|
WHEN LIFE GIVES YOU LEMONS... I would like to address several issues in response to the article written by Nigel Jaquiss two weeks ago about the Mitsubishi Mr. and Mrs. Nyehart purchased from Dick Hannah Mitsubishi in April 1996 ["Squeezing Lemons," WW, April 15, 1998]. Mr. Jaquiss' article links the Nyeharts' purchase and service experiences at Dick Hannah Dealerships with the fact that they are left unprotected by the lemon laws of both the state in which they purchased the car and the state in which they live. You have confused these two issues. For example, what exactly does "cars simply sell for less in Vancouver" have to do with the lemon law issue? Did the Nyeharts feel they got a bad deal on the purchase of their car (which by the way was purchased for substantially less than the $19,000 listed in your article)? The article states that the Nyeharts "lost patience with the dealership." The Nyeharts' service history indicates they have visited our dealership's service department three times since the purchase of their car. According to our records, these visits concerned fit and finish items such as weather stripping, interior trim, locks, etc., in 1996. The Nyeharts have never brought their Mitsubishi into us for repair to the electrical items mentioned in the article. Their last visit was in August 1996. In a letter sent to the dealership in December of last year, an attorney for the Nyeharts explained to us that the Nyeharts had been to every Mitsubishi service department in the Portland metro area, named another dealership in particular as a source of frustration, and a factory representative. Perhaps those dealerships should bear the brunt of your article. Your quote of our service manager, Rick Troutman, was sadly out of context. By saying, "There's no such thing as a lemon," he was intimating that, in his experience, often the inability to diagnose and repair the problem is rooted in human error and not manufacturer defect. What you did not print was his stated willingness to take a shot at diagnosing and repairing the problem for the Nyeharts. The dealer is responsible for repair and maintenance of the vehicle. The manufacturer is responsible for product quality. We are paid by the manufacturer to perform warranty work on our customers' cars and are more than willing to perform this type of repair in our shop. Furthermore, we take full responsibility for the quality of work performed at our dealership and the service we provide our customers. Customers who have valid product quality issues can address them directly with the manufacturer with our assistance or on their own. In the past we have assisted many of our customers through this process with and without using the lemon law as backing. As further proof of our customer service success, you should know that Dick Hannah Mitsubishi service has scored highest in the Pacific Northwest in customer satisfaction ratings for the past three years. The real point of your article should have been to draw attention to the shortcomings in Oregon's lemon law as it now stands. The link you've made between this issue and our dealership (spelled "Hannah," with an "H," by the way) is unnecessary and unfair. Jennifer Hannah, vice president
Dick Hannah Dealerships Nigel Jaquiss responds: The original story had to do with a loophole that prevents an Oregonian who buys a car in Washington from having any recourse against the manufacturer when that car turns out to be a lemon. The story did not imply that Hannah knowingly sold the Nyeharts a lemon or that under the law it had a responsibility to replace the car. The story did quote Troutman accurately, and the information about the $19,000 sale price came from the Nyeharts. We did, however, spell Hannah incorrectly. OHSU NEEDS OUR SUPPORT Nigel Jaquiss, in his recent story about OHSU's beleaguered researcher Bruce Gold ["Raw Nerve," WW, May 20, 1998], cited OHSU's poor performance in attracting NIH funding compared with other academic medical centers. The article compared OHSU's $53.6 million with Johns Hopkins University, which raked in $292.2 million, University of Washington with $226.1 million and the University of Pennsylvania which boasts $217.1 million in NIH funding. However, OHSU also receives far less support from the coffers of the state it serves than do other major research institutions. The article elegantly outlines the problems faced by underfunded institutions like OHSU--they have trouble competing in the big leagues of NIH funding because they lack a critical mass of experienced researchers to help younger researchers play the game effectively. OHSU, Oregon's only academic medical institution, receives around 7 percent of its income from the state and is trying to survive primarily by competing head-to-head for patient care dollars with non-academic hospitals. Although OHSU performs the most cutting-edge medical care in the state, it is also responsible for caring for the sickest and the poorest Oregonians and, because
of inadequate reimbursement for these services, is suffering financially for fulfilling its mission. OHSU continues to excel in training doctors but if it is to become a research power and attract national brains and dollars to our state, it needs more financial support from Oregon's taxpayers. Keith Dipboye
Resident Physician, OHSU Department of Internal Medicine |
