On December 26, 2018 we purchased a new 2019 Chevrolet Equinox from South Charlotte Chevrolet (9325 South Boulevard, Charlotte, NC 28273) with a mileage of 346 on delivery.
On December 27, 2018 we noticed that the Lane Change Alert (LCA) was disengaged on the Vehicle System Menu. This also resulted in the Rear Cross Traffic Alert (RCTA) being disengaged. We proceeded to set the LCA to "on" and verified this also engaged the RCTA.
Later that same day (12/27/18), we noticed the LCA (and subsequently, the RCTA) was again disengaged. Again, we engaged it within the Vehicle System Menu and verified that it was engaged.
After driving the vehicle again that same day (12/27/18) and turning it off for a period of time (approximately 20 minutes) we noticed that when the vehicle was restarted that the LCA and RCTA were once again disengaged in the Vehicle System Menu. Upon further investigation, we concluded that each time the vehicle was turned off and restarted (over a period of several minutes), the LCA, and subsequently the RCTA was disengaging itself and you had to manually go into the Vehicle System Menu each and every time to turn it back on.
On January 2, 2019 we took the vehicle to South Charlotte Chevrolet to have the issue diagnosed and repaired (with a mileage of 485). The issue was seen by the Service Advisor and the technician; however, no repair was made at the time as "Contacted GM TAC 9-4957893398, need more time for diagnosis." Further stated, "Tech Support has never heard of this issue, so more time is needed to investigate." Appointment scheduled for January 7, 2019 to bring the vehicle back into the dealership for investigation/diagnosis/repair.
Vehicle returned to South Charlotte Chevrolet at 9:00 a.m. on January 7, 2019, as scheduled, for follow-up appointment and issue repair. Received a call from the Service Advisor at 4:45 p.m. that the vehicle could not be repaired currently as this is a "known issue" to GM and is a software/programming error that needs to be addressed. Further stated, "It could be a week, it could be a month, it could be ... " Per the work order: "Contacted GM TAC 9-4957893398, GM is working on a PI for this concern which has not yet been released. Engineering will release PI when solution is found. Programming issue."
I have several concerns/issues that need to be addressed:
1) How did this go from ""Tech Support has never heard of this issue" to "known issue to GM and is a software/programming error that needs to be addressed" within a matter of a weekend? In this scenario, 2+2 does not equal 4.
2) If #1 is correct, and it is a "known issue," should not prospective buyers of this make and model be advised prior to purchasing that there is a known operating issue with a vehicle feature that the customer is paying extra for (Confidence and Convenience Package)? If it is a "known issue," why is GM even selling that make and model of vehicle with that know defect?
3) If #1 is not correct, and it is NOT a "known issue" but rather a way to appease the customer "for the moment," while the vehicle remains with an issue in its system, this speaks badly of GM.
4) Having paid an extra $1,945.00 for the Confidence (quite the misnomer in this instance) and Convenience Package, we are paying for a feature that does not work properly and there is no timetable for it to work properly. I would hope that is not what GM expects of its customers - to pay for vehicle features that do not work.
A D V E R T I S E M E N T S
On December 26, 2018 we purchased a new 2019 Chevrolet Equinox from South Charlotte Chevrolet (9325 South Boulevard, Charlotte, NC 28273) with a mileage of 346 on delivery.
On December 27, 2018 we noticed that the Lane Change Alert (LCA) was disengaged on the Vehicle System Menu. This also resulted in the Rear Cross Traffic Alert (RCTA) being disengaged. We proceeded to set the LCA to "on" and verified this also engaged the RCTA.
Later that same day (12/27/18), we noticed the LCA (and subsequently, the RCTA) was again disengaged. Again, we engaged it within the Vehicle System Menu and verified that it was engaged.
After driving the vehicle again that same day (12/27/18) and turning it off for a period of time (approximately 20 minutes) we noticed that when the vehicle was restarted that the LCA and RCTA were once again disengaged in the Vehicle System Menu. Upon further investigation, we concluded that each time the vehicle was turned off and restarted (over a period of several minutes), the LCA, and subsequently the RCTA was disengaging itself and you had to manually go into the Vehicle System Menu each and every time to turn it back on.
On January 2, 2019 we took the vehicle to South Charlotte Chevrolet to have the issue diagnosed and repaired (with a mileage of 485). The issue was seen by the Service Advisor and the technician; however, no repair was made at the time as "Contacted GM TAC 9-4957893398, need more time for diagnosis." Further stated, "Tech Support has never heard of this issue, so more time is needed to investigate." Appointment scheduled for January 7, 2019 to bring the vehicle back into the dealership for investigation/diagnosis/repair.
Vehicle returned to South Charlotte Chevrolet at 9:00 a.m. on January 7, 2019, as scheduled, for follow-up appointment and issue repair. Received a call from the Service Advisor at 4:45 p.m. that the vehicle could not be repaired currently as this is a "known issue" to GM and is a software/programming error that needs to be addressed. Further stated, "It could be a week, it could be a month, it could be ... " Per the work order: "Contacted GM TAC 9-4957893398, GM is working on a PI for this concern which has not yet been released. Engineering will release PI when solution is found. Programming issue."
I have several concerns/issues that need to be addressed:
1) How did this go from ""Tech Support has never heard of this issue" to "known issue to GM and is a software/programming error that needs to be addressed" within a matter of a weekend? In this scenario, 2+2 does not equal 4.
2) If #1 is correct, and it is a "known issue," should not prospective buyers of this make and model be advised prior to purchasing that there is a known operating issue with a vehicle feature that the customer is paying extra for (Confidence and Convenience Package)? If it is a "known issue," why is GM even selling that make and model of vehicle with that know defect?
3) If #1 is not correct, and it is NOT a "known issue" but rather a way to appease the customer "for the moment," while the vehicle remains with an issue in its system, this speaks badly of GM.
4) Having paid an extra $1,945.00 for the Confidence (quite the misnomer in this instance) and Convenience Package, we are paying for a feature that does not work properly and there is no timetable for it to work properly. I would hope that is not what GM expects of its customers - to pay for vehicle features that do not work.
- Frankie P., Pineville, NC, US