Can Acura Void my warranty
08-04-2004, 10:44 AM
#1
Advanced
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: NJ
Posts: 89
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Can Acura Void my warranty
My car froze up two nights ago. At one point on an 185 mile drive I shot the car up to 100+ mph. Acura says that the computer registered a VTEC failure and froze it in the cpu. Now they are saying that it was because of how I drove the car and it is my fault AND that not only do I have to pay for it BUT they want to VOID the rest of my warranty. I even paid for an extended warranty. Can they legally do this? Who cares how fast I was going, the VTEC shouldn't FAIL. They build a car, boast about its performance and HP and then punish you for driving it. This is great!!! Can they do this, should I get a lawyer?
Thanks in advance,
-P
Thanks in advance,
-P
08-04-2004, 11:05 AM
#6
drewLS6 soon
I dont think they shhuld becuase acura put a governer on our cars at 147 and if they say that going 100 mph will break something on our cars, which it doesnt i have gone well over 100 in my car, then acura should have set the governer at 100 mph. I dont think they can void your warranty. ON friday night my tranny started to act up and i went 130 that night. My car was taken to the dealership on monday and now im getting a whole new tranny.
08-04-2004, 11:06 AM
#7
Racer
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Illinois
Age: 40
Posts: 293
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thats BS, they can't do that. If the car isn't SUPPOSED to go more than 100 mph, they should have put a limiter at 100. 100 mph is at like 3500 rpms isn't it? So basically they're saying the car can't go over 3,500 rpms! BS!!!!!
Trending Topics
08-04-2004, 11:08 AM
#8
Racer
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Illinois
Age: 40
Posts: 293
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by drewJ32A2
I dont think they shhuld becuase acura put a governer on our cars at 147 and if they say that going 100 mph will break something on our cars, which it doesnt i have gone well over 100 in my car, then acura should have set the governer at 100 mph. I dont think they can void your warranty. ON friday night my tranny started to act up and i went 130 that night. My car was taken to the dealership on monday and now im getting a whole new tranny.
lol that's funny, we had pretty much the same post at the same time
08-04-2004, 11:10 AM
#9
Team Owner
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Hellertown, Pa. USA
Age: 57
Posts: 20,014
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You could have missed a gear on a downshift or pushed the RPM limiter too far and over-revved the engine.
THAT will show on the computer for sure.
I think that’s the only way they can prove it’s your fault.
Are we getting the ENTIRE story here ???
THAT will show on the computer for sure.
I think that’s the only way they can prove it’s your fault.
Are we getting the ENTIRE story here ???
08-04-2004, 11:18 AM
#10
Advanced
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: NJ
Posts: 89
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The car was in 6 weeks after I got it for a bent valve for that exact thing. i missed a gear, over revved and bent an intake and exhaust valve. That was not covered under warranty, it was my fault and I paid for it. That was thousands of miles ago and this time there was NO over-rev, just a VTEC-failure. I just confirmed that there was not an over rev with the dealer but just a failure because I already know that screws me. Just the Vtec failure
08-04-2004, 11:38 AM
#13
Find beauty in dissonance
Originally Posted by psolk
The car was in 6 weeks after I got it for a bent valve for that exact thing. i missed a gear, over revved and bent an intake and exhaust valve. That was not covered under warranty, it was my fault and I paid for it. That was thousands of miles ago and this time there was NO over-rev, just a VTEC-failure. I just confirmed that there was not an over rev with the dealer but just a failure because I already know that screws me. Just the Vtec failure
How did they determine 'how you drove the car?' The computer logged the +100 mph speed?
08-04-2004, 11:39 AM
#14
Instructor
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: baltimore
Posts: 208
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
regardless of how this plays out you should start with the consumer complaint division of your state attorney general's office. the dealer is attempting to breech the consumer warranty without any evidence of abuse on your part. the computer code only reports a failure. it doesn't report the cause. abuse has been assumed on your part with no evidence by the dealer's representatives. they're simply trying to avoid their obligations under the warranty "contract".
the attorney general's office takes time to investigate these things. so based on your current situation you'll be stuck having to pay for things up front. but be patient. if the dealer can't prove you abused the car they can't breech. they can try, but that's what the attorney general's office is there to prevent.
if the attorney general's office can't resolve things THEN you'll absolutely NEED a laywer. you'll have to sue. probably in circuit court for willful breech of warranty.
good luck.
the attorney general's office takes time to investigate these things. so based on your current situation you'll be stuck having to pay for things up front. but be patient. if the dealer can't prove you abused the car they can't breech. they can try, but that's what the attorney general's office is there to prevent.
if the attorney general's office can't resolve things THEN you'll absolutely NEED a laywer. you'll have to sue. probably in circuit court for willful breech of warranty.
good luck.
08-04-2004, 11:56 AM
#16
Suzuka Master
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: TEXAS
Age: 43
Posts: 6,085
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
i dont understand this shit
ACURA seriously needs to meet with all these scum bag dealerships and tell them to tone down this crap. the more i hear about how dealerships are threatning to void warranties the more i dont ever want to even set foot into another acura dealership again, regardless of the great cars they make
they need to seriously check out the local lexus dealership and learn how to give good service!!!!
sidemarker
ACURA seriously needs to meet with all these scum bag dealerships and tell them to tone down this crap. the more i hear about how dealerships are threatning to void warranties the more i dont ever want to even set foot into another acura dealership again, regardless of the great cars they make
they need to seriously check out the local lexus dealership and learn how to give good service!!!!
sidemarker
08-04-2004, 12:32 PM
#17
Advanced
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: NJ
Posts: 89
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It just keeps getting better. The dealer just called me back and told me this: The car does NOT have an over-rev in the computer. In fact, the failure was nailed down to 5300 RPM'sin 4th gear. Not even at Red-line. They tell me for some reason the car tripped itself into a safe-mode and they they should be able to re-set it and re-initialize the system and the car should be fine BUT if there is any damage they want to let me know that they are not covering it because of the speed the car was going when it occurred. It has nothing to do with speed, it happened at 5300 RPM, well within the "published numbers" Acura puts ou on that car. Scumbags want to tell me in advance they aren't going to cover anything that might be wrong...
08-04-2004, 12:43 PM
#19
Adventurist.
Tell your dealer to shove it up their cracks and hand them the law:
The Magnusson Moss provisions are contained in Title 15 US Code Chapter 50 Section 2302 (c):
(c) No warrantor of a consumer product may condition his written or implied warranty of such product on the consumer's using, in connection with such product, any article or service (other than article or service provided without charge under the terms of the warranty) which is identified by brand, trade, or corporate name; except that the prohibition of this subsection may be waived by the Commission if -
(1) the warrantor satisfies the Commission that the warranted product will function properly only if the article or service so identified is used in connection with the warranted product, and
(2) the Commission finds that such a waiver is in the public interest.
The above section prohibits a warrantor from requiring use of purchased parts from the same source as the original equipment or some other specified source . It allows use of aftermarket purchased parts from other sources unless the Federal Trade Commission has granted to the warrantor a waiver of this section of the law.
The US Code of Federal Regulations provides additional guidance on warranties:
TITLE 16--COMMERCIAL PRACTICES
CHAPTER I--FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION
PART 701--DISCLOSURE OF WRITTEN CONSUMER PRODUCT WARRANTY TERMS AND CONDITIONS--Table of Contents
Sec. 701.3 Written warranty terms.
(a) Any warrantor warranting to a consumer by means of a written warranty a consumer product actually costing the consumer more than $15.00 shall clearly and conspicuously disclose in a single document in simple and readily understood language, the following items of information:
(1) The identity of the party or parties to whom the written warranty is extended, if the enforceability of the written warranty is limited to the original consumer purchaser or is otherwise limited to persons other than every consumer owner during the term of the warranty;
(2) A clear description and identification of products, or parts, or characteristics, or components or properties covered by and where necessary for clarification, excluded from the warranty;
(3) A statement of what the warrantor will do in the event of a defect, malfunction or failure to conform with the written warranty, including the items or services the warrantor will pay for or provide, and, where necessary for clarification, those which the warrantor will not pay for or provide. (emphasis added)
(c) No warrantor of a consumer product may condition his written or implied warranty of such product on the consumer's using, in connection with such product, any article or service (other than article or service provided without charge under the terms of the warranty) which is identified by brand, trade, or corporate name; except that the prohibition of this subsection may be waived by the Commission if -
(1) the warrantor satisfies the Commission that the warranted product will function properly only if the article or service so identified is used in connection with the warranted product, and
(2) the Commission finds that such a waiver is in the public interest.
The above section prohibits a warrantor from requiring use of purchased parts from the same source as the original equipment or some other specified source . It allows use of aftermarket purchased parts from other sources unless the Federal Trade Commission has granted to the warrantor a waiver of this section of the law.
The US Code of Federal Regulations provides additional guidance on warranties:
TITLE 16--COMMERCIAL PRACTICES
CHAPTER I--FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION
PART 701--DISCLOSURE OF WRITTEN CONSUMER PRODUCT WARRANTY TERMS AND CONDITIONS--Table of Contents
Sec. 701.3 Written warranty terms.
(a) Any warrantor warranting to a consumer by means of a written warranty a consumer product actually costing the consumer more than $15.00 shall clearly and conspicuously disclose in a single document in simple and readily understood language, the following items of information:
(1) The identity of the party or parties to whom the written warranty is extended, if the enforceability of the written warranty is limited to the original consumer purchaser or is otherwise limited to persons other than every consumer owner during the term of the warranty;
(2) A clear description and identification of products, or parts, or characteristics, or components or properties covered by and where necessary for clarification, excluded from the warranty;
(3) A statement of what the warrantor will do in the event of a defect, malfunction or failure to conform with the written warranty, including the items or services the warrantor will pay for or provide, and, where necessary for clarification, those which the warrantor will not pay for or provide. (emphasis added)
08-04-2004, 12:47 PM
#20
Adventurist.
Originally Posted by psolk
Scumbags want to tell me in advance they aren't going to cover anything that might be wrong...
08-04-2004, 12:49 PM
#21
Liquid Ice
Originally Posted by psolk
It just keeps getting better. The dealer just called me back and told me this: The car does NOT have an over-rev in the computer. In fact, the failure was nailed down to 5300 RPM'sin 4th gear. Not even at Red-line. They tell me for some reason the car tripped itself into a safe-mode and they they should be able to re-set it and re-initialize the system and the car should be fine BUT if there is any damage they want to let me know that they are not covering it because of the speed the car was going when it occurred. It has nothing to do with speed, it happened at 5300 RPM, well within the "published numbers" Acura puts ou on that car. Scumbags want to tell me in advance they aren't going to cover anything that might be wrong...
If they say they're going to do something like this, then I would start to consider options like going to the Better Business Bureau, contacting the State Attorney General (like was already said), or even obtaining legal counsel .. or at least threatening to do one or all of these things.
... And from what I seem to recall from Top Gear, there has never been a VTEC failure ever in any consumer Honda. So if your car really does have a VTEC failure, you might be able to sell your car to Honda to check it out
08-04-2004, 01:16 PM
#22
Kenpachi Teichou
Join Date: May 2004
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 1,907
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Don't put up with this crap man. This dealer is just trying to save some money by taking advantage of you. I'm with NiteQwill on this one. Take it to those bitches! 
08-04-2004, 01:28 PM
#24
Racer
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Illinois
Age: 40
Posts: 293
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by psolk
I just told them to reset the computer and initialize the system and that I am picking the car up and my lawyer will be contacting them and Acura directly.
08-04-2004, 05:27 PM
#25
Advanced
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Bay Area, CA
Posts: 75
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I hope that they reset it, all is well, and you're good to go; but I'd tone down on the lawyer talk and I tend to disagree with most of this thread.
Yes, the Magnussen act gives consumers some significant rights. This is what keeps them from voiding a warranty on an engine failure if you replaced your seat coverings. In other words, it is the dealer/manufacturer's responsibility to **prove** that the modifications made to the car were the cause of the problem, rather than the owner having to prove that they weren't.
But, (and it's a big one), all of these warranties have an abuse clause. For example, if I took my car and ran it into a cement wall at 40 mph and now the blinkers didn't work (along with the rest of the car being crushed in), I couldn't take it to a dealer and say that my blinkers are covered under warranty. Another example not involving an accident, say I was working on replacing my HID's with different bulbs, rewiring them for a different size or whatever, if I broke them while doing them, I also couldn't take it to the dealer and say the HID's are under warranty. The abuse clauses allow manufacturers to make a reasonable judgment on what they can be forced to cover.
So let's take this to your case. Your car breaks 10k miles from now. They don't cover it. You get pissed off and go down the lawyer route. One option is Acura caves and covers your car. But if this is a 8K+ engine replacement, it's cheaper for them to say, fine, let's see what a judge thinks.
At that point you're out attorney fees, and you have to convince a judge in open court that taking a car 111 mph on the public roads (because if you try and say that this was on a closed course, Acura could deny the warranty immediately for cause anyway) would not invoke the abuse clause. Good luck with that argument, and make sure to get video of the proceedings to post to this forum.
Yes, the Magnussen act gives consumers some significant rights. This is what keeps them from voiding a warranty on an engine failure if you replaced your seat coverings. In other words, it is the dealer/manufacturer's responsibility to **prove** that the modifications made to the car were the cause of the problem, rather than the owner having to prove that they weren't.
But, (and it's a big one), all of these warranties have an abuse clause. For example, if I took my car and ran it into a cement wall at 40 mph and now the blinkers didn't work (along with the rest of the car being crushed in), I couldn't take it to a dealer and say that my blinkers are covered under warranty. Another example not involving an accident, say I was working on replacing my HID's with different bulbs, rewiring them for a different size or whatever, if I broke them while doing them, I also couldn't take it to the dealer and say the HID's are under warranty. The abuse clauses allow manufacturers to make a reasonable judgment on what they can be forced to cover.
So let's take this to your case. Your car breaks 10k miles from now. They don't cover it. You get pissed off and go down the lawyer route. One option is Acura caves and covers your car. But if this is a 8K+ engine replacement, it's cheaper for them to say, fine, let's see what a judge thinks.
At that point you're out attorney fees, and you have to convince a judge in open court that taking a car 111 mph on the public roads (because if you try and say that this was on a closed course, Acura could deny the warranty immediately for cause anyway) would not invoke the abuse clause. Good luck with that argument, and make sure to get video of the proceedings to post to this forum.
08-04-2004, 05:42 PM
#26
Racer
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Illinois
Age: 40
Posts: 293
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by aciurczak
I hope that they reset it, all is well, and you're good to go; but I'd tone down on the lawyer talk and I tend to disagree with most of this thread.
Yes, the Magnussen act gives consumers some significant rights. This is what keeps them from voiding a warranty on an engine failure if you replaced your seat coverings. In other words, it is the dealer/manufacturer's responsibility to **prove** that the modifications made to the car were the cause of the problem, rather than the owner having to prove that they weren't.
But, (and it's a big one), all of these warranties have an abuse clause. For example, if I took my car and ran it into a cement wall at 40 mph and now the blinkers didn't work (along with the rest of the car being crushed in), I couldn't take it to a dealer and say that my blinkers are covered under warranty. Another example not involving an accident, say I was working on replacing my HID's with different bulbs, rewiring them for a different size or whatever, if I broke them while doing them, I also couldn't take it to the dealer and say the HID's are under warranty. The abuse clauses allow manufacturers to make a reasonable judgment on what they can be forced to cover.
So let's take this to your case. Your car breaks 10k miles from now. They don't cover it. You get pissed off and go down the lawyer route. One option is Acura caves and covers your car. But if this is a 8K+ engine replacement, it's cheaper for them to say, fine, let's see what a judge thinks.
At that point you're out attorney fees, and you have to convince a judge in open court that taking a car 111 mph on the public roads (because if you try and say that this was on a closed course, Acura could deny the warranty immediately for cause anyway) would not invoke the abuse clause. Good luck with that argument, and make sure to get video of the proceedings to post to this forum.
Yes, the Magnussen act gives consumers some significant rights. This is what keeps them from voiding a warranty on an engine failure if you replaced your seat coverings. In other words, it is the dealer/manufacturer's responsibility to **prove** that the modifications made to the car were the cause of the problem, rather than the owner having to prove that they weren't.
But, (and it's a big one), all of these warranties have an abuse clause. For example, if I took my car and ran it into a cement wall at 40 mph and now the blinkers didn't work (along with the rest of the car being crushed in), I couldn't take it to a dealer and say that my blinkers are covered under warranty. Another example not involving an accident, say I was working on replacing my HID's with different bulbs, rewiring them for a different size or whatever, if I broke them while doing them, I also couldn't take it to the dealer and say the HID's are under warranty. The abuse clauses allow manufacturers to make a reasonable judgment on what they can be forced to cover.
So let's take this to your case. Your car breaks 10k miles from now. They don't cover it. You get pissed off and go down the lawyer route. One option is Acura caves and covers your car. But if this is a 8K+ engine replacement, it's cheaper for them to say, fine, let's see what a judge thinks.
At that point you're out attorney fees, and you have to convince a judge in open court that taking a car 111 mph on the public roads (because if you try and say that this was on a closed course, Acura could deny the warranty immediately for cause anyway) would not invoke the abuse clause. Good luck with that argument, and make sure to get video of the proceedings to post to this forum.
He wasn't abusing the car.
Just because he wasn't going the speed limit doesn't mean that the car gets messed up. He wasn't even close to redline like he said. If he had overrevved it, I'd get your point, but he ddin't
The car needs to be repaired. If it was bad for the car to go 110, then that's where the limiter should be.
08-04-2004, 05:50 PM
#27
Advanced
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Bay Area, CA
Posts: 75
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by AmooManiaK
I disagree.
He wasn't abusing the car.
Just because he wasn't going the speed limit doesn't mean that the car gets messed up. He wasn't even close to redline like he said. If he had overrevved it, I'd get your point, but he ddin't
The car needs to be repaired. If it was bad for the car to go 110, then that's where the limiter should be.
He wasn't abusing the car.
Just because he wasn't going the speed limit doesn't mean that the car gets messed up. He wasn't even close to redline like he said. If he had overrevved it, I'd get your point, but he ddin't
The car needs to be repaired. If it was bad for the car to go 110, then that's where the limiter should be.
The way this works out best is for him to try and keep a reasonable relationship with the dealer (who already knows him as someone who overrevved and blew up their engine once), so they have an incentive to try and be helpful. They would only do this if they felt that there may be future business coming in, or if the dealer is confident they can get Acura to cover the warranty work.
If this case goes all the way to court, he loses. Without a doubt. So threatening to do that is not only an empty promise, it's pointless. It isn't helping him towards his goal, which is to increase the odds that the dealer will cover a future engine failure.
Furthermore, the "limiter isn't set at 110, so it can't be abuse" is a tenuously weak argument. There are a million things that could be done to damage a car that would count as abuse, that there may have been a way to protect from by designing the car differently. The fact that that design wasn't chosen does not let the owner off the hook for not choosing to do that abuse. If I run a fork down the side of my car, I can't claim "if this is classified as abuse, why didn't the car come with a layer of fork proof material on it".
08-04-2004, 05:50 PM
#28
Honkey
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Scottsdale, AZ
Age: 48
Posts: 2,728
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've never understood why dealers decline warranty coverage. Acura still pays them for the work...I"m sure it's a smaller amount than if the consumer were to pay it, but they still get paid nonetheless.
08-04-2004, 06:00 PM
#29
Advanced
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Bay Area, CA
Posts: 75
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by 4pumpedCL
I've never understood why dealers decline warranty coverage. Acura still pays them for the work...
Most manufacturers have a pre-approval system where the dealer enters in the VIN, chooses the reason why warranty work is necessary, and the manufacturer (or warranty provider) gives an auth code for the work. Without authorization from the manufacturer, it would be a rare case for the dealer to do the work on their own dime. With authorization from the manufacturer, I don't see why they ever wouldn't do the work.
Does anyone actually have an example where Acura said yes but the dealer said no? (This isn't the same issue as taking it to a "better" dealer who then agrees to do it, as it is quite feasible that the 2nd dealer was a bit looser in the reasons they entered into the warranty system about why it should be covered, so Acura may have said yes the 2nd time).
08-04-2004, 06:06 PM
#30
Honkey
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Scottsdale, AZ
Age: 48
Posts: 2,728
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by aciurczak
Does anyone actually have an example where Acura said yes but the dealer said no? (This isn't the same issue as taking it to a "better" dealer who then agrees to do it, as it is quite feasible that the 2nd dealer was a bit looser in the reasons they entered into the warranty system about why it should be covered, so Acura may have said yes the 2nd time).
I guess this is what I'm refering to. One dealer says the won't cover it...the next says they will. I had this problem with my transmission. First dealer wouldn't cover it because of my "extreme axle" conditions due to hydraulics, the other covered it no questions asked.
08-04-2004, 06:21 PM
#31
I need FI
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Montreal, Canada
Age: 42
Posts: 536
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Any engine mod shouldn't even affect your warranty, especially if you had it modified in the dealer. however, the dealer is not correct when they say they will void the REST of your warranty. that's illegal. However, about you paying for the damages, that I'm not too sure. 
Contact your local lawyer
Contact your local lawyer
08-04-2004, 08:59 PM
#33
Advanced
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: NJ
Posts: 89
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Who is to say I did not do it on my firends driveway which is 2+miles long in Colts Neck. It doesn't mean I was speeding on public roads or on a track. If it was at a track, I am sure I would have to regiseter somewhere. So, my quetion is how do they know where this happened? They would have to prove where it happened. The only thing the computer tells them is that it happened at 5300 RPM. Why should an engine failure at 5300 RPM not be covered regardless of how fast I was going?
All of the mods were done by PAA and are all Comptech so my mods are not even a question. They are saying because of the snapshot in the cpu V-TEC failure at 5300 RPM in 4th gear that they will not cover any engine damage the car might have. You are crazy if you think I shouldn't get a lawyer
All of the mods were done by PAA and are all Comptech so my mods are not even a question. They are saying because of the snapshot in the cpu V-TEC failure at 5300 RPM in 4th gear that they will not cover any engine damage the car might have. You are crazy if you think I shouldn't get a lawyer
08-04-2004, 09:19 PM
#34
Advanced
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Bay Area, CA
Posts: 75
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Good luck with your situation. Remember, internet advice is worth every penny you paid for it. Prove me wrong, get a lawyer (and by get a lawyer, I mean get a lawyer, not only post "I'm going to call my lawyer" like everyone does for the most inane reasons on internet boards like this one), and let us all know how much money you saved in the long run.
Read your warranty again. I'm on travel right now so I can't check mine until I'm back in town, but from a google search, a common exclusion is:
* Breakdowns caused by racing, fire, freezing, lightning, earthquakes, windstorms, hail, water, acts of public enemy or any government authority.
You (and or your aforementioned lawyer) would be hard-pressed to convince any reasonable listener (say, a judge for example) that 111 mph, whether on your friend's driveway, drag strip, or public streets, is not racing.
I am confident that trying to forecefully prove you are in the right is the wrong tactic. 111 MPH just doesn't smell good to anyone, and it is very likely when push comes to shove you will not be happy with the outcome. You'd get much more luck by adopting a more positive attitude with your dealer, and/or finding one where you can develop such an attitude, than such a confrontational one.
Read your warranty again. I'm on travel right now so I can't check mine until I'm back in town, but from a google search, a common exclusion is:
* Breakdowns caused by racing, fire, freezing, lightning, earthquakes, windstorms, hail, water, acts of public enemy or any government authority.
You (and or your aforementioned lawyer) would be hard-pressed to convince any reasonable listener (say, a judge for example) that 111 mph, whether on your friend's driveway, drag strip, or public streets, is not racing.
I am confident that trying to forecefully prove you are in the right is the wrong tactic. 111 MPH just doesn't smell good to anyone, and it is very likely when push comes to shove you will not be happy with the outcome. You'd get much more luck by adopting a more positive attitude with your dealer, and/or finding one where you can develop such an attitude, than such a confrontational one.
08-04-2004, 09:34 PM
#35
Racer
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Illinois
Age: 40
Posts: 293
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sometimes you have to threaten someone for them to get the point. If he just sits there like a sad puppy, the dealer will just take him for granted.
·buse ( P ) Pronunciation Key (-byz)
tr.v. a·bused, a·bus·ing, a·bus·es
To use wrongly or improperly; misuse
IF he tries to void your warranty on the whole car, THEN get a lawyer, don't get one for no reason.
·buse ( P ) Pronunciation Key (-byz)
tr.v. a·bused, a·bus·ing, a·bus·es
To use wrongly or improperly; misuse
IF he tries to void your warranty on the whole car, THEN get a lawyer, don't get one for no reason.
08-04-2004, 09:39 PM
#36
Advanced
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: NJ
Posts: 89
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I hear you, but I don't have to prove I wasn't racing, I have to prove I was not driving the car in a manner that voids my warranty. 5300 RPM in any gear does not prove I was racing the car. It proves the engine failed under the manufacturers approved redline for the vehicle which does not void any warranty. If I got a ticket for doing that speed on a public road, yes, there is all the proof they need, but any judge who follows the law can not rule that I was racing without proof. Just because they "think" so doesn't mean a thing. We all though OJ killed her, but they just didn't have the evidence.
08-04-2004, 09:45 PM
#37
Advanced
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: NJ
Posts: 89
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
He is telling me that no matter what engine damage MIGHT have been done by this "limp" mode being triggered at 5300 RPM and using the engine as a brake, they are not responsible. The car was fine prior to the "limp" mode firing, so why would tehy expect there to be engine damage?
Even the corporate attorneys whom I have access to said that it sounds as though they know that triggering the limp mode is going to damage the car and they are covering their ass already.
Even the corporate attorneys whom I have access to said that it sounds as though they know that triggering the limp mode is going to damage the car and they are covering their ass already.
08-04-2004, 09:52 PM
#38
Adventurist.
Originally Posted by aciurczak
You (and or your aforementioned lawyer) would be hard-pressed to convince any reasonable listener (say, a judge for example) that 111 mph, whether on your friend's driveway, drag strip, or public streets, is not racing.
His problems happened at 4th gear at 5300rpm.
The problem with his dealer was that they threatened to void his entire warranty for the life of the car, that is illegal.
Originally Posted by aciurczak
I've never heard of a case where a dealer declined warranty coverage while the manufacture had agreed to pay for the work. The reason dealers decline warranty coverage is because the manufacturer is saying they will not pay for the work.
08-04-2004, 10:18 PM
#39
Advanced
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: NJ
Posts: 89
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by aciurczak
Most manufacturers have a pre-approval system where the dealer enters in the VIN, chooses the reason why warranty work is necessary, and the manufacturer (or warranty provider) gives an auth code for the work. Without authorization from the manufacturer, it would be a rare case for the dealer to do the work on their own dime. With authorization from the manufacturer, I don't see why they ever wouldn't do the work.
Quote:
Originally Posted by aciurczak
I've never heard of a case where a dealer declined warranty coverage while the manufacture had agreed to pay for the work. The reason dealers decline warranty coverage is because the manufacturer is saying they will not pay for the work.
How Can Acura decline the work when they do not even have a code to put into the computer for a repair. they do not even know if anything is wrong. They are saying that if it is, they are not covering it. So NO, this is not Acura because they are not even involved, this is obviuosly the dealer.
Originally Posted by aciurczak
Most manufacturers have a pre-approval system where the dealer enters in the VIN, chooses the reason why warranty work is necessary, and the manufacturer (or warranty provider) gives an auth code for the work. Without authorization from the manufacturer, it would be a rare case for the dealer to do the work on their own dime. With authorization from the manufacturer, I don't see why they ever wouldn't do the work.
Quote:
Originally Posted by aciurczak
I've never heard of a case where a dealer declined warranty coverage while the manufacture had agreed to pay for the work. The reason dealers decline warranty coverage is because the manufacturer is saying they will not pay for the work.
How Can Acura decline the work when they do not even have a code to put into the computer for a repair. they do not even know if anything is wrong. They are saying that if it is, they are not covering it. So NO, this is not Acura because they are not even involved, this is obviuosly the dealer.
08-04-2004, 11:02 PM
#40
Suzuka Master
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: TEXAS
Age: 43
Posts: 6,085
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by aciurczak
Good luck with your situation. Remember, internet advice is worth every penny you paid for it. Prove me wrong, get a lawyer (and by get a lawyer, I mean get a lawyer, not only post "I'm going to call my lawyer" like everyone does for the most inane reasons on internet boards like this one), and let us all know how much money you saved in the long run.
Read your warranty again. I'm on travel right now so I can't check mine until I'm back in town, but from a google search, a common exclusion is:
* Breakdowns caused by racing, fire, freezing, lightning, earthquakes, windstorms, hail, water, acts of public enemy or any government authority.
You (and or your aforementioned lawyer) would be hard-pressed to convince any reasonable listener (say, a judge for example) that 111 mph, whether on your friend's driveway, drag strip, or public streets, is not racing.
I am confident that trying to forecefully prove you are in the right is the wrong tactic. 111 MPH just doesn't smell good to anyone, and it is very likely when push comes to shove you will not be happy with the outcome. You'd get much more luck by adopting a more positive attitude with your dealer, and/or finding one where you can develop such an attitude, than such a confrontational one.
Read your warranty again. I'm on travel right now so I can't check mine until I'm back in town, but from a google search, a common exclusion is:
* Breakdowns caused by racing, fire, freezing, lightning, earthquakes, windstorms, hail, water, acts of public enemy or any government authority.
You (and or your aforementioned lawyer) would be hard-pressed to convince any reasonable listener (say, a judge for example) that 111 mph, whether on your friend's driveway, drag strip, or public streets, is not racing.
I am confident that trying to forecefully prove you are in the right is the wrong tactic. 111 MPH just doesn't smell good to anyone, and it is very likely when push comes to shove you will not be happy with the outcome. You'd get much more luck by adopting a more positive attitude with your dealer, and/or finding one where you can develop such an attitude, than such a confrontational one.
come on this shit is getting out of hand
if they dont honor the warranty go somewhere else and make sure to talk to the GM and let him know that THEY SUCK and you will never go back to their dealership
im sorry your going through a lot of bull shit, and regardless what the fine print on the warranty contract stipulates, EITHER WAY THEY HAVE TO PROVE YOU INTENTIONALY broke the damn thing
FUCK THEM AND FUCK THOSE ASSHOLE DEALERSHIPS!!!!!!!!!!!!
sidemarker