FCA ditching arbitration leaves a lot of maybes

Lorraine Sommerfeld explains why car owners need the agency to settle disputes

It's a big announcement that will disappear beneath the headline waves rapidly. That's unfortunate because Fiat Chrysler Automobiles (FCA) pulling out of the Canadian Motor Vehicle Arbitration Plan (CAMVAP) is a big deal, even if you've never heard of CAMVAP.

Chrysler, Jeep, Dodge, Ram, and Fiat owners, you might want to pay attention.

CAMVAP is a Canadian car owner's second-last line of defence if you're battling a manufacturer over a vehicle you believe is defective.

When you've reached the end of your options (and your rope) trying to make a manufacturer fix or replace your vehicle, or even acknowledge that something is wrong, this is where you end up. Established in 1994, CAMVAP is voluntarily funded by manufacturers. The exceptions are BMW, Mini, and Mitsubishi, who handle their claims in-house.

Essentially, CAMVAP handles claims made by consumers who are experiencing ongoing problems with their new(-ish) vehicle's “assembly or materials, or how the manufacturer is applying or administering its new vehicle warranty.” To resolve the disputes, they provide impartial arbitration: they bring a representative of the manufacturer and the complainant to the bargaining table.

Resolutions can be reimbursement for repairs already made; paying owners' out-of-pocket expenses; an order for repairs; a buyback; or a finding of no maker liability. The decision is binding. If you go this route, you give up a chance to take your case to court.

There are restrictions when applying to CAMVAP. Your vehicle must be from the current model year or within the four previous ones. It must have under 160,000 kilometres, logged primarily for personal use. You must have purchased it from the manufacturer's authorized dealer. You must have already allowed your dealer and the manufacturer a reasonable amount of time to solve the problem. It is not a perfect process; it has its detractors, including some of the brands who support it.

They solve cases fast: about 70 calendar days to verdict. It's a more relaxed atmosphere than court (cases are generally heard in a hotel conference room setting), but thinking you can walk in with a clutch of receipts in your hand won't be enough.

You are facing a manufacturer's official who does this stuff all the time. Like true arbiters, they aren't on your side. You have to make your case, and having a lawyer and a technician familiar with your problems may not be required, but it is definitely an asset. They cost money.

LouAnn Gosselin, head of communications for FCA Canada says, “While FCA Canada recognizes the value of a voluntary arbitration program that is able to efficiently and effectively resolve disputes between consumers and manufacturers, the company remains of the view that the improvements required to carry out the full spirit and intent of CAMVAP have not been realized.”

The Automobile Protection Association (APA), a non-profit consumer advocacy group, has long been critical of some aspects of CAMVAP's processes, while acknowledging it could best be improved from within, by those manufacturer members, for example. President George Iny is blunt about FCA's decision, however: “FCA is among the automakers with the least reliable vehicles and most hard-nosed customer support.”

“FCA is a CAMVAP frequent flyer and loses more arbitrations than most other automakers,” says Iny. “Consequently, losing the CAMVAP recourse means an FCA owner loses a potentially useful option in a relationship that is already tough from the outset.”