Only $1895.00, Very Clean For Age And Miles, Top Working, Drives Good, See Pics on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Certain Chrysler owners eligible for buyback program

Certain car owners whose Chrysler vehicles contain dangerous defects will soon have a way to get rid of their lemons without losing money. As part of an agreement with federal regulators, Fiat Chrysler Automobiles has agreed to buy back more than 500,000 vehicles susceptible to veering out of control without warning at above market-value prices. The deal mainly covers certain models of RAM trucks, the Dodge Dakota pickup and Dodge Durango SUV. Further, owners of more than 1.5 million Jeep Liberty and Grand Cherokees at heightened risk for lethal fires are eligible to trade in their vehicles at above market value or, alternately, get a gift certificate if they prefer to have repairs made. Chrysler has "a heavy responsibility to make sure the products they make are safe for the traveling public," said Mark Rosekind, administrator of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. "... Here, we are sending an unambiguous signal to industry that if you skirt the laws or violate the law, or don't live up to the responsibility that consumers expect, we are going to penalize you." The buy-back and trade-in options for motorists come as part of an unprecedented penalty NHTSA slapped against Chrysler for violating federal motor-vehicle safety laws. Chrysler will pay a $105 million fine, the highest ever levied by the regulatory agency. In addition to the buy-backs, Chrysler also agreed to an independent monitor for three years. Investigators had outlined problems in the company's conduct in 23 recalls that affected more than 11 million defect vehicles. As part of a consent-order agreement, Chrysler acknowledged it did not notify vehicle owners of recalls in an effective manner and did not notify NHTSA of safety problems. Though those recalls affected millions of drivers, the buy-back and trade-in options are only for a small portion of the vehicles involved. Because Chrysler struggled to fix the problem and no repair was apparent, Rosekind said the buy-backs are reserved "for customers who didn't have a remedy." Buy-backs are for trucks and SUVs affected by three recalls that occurred in 2013 (recalls 13V-038, 13V-527 and 13V-529), that addressed a rear-axle pinion nut that could come loose and cause a loss of vehicle control. Those recalls covered 579,228 vehicles, including 2009-2012 Ram 1500, 2500, 3500, 4500 and 5500 trucks, 2009-2012 Dodge Dakotas, 2009 Chrysler Aspen and the 2009 Dodge Durango.

Bring back the Bronco! Trademarks we hope are actually (someday) future car names

Trademark filings are the tea leaves of the auto industry. Read them carefully – and interpret them correctly – and you might be previewing an automaker's future product plans. Yes, they're routinely filed to maintain the rights to an iconic name. And sometimes they're only for toys and clothing. But not always. Sometimes, the truth is right in front of us. The trademark is required because a company actually wants to use the name on a new car. With that in mind, here's a list of intriguing trademark filings we want to see go from paperwork to production reality. Trademark: Bronco Company: Ford Previous Use: The Bronco was a long-running SUV that lived from 1966-1996. It's one of America's original SUVs and was responsible for the increased popularity of the segment. Still, it's best known as O.J. Simpson's would-be getaway car. We think: The Bronco was an icon. Everyone seems to want a Wrangler-fighter – Ford used to have a good one. Enough time has passed that the O.J. police chase isn't the immediate image conjured by the Bronco anymore. Even if we're doing a wish list in no particular order, the Bronco still finds its way to the top. For now (unfortunately), it's just federal paperwork. Rumors on this one can get especially heated. The official word from a Ford spokesman is: "Companies renew trademark filings to maintain ownership and control of the mark, even if it is not currently used. Ford values the iconic Bronco name and history." Trademarks: Aviator, AV8R Company: Ford Previous Use: The Aviator was one of the shortest-run Lincolns ever, lasting for the 2003-2005 model years. It never found the sales success of the Ford Explorer, with which it shared a platform. We Think: The Aviator name no longer fits with Lincoln's naming nomenclature. Too bad, it's better than any other name Lincoln currently uses, save for its former big brother, the Navigator. Perhaps we're barking up the wrong tree, though. Ford has made several customized, aviation themed-Mustangs in the past, including one called the Mustang AV8R in 2008, which had cues from the US Air Force's F-22 Raptor fighter jet. It sold for $500,000 at auction, and the glass roof – which is reminiscent of a fighter jet cockpit – helped Ford popularize the feature. Trademark: EcoBeast Company: Ford Previous Use: None by major carmakers.

Dealer chain accuses FCA of paying dealers to pad sales [UPDATE]

UPDATE: The story has been updated to include a full press release from Fiat Chrysler Automobiles on the Napleton Automotive Group's allegations. A Chicago-based dealership group has filed an explosive lawsuit against Fiat Chrysler Automobiles accusing the company of paying dealers to fake new-vehicle sales, Automotive News reports. Edward Napleton, president of the Napleton Automotive Group, filed the suit on Tuesday. It claims that FCA offered Napleton money to fudge end-of-month sales figures. According to the filing, dealers would report false transactions, only to "back out" at the start of a new month "before the factory warranty on the vehicles could be processed and start to run." According to Automotive News, FCA was aware of the false reports and rewarded dealership managers for hitting sales targets. The lawsuit cites one example at Napleton Arlington Heights Chrysler Jeep Dodge Ram where an FCA business center manager offered Napleton $20,000 "to falsely report the sales of 40 new vehicles." The payment would be disguised "as a co-op advertising credit to the dealer's account." Such a move would prevent a sales audit, AN reports. Napleton rejected the deal, telling FCA it was illegal. He later learned a similar arrangement was made with a competing dealer to falsify the sale of 85 vehicles. They were given "tens of thousands of dollars as an illicit reward for their complicity in the scheme." FCA has vehemently denied the accusation in a statement obtained by Automotive News. "While the lawsuit has not yet been served on FCA US, the company believes that the claim is without merit and was filed by internal counsel to the dealer group as FCA US has concurrently been discussing with the dealer group the need to meet its obligations under some of its dealer agreements," the statement said. "The company is confident in the integrity of its business processes and dealer arrangements and intends to defend this action vigorously." There are additional allegations, as well, claiming FCA "strong-armed its dealers to achieve sales numbers" and accusing the company of maintaining a "pattern of conduct towards its dealers [that] has been one of coercion and threats of termination having nothing to do with the actual performance of its dealers." FCA is riding a wave of 69 consecutive months of year-over-year sales gains. More on this one as it becomes available. FCA Strongly Rejects Allegations by Two U.S.