The article isn’t so much about the stalling issue as it is about MT’s experience getting their issues resolved.
I hope the folks at FCA are listening to the feedback being provided through this article, it paints a very unpleasant picture about the level of service one can expect from the dealer network.
Sadly, my recent experience reflects MT’s. Weeks to get an appointment - called all the dealers in my area, all needed approximately 2 weeks lead time to get me in. They had my Dodge for over 3 weeks for some very basic work. Took them a week to get to my car (Christmas/New Year, same reason MT was given for theirs), called me in to pick up the car after telling me they could not reproduce the problem (speaker rattle). Rather than pick up the car, I dropped in and had the service writer out to the car. Within 10 seconds we were able to replicate the issue, which, by the way, I demonstrated to them upon drop-off a week earlier. So now they needed another 2 weeks for the work to be done (back ordered part - just like MT).
Got my Dodge back, brought my Pacifica in next day. What should have beef a routine 2 day service turned into a month long affair. Started out the same way...techs didn’t get to the car for 4-5 days. When they did, they wound up damaging the van (broken hood and windshield). Reason for the long delay???? Yep, windshield was back ordered. Took 2 weeks for the part to arrive.
I thought the MT article was brutal but fair, and completely in line with my experiences.
I think Chrysler / Jeep / Dodge makes some awesome products that are as good, if not better, than their competition. One of the best ways to reinforce brand loyalty is through excellent service, likewise it’s also one of the easiest ways to lose a customer as well.
If FCA wants to compete, they need to solve this problem...fix the car right the first time, do it quickly and minimize the number of repeat visits for the same issue.