1998-2000 passat lower control arm recall

That's how I read it too. It looks like owners got the notice before the
dealers did.

There are 2 Passats(both 99's) in our family and so far I only got one
notice.

"Frank" > wrote in message
om...
> We got a recall letter from VWoA about 1998-2000 Passats, wear on the
> front suspension lower control arms, check and possibly replace them.
> Says they can be worn even if rubber boots are not damaged, then if
> rubber boots are damaged, blah, blah,.... Anyone have any experience
> with that? Thanks.
>
> Frank

There are 2 Passats(both 99's) in our family and so far I only got one
notice.

"Frank" > wrote in message
om...
> We got a recall letter from VWoA about 1998-2000 Passats, wear on the
> front suspension lower control arms, check and possibly replace them.
> Says they can be worn even if rubber boots are not damaged, then if
> rubber boots are damaged, blah, blah,.... Anyone have any experience
> with that? Thanks.
>
> Frank

"Iain Miller" > wrote in message >...

> The reimbursement form is for those who already paid to have the work done
> before the recall was issued.

OK, I have more information (from both VW and NHTSA).

First, the reimbursement form is, as you say, if you already paid to
have the work done. You need the maintenance records to get
reimbursed.

However, VW stated that you will still have to pay for the work if you
can't produce maintenance records. The reason they can have this
requirement is that this in not, technically, a safety recall. A
safety recall is mandated by the NHTSA. This is a "Campaign",
voluntarily initiated by VW, and therefore (according to VW) not
subject to the strict consumer-never-pays rules of a safety recall.
You must still prove that you had the car serviced according to the
maintenance schedule, or you will have to pay for the work. The NHTSA
advised me that I could file a complaint about this, but there was no
guarantee it would be resolved in my favor.

If you don't have the maintenance records, the dealer where you had
the work done will have them (assuming they are still in business).

So good luck.

Rose

"Iain Miller" > wrote in message >...

> The reimbursement form is for those who already paid to have the work done
> before the recall was issued.

OK, I have more information (from both VW and NHTSA).

First, the reimbursement form is, as you say, if you already paid to
have the work done. You need the maintenance records to get
reimbursed.

However, VW stated that you will still have to pay for the work if you
can't produce maintenance records. The reason they can have this
requirement is that this in not, technically, a safety recall. A
safety recall is mandated by the NHTSA. This is a "Campaign",
voluntarily initiated by VW, and therefore (according to VW) not
subject to the strict consumer-never-pays rules of a safety recall.
You must still prove that you had the car serviced according to the
maintenance schedule, or you will have to pay for the work. The NHTSA
advised me that I could file a complaint about this, but there was no
guarantee it would be resolved in my favor.

If you don't have the maintenance records, the dealer where you had
the work done will have them (assuming they are still in business).

So good luck.

Rose

In rec.autos.makers.vw.watercooled, Rose Faex wrote:

>"Iain Miller" > wrote in message >...
>
>> The reimbursement form is for those who already paid to have the work done
>> before the recall was issued.
>
>OK, I have more information (from both VW and NHTSA).
>
>First, the reimbursement form is, as you say, if you already paid to
>have the work done. You need the maintenance records to get
>reimbursed.
>
>However, VW stated that you will still have to pay for the work if you
>can't produce maintenance records. The reason they can have this
>requirement is that this in not, technically, a safety recall. A
>safety recall is mandated by the NHTSA. This is a "Campaign",

As in "sales campaign"?

>voluntarily initiated by VW, and therefore (according to VW) not
>subject to the strict consumer-never-pays rules of a safety recall.
>You must still prove that you had the car serviced according to the
>maintenance schedule, or you will have to pay for the work. The NHTSA
>advised me that I could file a complaint about this, but there was no
>guarantee it would be resolved in my favor.
>
>If you don't have the maintenance records, the dealer where you had
>the work done will have them (assuming they are still in business).

<:-^> that seems reasonable; if you don't change your oil or air
filter regularly, your lower control arm could be damaged as a
result. </:-^> [to translate, that last group of symbols was to
indicate tongue-in-cheek mode is back off]

In rec.autos.makers.vw.watercooled, Rose Faex wrote:

>"Iain Miller" > wrote in message >...
>
>> The reimbursement form is for those who already paid to have the work done
>> before the recall was issued.
>
>OK, I have more information (from both VW and NHTSA).
>
>First, the reimbursement form is, as you say, if you already paid to
>have the work done. You need the maintenance records to get
>reimbursed.
>
>However, VW stated that you will still have to pay for the work if you
>can't produce maintenance records. The reason they can have this
>requirement is that this in not, technically, a safety recall. A
>safety recall is mandated by the NHTSA. This is a "Campaign",

As in "sales campaign"?

>voluntarily initiated by VW, and therefore (according to VW) not
>subject to the strict consumer-never-pays rules of a safety recall.
>You must still prove that you had the car serviced according to the
>maintenance schedule, or you will have to pay for the work. The NHTSA
>advised me that I could file a complaint about this, but there was no
>guarantee it would be resolved in my favor.
>
>If you don't have the maintenance records, the dealer where you had
>the work done will have them (assuming they are still in business).

<:-^> that seems reasonable; if you don't change your oil or air
filter regularly, your lower control arm could be damaged as a
result. </:-^> [to translate, that last group of symbols was to
indicate tongue-in-cheek mode is back off]

"Rose Faex" > wrote in message
om...
> "Iain Miller" > wrote in message
>...
>
> > The reimbursement form is for those who already paid to have the work
done
> > before the recall was issued.
>
> OK, I have more information (from both VW and NHTSA).
>
> First, the reimbursement form is, as you say, if you already paid to
> have the work done. You need the maintenance records to get
> reimbursed.
>
> However, VW stated that you will still have to pay for the work if you
> can't produce maintenance records. The reason they can have this
> requirement is that this in not, technically, a safety recall. A
> safety recall is mandated by the NHTSA. This is a "Campaign",
> voluntarily initiated by VW, and therefore (according to VW) not
> subject to the strict consumer-never-pays rules of a safety recall.
> You must still prove that you had the car serviced according to the
> maintenance schedule, or you will have to pay for the work. The NHTSA
> advised me that I could file a complaint about this, but there was no
> guarantee it would be resolved in my favor.
>
> If you don't have the maintenance records, the dealer where you had
> the work done will have them (assuming they are still in business).
>
> So good luck.
>
> Rose

I guess that begs the question of "Why wouldnt you have the service
records?" ANd the only answer that makes sense is you may not be the
original owner.

As with just about every manufacturer, if you dont take care of the car as
specified on the maintenance schedule, all bets are off as to what is and
what should be covered under warranty as the case now falls under
abuse/negligence.

"Rose Faex" > wrote in message
om...
> "Iain Miller" > wrote in message
>...
>
> > The reimbursement form is for those who already paid to have the work
done
> > before the recall was issued.
>
> OK, I have more information (from both VW and NHTSA).
>
> First, the reimbursement form is, as you say, if you already paid to
> have the work done. You need the maintenance records to get
> reimbursed.
>
> However, VW stated that you will still have to pay for the work if you
> can't produce maintenance records. The reason they can have this
> requirement is that this in not, technically, a safety recall. A
> safety recall is mandated by the NHTSA. This is a "Campaign",
> voluntarily initiated by VW, and therefore (according to VW) not
> subject to the strict consumer-never-pays rules of a safety recall.
> You must still prove that you had the car serviced according to the
> maintenance schedule, or you will have to pay for the work. The NHTSA
> advised me that I could file a complaint about this, but there was no
> guarantee it would be resolved in my favor.
>
> If you don't have the maintenance records, the dealer where you had
> the work done will have them (assuming they are still in business).
>
> So good luck.
>
> Rose

I guess that begs the question of "Why wouldnt you have the service
records?" ANd the only answer that makes sense is you may not be the
original owner.

As with just about every manufacturer, if you dont take care of the car as
specified on the maintenance schedule, all bets are off as to what is and
what should be covered under warranty as the case now falls under
abuse/negligence.

"Biz" > wrote in message >...

> I guess that begs the question of "Why wouldnt you have the service
> records?" ANd the only answer that makes sense is you may not be the
> original owner.

A lot of people are a bit disorganized (or, as in the case of my
parents, old and forgetful), and while they might have the maintenance
done, they might not keep the receipts (or be able to find them in the
mess).

But if this were a NHTSA-mandated safety recall, it wouldn't matter
whether they drove the car through sandstorms and never changed the
oil. If it's a safety defect that shouldn't happen and requires
rework, and that could result in injury or death, you don't pay, no
matter what. The situation, here, is that manufacturers can avoid this
obligation (and, presumably, some liability) by voluntarily initiating
a "campaign".

Rose