If anyone is interested in reading through loads of email, here is the b*llsh*t I have had from Metzeler so far... Does anyone else think they are crap at communication and I have been very very patient?
Sent: 02/06/2010 14.35.08
To:
http://www.intanexus.com/Jon/V-strom/100_2065sm.jpg http://www.intanexus.com/Jon/V-strom/100_2066sm.jpg Your comments would be most welcome.
Best Regards
Jon
From:
webmaster.uk@metzelermoto.comSubject: RE: Cracks in Front Tyre
Hi,
Thank you for your reply.
I have just noticed a recall on your website for Metzeler Tourance 150/70 R17 M/C 69V manufactured in weeks 09 and 10 of 2010. While this does not include my tyre, the symptoms are the same: "The affected tyres could suffer tread block tearing which on some occasions could lead to the separation of some blocks, causing a sudden and unexpected vibration of the motorcycle."
Can I therefore conclude that my tyre, like those being recalled, does not "consistently meet the optimum Metzeler quality-specifications which guarantee safe tyre performance" ?
The statement on the website regarding the recalled tyres says: "METZELER will pay for the purchase and installation of replacement tyres, including the cost of fitment."
Does this also apply to the replacement tyre that I require?
Best Regards
Jon
From:
webmaster.uk@metzelermoto.comSubject: Customer Service
Good Afternoon,
I am disappointed to note that I have not received a reply to my email of two days ago. Despite 25 years of loyalty to the Metzeler name, I am now considering an alternative brand for replacement tyres.
Although I continue to have the opinion that Metzeler tyres offer a high level of grip in both wet and dry conditions and last for many miles of riding, I am very unimpressed with your level of customer service in the light of what could be a potentially dangerous manufacturing fault.
The full thread of the issue may be read in the chain of emails below. You will see that I have asked two very specific questions, which you have either avoided answering (in your last email) or have now, it appears, stopped discussing the matter all together.
I repeat the questions here for you convenience:
1. Looking at the provided photos do you feel that this tyre "meets Metzeler quality-specifications which guarantee safe tyre performance" and therefore I can continue to ride the bike without concern?
2. If you feel the tyre may be the subject of a manufacturing fault (and therefore was not fit for purpose at the time of sale) are you prepared to discuss paying for a replacement tyre?
Also for your convenience, I attach the two earlier images along with a third which illustrates clearly the depth of the cracks.
I would appreciate your direct response to my direct questions.
Thank you in advance.
Jon Wilmer.
From:
webmaster.uk@metzelermoto.comSubject: RE: Customer Service
Thank you for replying. However, I have asked two specific questions. Would you please be kind enough to answer with specific answers:
1 Do you feel that this tyre "meets Metzeler quality-specifications which guarantee safe tyre performance"?
2. Are you prepared to discuss paying for a replacement tyre?
Thank you in advance for your attention.
Jon Wilmer
From:
webmaster.uk@metzelermoto.comSubject: RE: Customer Service
Good morning,
As I understand from your reply, you are not willing to answer my questions, neither are you even willing to discuss the possibility of any offer towards the cost of the replacement tyre until after you have the tyre in your possession?
Due to your very poor communication over this issue I hope you will forgive my cynicism but, once you have the tyre, I no longer have any evidence regarding the break down of the material and, therefore, whether the item was of "merchantable quality" and "fit for purpose" at the time of sale. Once the tyre is with you I do not have the confidence that your assessment will be unbiased. You would, for example, be completely at liberty to say "the tyre was abused, not our fault". I would have no recourse and no evidence.
Under the circumstances, I feel I would be in a better position if I arrange an independent inspection though my local Trading Standards Authority, perhaps with the assistance of the motorcycle press.
I am sure you do not want to admit to a manufacturing problem, especially in light of the current recall. (Similar tyre, same symptoms) That would be bad publicity. However, I think you are not seeing the bigger picture: If it is reported that the tyre was found to be defective AND you were not even prepared to discuss the issue with a loyal customer. That would be very bad publicity.
Jon Wilmer
(Motorcycle Action Group UK)
From:
webmaster.uk@metzelermoto.comDate: Wed, 9 Jun 2010 17:48:39 +0200
Subject: RE:RE: Customer Service
Mr Wilmer
Pirelli tyres in the UK operates along with all NTDA members (tyre outlets) and all other tyre manufactures to a standard warranty inspection process. This requires the tyre to be returned by your tyre dealer with a completed standard application form to the manufacture concerned.
We can not make a full inspection unless we are able to fully examine all of the tyre (internally as well as externally), which may require samples being taken from the tyre for further testing.
The tyre will be inspected in our UK warranty centre and you will be advised in writing of our technicians results.
If we find there is a manufacturing fault we will credit your dealer a percentage of the tyres value for him to pass on to yourself.
If we can find no manufacturing fault(s) we will write to you with an explanation of why we have rejected the claim.
At this point if you so wish we will return the tyre to your tyre dealer
THERE IS NO CHARGE FOR ANY OF THIS SERVICEBest Regards
Paul Leyland
Product Evaluation Europe &
Warranty Management UK
Mr Leyland,
Thank you for your full and detailed email. What a shame it took 6 emails from me before someone from Metzeler was prepared to send such a response. I would have preferred this reply after my first email, of one week ago.
I now understand that you operate a standard warranty inspection process. I think that operating to any standard procedure is actually rather limiting in that is does not allow for discretionary action. In my experience minimum standards are also used as maximum standards. Therefore, no company (in this instance, Metzeler) is willing to stand head and shoulders above the rest and say "We're better, we go further". From the customer point of view this is very disappointing.
As I mentioned in one of my previous emails, I have been loyally using Metzeler tyres for 25 years. I am disheartened to find that customer loyalty is not reciprocated. As is so often the case, it seems that Metzeler are such a big concern they forget that it’s the little people, like me, that put you where you are today.
During the week that has passed I already decided to replace my tyre. After such poor responses to date, I am sorry to advise you that I have fitted a tyre made by one of your competitors. Should this brand demonstrate itself to be as good or possibly even better than my experience of Metzeler tyres, it will signal the end of an almost lifelong relationship. As is so often the case with a breakdown in a relationship, the cause was poor communication.
The replacement tyre was purchased online and fitted by a friend of mine. He is not an NTDA member. I have kept the (possibly) faulty tyre. If you would like to send a courier or postage paid label, I would be happy to ensure the tyre is returned for your inspection.
Should it be found there was a manufacturing fault, I have to say that I am not impressed by the offer that you will credit me with a percentage of the tyres value. This does not accept that the tyre was not of merchantable quality at the time of sale. Nor that it could have failed at any time with potentially disastrous results. What ever happened to “we are genuinely sorry you were not entirely satisfied with our product, here is another one so that you can give us another chanceâ€. All part of keeping down to the minimum standard, I guess.
However, I am very pleased to note you point out that for the inspection, possible send off of samples, the letter advising of results and a possible part refund, “THERE IS NO CHARGE FOR ANY OF THIS SERVICEâ€. As opposed to what, exactly? So far I have paid around £75 for a product that I believed in and now feel very let down by the company that manufactures it. You’ll forgive me if I don’t get too excited.
Best Regards
Jon