Originally Posted By: ekpolk
Originally Posted By: NHHEMI
Dermapaint is 100% correct. If the owner can not show proper maintenance was done and the oil changed properly they have an out. Improper maintenance is a very easy way out for the car mfg. He can show he did it all correctly however( he says )so it won't be an issue.
Yes and no. I do MMWA cases as a side-line to my law practice. IF it goes to arb or court (a major if in the real world), the mfr will have the burden to prove that something that the owner (or some other 3d party) did caused the failure. Should the case go that far, it will be VERY hard for the mfr to meet this burden. We all hope that cases never go this far (bad for everyone), but if they do, the owner's lack of receipts, especially if he testifies he took good care, simply will NOT meet the mfr's burden.
The owner will then win, and probably get atty fees assessed too. But by that time, the owner will have been car-less for God only knows how long (unless he can just afford to buy another). By then, everyone has lost. Imagine a football game in which both teams can "earn" a loss.
Far better, but not technically necessary, to have every duck precisely in line, up front, so you can avoid such a confrontation.
You mean I don't need to buy no stinking oil, just say I took good care of it? There are a lot of pages in my owner's manual I don't need to read. Doesn't seem like it works this way, to me. I gotta prove something, not just say something, I thought. I saw where GM and I think Ford too, will question the use of a non original oil filter part, in cases of oil related engine damage. I think their reasoning is valid too, with all the possibilities of copied parts from China out there. Why should they pay for such things causing failures?