Originally Posted by
maxcichon
I made my 2nd complaint on this issue 4 weeks ago (1st in 2011). I received a phone call from "Washington D.C." on Friday, last. The gent wanted to know if the complaints were for the same car (VIN). I told him yes. The 1st was when it started detaching and the latest for when the glass detached completely and required the costly replacement of the entire top.
And I mentioned, in the latest complaint, the damage caused to the rear glass wiring.
We had a nice, if short, discussion about the "Hot States" delivery criteria Chrysler used.
There seems to still be hope, folks!
Thank you for your help. The climate issue was never "official" from Chrysler (they skipped Mississipi & others), and they have always known that it was not limited only to the group of VIN's shipped to the 9 States. Production of the imported roof tops and cars occurred over a short time span, several years before the failures began. Nobody knows why only those VIN's were chosen.
NHTSA should consider the potential for accident, injury or death caused by water or other damage to all rear wiring systems such as loss of tail and brake lighting etc. The "risk" should not have to be immediate or sudden in order to be considered "unreasonable", such as the ignition switch failures that occurred to many GM vehicles over a period of time. However, even a sudden detached window likely startles the driver and may cause an accident due to fear and/or overreaction.
Chrysler will fight this with all they have. We hope NHTSA takes an honest look from the peoples' viewpoint.