That happened back in about 2011 when a man and his family dismantled his Jeep after many issues that been unresolved over four or five years. It was after that, not really because of it, that consumer laws were strengthened whereby retailers and or manufacturers had to refund the purchase cost of the item if it was not fit for purpose.
Most major manufacturers will accommodate people who have purchased a dud product. it is not in their commercial interest to have multiple legal actions taken in courts and tribunals. It is not about having "big lawyers", whatever that means. If you have the evidence you will be successful. Courts and tribunals make the rulings, not the lawyers. All the lawyer does is make submissions on the evidence put forward, the court or tribunal adjudicates on that, not on someone's opinion.
Burt65 said
02:19 PM Jul 9, 2025
DogBoyz wrote:
i remember several years back a man discovered he bought a Jeep that was a lemon. this was in Australia. I think it might have been melbourne. Im not sure now, but this fellow was denied help by the company that owns jeep which is fiat. I dont know how that works, but thats what I read in all the stories. The man who owned the Jeep the lemon went to great lengths to get vengeance on the dealership who treated him with arrogance along with their lawyers they had a meeting where they mocked him.
I think the final outcome was that he got a crane hire a crane at great cost to lift the Jeep high into the air, and then release it to the ground, and let it crash into the ground, utterly destroying it. And invited the media to attend the destruction of the jeep. Ive never forgotten the treatment that he received. I dont know the man I just read about it in papers. The treatment he received was despicable and I will always remember that and I will never buy FIAT because they are the company who are behind the Jeep. If more people stood up like that man, and if more people had long longer memories, these carmakers who deny responsibility for their dodgy products wouldnt get away with it so easily as they do with their big shop lawyers
-- Edited by DogBoyz on Tuesday 24th of June 2025 04:54:48 PM
Except that FIAT does not own Jeep. Fiat are merely shareholder of the company Stellantis. The Dutch company Exor are the major shareholder.
Either way, JEEP vehicles have always been lemon since WW2 and FIAT has no say on how these vehicles get built in the US..
That happened back in about 2011 when a man and his family dismantled his Jeep after many issues that been unresolved over four or five years. It was after that, not really because of it, that consumer laws were strengthened whereby retailers and or manufacturers had to refund the purchase cost of the item if it was not fit for purpose.
Most major manufacturers will accommodate people who have purchased a dud product. it is not in their commercial interest to have multiple legal actions taken in courts and tribunals. It is not about having "big lawyers", whatever that means. If you have the evidence you will be successful. Courts and tribunals make the rulings, not the lawyers. All the lawyer does is make submissions on the evidence put forward, the court or tribunal adjudicates on that, not on someone's opinion.
Except that FIAT does not own Jeep. Fiat are merely shareholder of the company Stellantis. The Dutch company Exor are the major shareholder.
Either way, JEEP vehicles have always been lemon since WW2 and FIAT has no say on how these vehicles get built in the US..
https://www.slashgear.com/1881106/stellantis-company-who-owns/
On my last lap around Australia I would have to say that 50% were FIAT with another 30% of IVECO and the rest Mercedes and a handful of Renault..
Can't vouch for the FIAT but the IVECO Daily (the bigger but more expensive brother) has no major problem with spare parts in Australia.