STEM AND TIRE IN QUESTION. I IMMEDIATELY CALLED CUMMING HENDERSON AND WAS TOLD THAT THE TIRE HAD ALREADY BEEN DISPOSED OF. AT THIS POINT, AND DESPITE A CALL TO TOWNES CUSTOMER SERVICE REPRESENTATIVE, ULA, IT BECAME CLEAR THAT TOWNE WAS NO LONGER INTERESTED IN HELPING US. MY CALL TO THE FORD MOTOR COMPANY CUSTOMER RELATIONSHIP CENTER WAS NO MORE SATISFYING. WE FEEL THAT A KNOWN SAFETY ISSUE WAS RESPONSIBLE FOR POTENTIAL DANGER TO THREE OF OUR MEN AND EXPENSIVE DOWN TIME. HAVING USED FORD MOTOR COMPANY TRUCKS IN OUR BUSINESS SINCE 1970, AND AS CURRENT OWNERS OF EIGHT FORD TRUCKS, WE ARE VERY DISAPPOINTED AT THE LACK OF SUPPORT IN THIS ISSUE.*AK