Kioti Responds.....KL120 & KL130 Loader Problems

[gmsssi]

Kioti responded to my following post..........

From a current owner of a DK45s! Would you please address the KL120 and KL130 loader problems (cross member cracking) that many of my friends are experiencing! It would do Kioti well to acknowledge the problem to current owners of these products and address it ASAP. Besides potentially becoming a public relations problem to Kioti due to the internet traffic on the subject, it could potentially become a safety issue. Please make me proud to be a member of the Kioti family!

Sincerely,

Greg Mallory

The response I received today from Kioti............................

Mr. Mallory,

I received your website inquiry regarding the KL120 and KL130 loader cracking issue. KIOTI has acknowledged this problem to our dealers. At this time however, we are performing extensive tests and gathering factual information about the cracking. Once we have determined a resolution to this issue we will release the information to end users who own these model loaders and our registered in our data base. Our primary goal is to stand behind our products and take care of our customers who own them. Thank you for your inquiry and concern on this issue.

Best Regards,

Stephanie Denton
Customer Relations
Executive Department
P: (919) 374-5073
F: (919) 374-5005

KIOTI

 

[Dmace]

Sweet !

 

[HODAK]

So, where are all of the negative responses????? You know, all of that "I think KIOTI should", and "the tractors I sell", and "I didn't say that", blah, blah, blah, Sorry, couldn't resist. OK, the door is open.............come on Bob.....

 

[RedRocker]

Sounds like a plan to me.

 

[kentrodngun]

Hmmm, their response also seem to be consistent with what a lot of people on this site predicted. That is, things like this take time and they (Kioti) can't just gut react. They need to test, evaluate and come up with a solution before "fessing up to the problem". As a Corporate business person, I don't think their overall timeline for getting a response out like this is unreasonable. I must admit however that I suspect that the chatter on sites like this one undoubtedly sped up issuing an official response. Hopefully they will come up with a resolution that satisfies the owners and polishes up their recently tarnished image.

 

[Steverino]

I believe that it also brought forth to Kioti the magnitude of the problem.

 

[Dargo]

So, where are all of the negative responses????? You know, all of that "I think KIOTI should", and "the tractors I sell", and "I didn't say that", blah, blah, blah, Sorry, couldn't resist. OK, the door is open.............come on Bob.....

I'd talked to Greg before and thought that his note was great and positive. His response is about as honest and professional as anyone could ask to see. It looks like you'll be the lone negative response in this thread; you win that category.

Good job Greg and Kioti!

 

[rback33]

I known I am picking on Greg at the moment because he happens to be the one that posted this item, but I have seen it MANY times before on TBN. As a professional in the Ag industry I ahve a real problem with (and I think it is actually against forum rules) when people publicly copy and paste professional corresondence into threads. I especailly have a problem when you include names and titles of the sources. This information is being give to you as a professional courtesy. She did not HAVE to give any of the information. I wish people would extend the same courtesy back and keep private correspondence private. Now don't get me wrong, I have no problem with the posting of GENERAL information that says something to the effect of, "hey, I got a response from Kioti's customer relations dept. They said that the were investigating the issues and all registered owners would be notified when an appropriate action measure is available." That would be sufficient. It's no wonder every fax and email comes with the privacy notification on it. I am almost ready to add it to mine. I guess to me it comes down to professional courtesy. I am pretty sure that forum rules say that private correspodence should be kept private and that was what you recieved. Again Greg, I apologize for ranting about you, as many others before you have done this. This is not meant as a personal attack, but as a rant in general about the practice. Sorry this was so long, but I.. well you get my point....Feel free to disagree or correct me if I am mistaken about forum rules...

 

[Highbeam]

Good deal, not a single mention of the word "cosmetic", "minor", or "limited". They've admitted the problem which is the very important first step, and now they are planning to handle it which is even more important. I, for one, am anxiously awaiting the release of the repair kit and revised loader design.

 

[Bob_Skurka]

I ahve a real problem with (and I think it is actually against forum rules) when people publicly copy and paste professional corresondence into threads. I especailly have a problem when you include names and titles of the sources.

Not to attack you, agree, or even to defend Greg . . . BUT (Hodak knew that was coming ) what I find far worse is when people post PM's that were sent by other members. That is nothing short of reprehensible. Now I believe a PM can be shared with a Moderator or the Site Admins if it is offensive, but under no circumstances should one be cut & pasted.

Onto this specific thead, I think that often there is a 'catch-22' that manufacturers and that posters find themselves stuck in. A manufacturer provides their name/information as a profession courtesy; to that I agree. A poster, in this case Greg, could make up anything and post it at any time and nobody would know the difference, so perhaps from the perspecitive of a poster, and from the perspective of the readers, having the information posted of who sent the letter is a way to provide some level of authenticity.

As for the letter itself, I think it is good. What I still think (again Hodak this is for you ) is that Kioti could have acted quicker. I'm not saying that they could have actually fixed anything quicker because I beleive it will take months to fix something properly.

What I am saying is that their s-l-o-w response (this started in February) to acknowledge the issue is what created much of the uproar. This would NEVER had become the big outcry that it did if they said in March or April, something like "we have identified a problem with some of the loaders on some of the CK120 and CK130 tractors, we are looking into the situation and we will fix it. Please be patient while we engineer a solution, it could take several months, but we will get back to you . . . "