After the tires sale "There are three packages without claims"
Latching Abandoned Anchor Device Latching Abandoned Anchor Device,Marine Accessories Anchor Device,Anchor Device,Cable Back Anchor Device TAIXING HAITAI GLOBAL TRADE CO.,LTD , https://www.jiangsuhaitship.com
Tires are the most wearable parts of a car and are crucial to vehicle performance and safety. The Consumers Association of 28 provinces and cities nationwide issued a joint report on the "Tire Enterprise After-sales Service Policy Investigation Report." It investigated 12 tire brands that occupied more than 90% of the market share of passenger car tires. The report shows that the length of warranty period is different, there is a large difference in claims standards, and legal liability is evaded for non-quality issues. The industrial practices that have followed many years in the tire industry have not been broken, making consumer disputes “have three packages without claims†after the occurrence of consumer disputes. status.
Tire Warranty: From when the calculation was controversial
The survey found that in addition to Michelin's non-response among the 12 tire manufacturing companies, the start date of the claims period of the nine companies was calculated based on the date of production, and the two companies were calculated based on the date of sale. The warranty period is of varying lengths. Some are three years from the production date, some are five years from the production date, and some are one year from the date of sale. It is reported that the Ministry of Commerce in 2009 issued the "Tire Distribution Business Regulations Claims Requirements" stipulated that the starting date of the automobile tire claims period is calculated from the date of production and calculated from the date of sale. Two calculation methods: According to the production date Starting from the calculation, the warranty period is 3 years; according to the retailer sales date, the warranty period is 1 year.
However, the difference in the calculation method of the start date of the claims period will often bring different consumer feelings and rights protection to consumers. For a claim period calculated from the date of production, the warranty time consumers can enjoy is actually equal to the warranty period minus the tire's inventory time, that is, if the inventory time approaches the warranty period, the tire warranty period loses meaning. Consumers also cannot enjoy their due rights. This will undoubtedly leave some unscrupulous companies the opportunity to find legal opportunities.
Consumers Association Joint Suggestions:
The warranty period for tires should be consistent with the "Car Three Guarantees Regulations" that came into force on October 1 this year, starting from the date of sale of the products; or for better safeguarding the rights and interests of consumers, advocating enterprises to provide consumers with two different start times. The warranty period for consumers to choose their own calculations.
Claims standards: follow many industry conventions
Regarding the claims standards for automobile tires during the warranty period, the “ Claims Requirements†promulgated by the Ministry of Commerce stipulates: “After using the tires, if the tires are used within 2mm after the tires have been used, the user may replace the tires with quality problems.†After the tires are used, the tire tread wear generally exceeds 2mm, and quality problems are discovered. If the tire manufacturer's responsibility is identified, the tire manufacturer should compensate for the pattern wear.
However, the survey found that some of the so-called “national standards†used by tire companies are the “Measures for the Management of Automobile Tire Claims†formulated by industry associations before the “claims requirements†were issued, and are actually the industry's common practice. For example, Bridgestone and other companies have imposed wear and tear fees in excess of 1.6mm in accordance with the "Administrative Measures."
According to experts, the difference between the two is that the “Administrative Measures†stipulates that wear exceeds 1.6mm for wear and tear, while “Claims Claims†stipulates that wear exceeds 2.0mm to collect wear fees. “Although the difference between the two is only 0.4mm, but for consumption For the people, the cost is very different."
Consumers Association Joint Suggestions:
The claims of the “Administrative Measure†are lower than the “claims for claims†and obviously favor the tire companies. After the introduction of the automobile Three Guarantees Regulations and its implementing rules and regulations, the tire industry should break the industry practice of the "Administrative Measures" and actively adapt to new requirements, improve the three-guarantee time limit and claims standards, and protect the legitimate rights and interests of consumers.
In another development, the Ministry of Commerce began to revise the Claims Claims in April last year, and plans to raise the standards from the recommended standards to mandatory standards. Soon, new standards will be implemented.
Compensation for non-quality problems: "improper use" as a right-to-stop
The survey also investigated the policy of compensation for non-quality problems in automobile tires. In addition to 1 company, there was a clear compensation policy for non-quality issues such as “impact bulging†and “traumaâ€, and one company stated that "The corresponding compensation policy is based on new listing or product promotion, etc." The remaining 10 companies have no compensation policy. Consumers generally report that when problems occur in tires, “misuse†has become a shield for manufacturers to avoid legal liability.
The reporter learned that the "Administrative Measures" as a line regulation listed 5 categories of 19 types of consumers "misuse", and even the "improper storage" and "misconstruction" may have been the responsibility of the car manufacturer. , and made it clear that "the use of improper tires caused early damage, and resulting in personal and property losses, the manufacturer (or seller) does not assume responsibility, have the right to refuse the use of the party's claim for compensation."
Whether it is the improper use of consumers or the quality of the product itself, and who is responsible for appraising the responsibility, this has often become the focus of disputes in consumer disputes. Consumers report that in the event of a tire consumption dispute, the tire manufacturers themselves identified themselves as both "athletes" and "referees", and the results of the identification are difficult to convince. If consumers find a third-party appraisal agency, the charge is very expensive and "not worth the candle."
Consumers Association Joint Suggestions:
It is proposed to introduce third-party testing agencies that are not for profit. At the same time, advocate tire enterprise innovation service measures, especially the situation of quality problems and improper use is difficult to identify, appropriate relaxation of claims policy, to take compensation measures to consumers to provide consumers with more personalized after-sales service.