Revdex.com: I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID 12174610, and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me
The saw in question was purchased on 8/22/The Stihl IncLimited Warranty Policy states that "Limited warranty time periodfor gasoline powered chain sawsOne year from date of purchase when used for personal non-income producing household purposes."In addition, Stihl offers the option to double this warranty coverage "if the consumer purchases a 6-pack of Stihl HP Ultra 2-cycle engine oil..." The customer did purchase this option, thereby granting the saw a full years Limited Warranty.The warranty is a statement by the manufacturer and the dealer is unable to modify or extend that warranty.On 3/27/the customer brought the saw in for repair expecting that the repair would be done under his warrantyExplanations were attempted as to the nature and the term of the warranty to no avialThe fact that this saw had used less than gallon of fuel during the past and a half years would not have extended the TERM of the warranty which ended by 8/22/The customer simply refused to accept that statement from the store ownerThe only option that the owner could offer would be to take the unit, examine it and report to the manufacturer the findings and let them make their decision in the situationThe owner then offered to take the equipment in on that basisIt is customary, and posted in the store, that a REPAIR DEPOSIT is to be paid at the time equipment is left for repair and the deposit was requestedAt that point the customer was ready to leave the store, telling the owner that she was refusing to help himShe pointed out that she was trying to help him but that this was the only way that he would be able to get any determination of the cause of the problem with his saw and determine how any repairs could be handledAs the saw was clearly out of the warranty period, as the customer states in his complaint, a warranty cannot be submitted by the dealerIn addition, for a piece of equipment to be used so infrequently, it is common to find that fuel related problems due to old/stale fuel must be addressedSuch issues are specifically excluded in the Warranty Exclusions stated within the Limited Warranty PolicyUnder the best circumstance we anticipated that charges would have to be made to the customer at some point.Finally the customer agreed to pay the deposit ($35.00, which was ultimately applied to sharpening of the chain that he requested).The technician at KRPE examined the equipment thoroughly and made the recommended tests that would normally determine where/if there were defects in materials or work-manshipFinding nothing that he could demonstrate to Stihl that would cause the damage, the only other probable cause may have been related to the condition of the fuelBut Stihl offered to make a GOOD WILL Policy Adjustment for the customer, provided that the customer contribute to the repair by paying the labor costStihl was no longer obligated under the term of warranty.The repair was made using the new parts as directed and provided by StihlAll tests after the repair showed that the unit was properly repaired and would be again serviceable as per factory specificationThe saw was returned to the customer on 4/27/with the admonition that he make sure that he was using the proper octane fuel in the unit.On 5/9/the saw was again brought back to store, with the same catastrophic damage to the piston and cylinderIn speaking to the customer about the damage the technician noted to the customer that he found some evidence of water in the fuel that had been removed from the sawHis intent when he spoke of the water in the fuel was primarily to advise the customer that he might have water in whatever fuel supply/tank that he has been using and for him to check his supply containers with this in mindThe unfortunate part of this situation is not just that the engine again failed, but that the opportunity to determine WHY it failed, and to possibly explain the first failure is that the customer in his anger falsely accused the KRPE technician of deliberately putting the water in the fuel!!!When he made that statement the technician felt that the customer no longer trusted us and with such a "break of trust" he refused to continue to work on his equipmentWith this, the saw was returned to the customer and he left the store,Under other circumstances that would normally have occurred in such a repeat of damage is both our technician and definitely also the Stihl technical staff would have wanted to do extensive additional study of the sawNow, with the customer leaving in his anger neither we, nor Stihl can know who or what is at fault to cause the failure.At this point it is thought that the customer may have been using fuel that has been stored at this cabin well past the viable shelf lifethen, when the saw was repaired, if he continued to use fuel from the same source, the result was predictable the sameAs to the DESIRED SETTLEMENT requested by the customer of "repair" and "stand behind their product", Kern River Power Equipment has always stood behind their repairs, as does Stihl Incstand behind their productBut the "break in trust" that was initiated by the customer's remarks about the technician putting water in his fuel, and unless the customer is willing to return the saw to our facility for further examination neither option will happenBoth KRPE and Stihl would have liked to have had the opportunity to make the determination of the cause of failure to have put this situation to restIt will be up to the customer to decide what he wants done
Revdex.com: I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID 12174610, and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me
The saw in question was purchased on 8/22/The Stihl IncLimited Warranty Policy states that "Limited warranty time periodfor gasoline powered chain sawsOne year from date of purchase when used for personal non-income producing household purposes."In addition, Stihl offers the option to double this warranty coverage "if the consumer purchases a 6-pack of Stihl HP Ultra 2-cycle engine oil..." The customer did purchase this option, thereby granting the saw a full years Limited Warranty.The warranty is a statement by the manufacturer and the dealer is unable to modify or extend that warranty.On 3/27/the customer brought the saw in for repair expecting that the repair would be done under his warrantyExplanations were attempted as to the nature and the term of the warranty to no avialThe fact that this saw had used less than gallon of fuel during the past and a half years would not have extended the TERM of the warranty which ended by 8/22/The customer simply refused to accept that statement from the store ownerThe only option that the owner could offer would be to take the unit, examine it and report to the manufacturer the findings and let them make their decision in the situationThe owner then offered to take the equipment in on that basisIt is customary, and posted in the store, that a REPAIR DEPOSIT is to be paid at the time equipment is left for repair and the deposit was requestedAt that point the customer was ready to leave the store, telling the owner that she was refusing to help himShe pointed out that she was trying to help him but that this was the only way that he would be able to get any determination of the cause of the problem with his saw and determine how any repairs could be handledAs the saw was clearly out of the warranty period, as the customer states in his complaint, a warranty cannot be submitted by the dealerIn addition, for a piece of equipment to be used so infrequently, it is common to find that fuel related problems due to old/stale fuel must be addressedSuch issues are specifically excluded in the Warranty Exclusions stated within the Limited Warranty PolicyUnder the best circumstance we anticipated that charges would have to be made to the customer at some point.Finally the customer agreed to pay the deposit ($35.00, which was ultimately applied to sharpening of the chain that he requested).The technician at KRPE examined the equipment thoroughly and made the recommended tests that would normally determine where/if there were defects in materials or work-manshipFinding nothing that he could demonstrate to Stihl that would cause the damage, the only other probable cause may have been related to the condition of the fuelBut Stihl offered to make a GOOD WILL Policy Adjustment for the customer, provided that the customer contribute to the repair by paying the labor costStihl was no longer obligated under the term of warranty.The repair was made using the new parts as directed and provided by StihlAll tests after the repair showed that the unit was properly repaired and would be again serviceable as per factory specificationThe saw was returned to the customer on 4/27/with the admonition that he make sure that he was using the proper octane fuel in the unit.On 5/9/the saw was again brought back to store, with the same catastrophic damage to the piston and cylinderIn speaking to the customer about the damage the technician noted to the customer that he found some evidence of water in the fuel that had been removed from the sawHis intent when he spoke of the water in the fuel was primarily to advise the customer that he might have water in whatever fuel supply/tank that he has been using and for him to check his supply containers with this in mindThe unfortunate part of this situation is not just that the engine again failed, but that the opportunity to determine WHY it failed, and to possibly explain the first failure is that the customer in his anger falsely accused the KRPE technician of deliberately putting the water in the fuel!!!When he made that statement the technician felt that the customer no longer trusted us and with such a "break of trust" he refused to continue to work on his equipmentWith this, the saw was returned to the customer and he left the store,Under other circumstances that would normally have occurred in such a repeat of damage is both our technician and definitely also the Stihl technical staff would have wanted to do extensive additional study of the sawNow, with the customer leaving in his anger neither we, nor Stihl can know who or what is at fault to cause the failure.At this point it is thought that the customer may have been using fuel that has been stored at this cabin well past the viable shelf lifethen, when the saw was repaired, if he continued to use fuel from the same source, the result was predictable the sameAs to the DESIRED SETTLEMENT requested by the customer of "repair" and "stand behind their product", Kern River Power Equipment has always stood behind their repairs, as does Stihl Incstand behind their productBut the "break in trust" that was initiated by the customer's remarks about the technician putting water in his fuel, and unless the customer is willing to return the saw to our facility for further examination neither option will happenBoth KRPE and Stihl would have liked to have had the opportunity to make the determination of the cause of failure to have put this situation to restIt will be up to the customer to decide what he wants done