Forest River not playing the by the rules.

The third thread on the subject.
Does no one use the search function anymore?

jplante4 wrote:

traveylin wrote:
Interesting that Ford maker of the Chassis is not included in the report. Next time you pay 150 thousand for an entry level mh, consider how much of the cost is administrative bureaucracy.

This is why an "entry level" 4 seat airplane that goes 120 MPH costs $412,000.

Was thinking the same thing.

Entry level sure has a huge swing on the sliding scale.

For the OP, I'm going to look into this. Thanks for posting. We were considering trading in the bounder for a FR.

Dale.Traveling wrote:
Just Forest River? All the other builders are probably scrambling to ensure they are complying with the requirements.

What I wonder is where does the final builders requirements end and the chassis builder's start concerning recalls and such? The DP's must be a night mare. Final builder, chassis by a second, engine by someone else with a transmission by someone else,,,. Where does the buck stop?

Consumer vehicles (cars and light trucks) are simple, the final builder be it GM, Ford, Toyota and such is responsible regardless if the vehicle has a part that was built by someone else. RV's should be the same, the final builder such as Forest River, Thor, Tiffin, Newmar, whoever is responsible for the completed product support. We buy a complete product and write a check to them not one to Forest River, then Ford, Coleman, Norcold, Thetford, Carefree, Sony, Winegard, Dometic, Suburban. Did I miss a supplier?

Did you miss a supplier? YES, about 200 or 300. FR is the only one having this problem. All other OEM's comply. Doug

Just Forest River? All the other builders are probably scrambling to ensure they are complying with the requirements.

What I wonder is where does the final builders requirements end and the chassis builder's start concerning recalls and such? The DP's must be a night mare. Final builder, chassis by a second, engine by someone else with a transmission by someone else,,,. Where does the buck stop?

Consumer vehicles (cars and light trucks) are simple, the final builder be it GM, Ford, Toyota and such is responsible regardless if the vehicle has a part that was built by someone else. RV's should be the same, the final builder such as Forest River, Thor, Tiffin, Newmar, whoever is responsible for the completed product support. We buy a complete product and write a check to them not one to Forest River, then Ford, Coleman, Norcold, Thetford, Carefree, Sony, Winegard, Dometic, Suburban. Did I miss a supplier?

traveylin wrote:
Interesting that Ford maker of the Chassis is not included in the report. Next time you pay 150 thousand for an entry level mh, consider how much of the cost is administrative bureaucracy.

This is why an "entry level" 4 seat airplane that goes 120 MPH costs $412,000.

traveylin wrote:
Interesting that Ford maker of the Chassis is not included in the report. Next time you pay 150 thousand for an entry level mh, consider how much of the cost is administrative bureaucracy.

The OEM (Forest River) just notifies customers as a courtesy (they do NOT really have to do it) if there is a chassis recall. Ford DOES have a complete division as does other chassis/auto makers for safety/product recalls that do follow the Federal law. Doug

Interesting that Ford maker of the Chassis is not included in the report. Next time you pay 150 thousand for an entry level mh, consider how much of the cost is administrative bureaucracy.

Effy wrote:
But it doesn't really say what the safety issues/recalls were.

What is says is simple. Even tho FR probably sent the required notices for any safety defects/recalls to owners and fixed the items as required, they failed to notify the NHTSA on any such action as required by LAW since the dates mentioned by the NHTSA. So, since FR did not do what is required and their answer was " the dog ate my homework", They are being fined. I doubt any RV owner was at risk, they just did not send the required paperwork to the NHTSA. Doug

When you read the report it makes no claim that FR was attempting to hide any data but claims it cannot produce the data the NHTSA wants due to a faulty record keeping system. FR has no excuse and should have known better. Warnings from the NHTSA previously should have been acted on quicker by the management team. This is an administrative failure that should not have occurred and we should expect a shake up in the FR administration over it. As for the fine, most Federal regulatory agencies have procedures in place that will allow the company involved to appeal and win reductions. I suspect when all is said and done the original amount when first issued ($100k+) will have to be paid but the subsequent fines after that when FR was attempting to collect the data will be dismissed or reduced. Relying on 3rd parties to comply with federally mandated reporting for you was pretty stupid on their part and no doubt an attempt to save money. I guess that didn't work out to well for them.

But it doesn't really say what the safety issues/recalls were.