dnewton3
Staff member
Originally Posted by Bill_W
Quote
Point was that the Magnuson Moss Warranty Act does not really apply to parts that are not specified for your vehicle. That's what the dealer may use as leverage to deny a warranty if they determined the filter was the cause of any engine related failure/damage.
I got a different view regarding aftermarket parts as I read the Magnuson Moss Warranty Act. Before a car manufacturer could void your warranty if you used anything aftermarket on the vehicle, after the act the manufacturer had to prove that the part had done damage to the vehicle. But one interesting point is during the warranty period a car manufacturer offered free oil and filter change during the warranty and you did not use it then they could void your warranty. The key word is free.
Per the .gov page
Will using 'aftermarket' or recycled parts void my warranty?
No. An 'aftermarket' part is a part made by a company other than the vehicle manufacturer or the original equipment manufacturer. A 'recycled' part is a part that was made for and installed in a new vehicle by the manufacturer or the original equipment manufacturer, and later removed from the vehicle and made available for resale or reuse. Simply using an aftermarket or recycled part does not void your warranty. The Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act makes it illegal for companies to void your warranty or deny coverage under the warranty simply because you used an aftermarket or recycled part. The manufacturer or dealer can, however, require consumers to use select parts if those parts are provided to consumers free of charge under the warranty.
Still, if it turns out that the aftermarket or recycled part was itself defective or wasn't installed correctly, and it causes damage to another part that is covered under the warranty, the manufacturer or dealer has the right to deny coverage for that part and charge you for any repairs. The FTC says the manufacturer or dealer must show that the aftermarket or recycled part caused the need for repairs before denying warranty coverage.
Well both of you are close, but not quite there.
The M/M act is essentially a means to describe how warrantors (product maker/provider) can limit their liability, and how that in turn applies to the purchasers (consumers). It also assigns certain rights to the buyers.
In a nutshell, if there is a product failure and there is a written limited warranty, it comes down to a single question, with multiple possible outcomes ... if a product fails, who has to prove why?
- If you used a product that conforms to the OEM criteria, which the OEM either provided or recommended, then the burden of proof of the failure is upon them, and they are essentially bound to cover said failure. (this would be like using an ACDelco oil filter on your GM truck where the filter was bought at the dealer or 3rd party)
- If you used a product that conforms to the OEM criteria, but was supplied by an aftermarket source, it still must be covered by the OEM, (think of this as a product verified by the aftermarket company which has it's own limited warranty, and the product is a "licensed" item via the OEM .... ala oil that meets GM Dexos specs and has a license, but is not ACDelco branded oil.)
- If you use a product that does not conform to the OEM via no license held, but the aftermarket item has its own written limited warranty, then the Aftermarket warranty is primary. There may be an argument between the OEM and Aftermarket trying to assign blame. For example Valvoline has some ATFs such as MaxLife which are "recommended" for use in many apps but it is not licensed for those. Valvoline has a written warranty to cover this. The burden of proof of failure shifts from the OEM to the aftermarket company.
- If you use a product that neither conforms to the OEM applications and also does not conform to the aftermarket application/specs, then the burden of proof is upon the consumer to prove that the use/application is not at fault for failure. The OEM and aftermarket written limited warranties may have specific limitations in this regard, and can delay/deny coverage unless you'd be able to force them into submission via court or arbitration.
Much of this has come down from case decisions as a refinement of the M/M act (very typical for our legal system; laws cannot prescribe all conditions, and so judges/arbitrators help delineate the nuances of applicability). The interpretation is that the burden of proof follows a sensible trail; licensed products are the OEM burden, aftermarket non-licensed are the the aftermarket burden, and non-approved applications are the user's burden.
Use an oil filter that does not conform to the Ford or Fram list? It's on you, buddy! You now have to go up against their mounds of money, their litany of lawyers, their gaggle of engineers and piles of data. And likely all on their timetable. And why not? Why is it Ford or Fram's responsibility to cover something you thought was cool to use? If you want to run GL-5 gear oil in your engine, go right ahead, but neither Ford nor Mobil has to cover that immediately, and would be well within their rights under M/M to delay/deny coverage if their written limited warranties state such Tom-foolery is prohibited. If you run an oil filter that neither Ford nor Fram OKs, it's all on you because you accidentally (or on purpose) chose something that didn't conform.
You might be able to actually win, should you choose to use a Wix 51516 (FL400) in place of a 51348 (FL910). This is because other than the physical size, the other traits are similar (BP pressure, efficiency, etc). BUT ... That could be after a very long, tedious battle in court/arbitration, all while your vehicle sits waiting for repairs, and you're still making payments on it perhaps. And you're without a car. And while you might be able to get them to cover the engine repair, they will often NOT cover things that are ancillary such as labor, car rental, etc ... Ever read the little sentence that is often present which states the warranty only applies to the cost of replacement and excludes labor and other things? Read the limited warranty CLOSELY next time.
Companies cannot be expected to test every single absurd combination of all things under the sun that some well-meaning (or even ill-meaning) goofball comes up with, and they are therefore allowed to have written limited warranties. And the conditions of those are allowed to be confining in many aspects.
It's not that you cannot use whatever you want on your items, but you are not allowed a cart-blanche approach to warranty coverage. If the provider of the product (OEM or aftermarket) has a limited warranty, then your use of that product assumes the conditions of that limited warranty. And just about every limited warranty I've ever read has statements as to the conditions that will void the warranty. Pick a product that does not conform from an approved list? Then the burden of blame shifts from them onto you; it's now your job to prove how your selection was not at fault to cause the failure, not theirs. And so they get to take their sweet time, and put up all the resources against you.
Again - Caveat Emptor.
Quote
Point was that the Magnuson Moss Warranty Act does not really apply to parts that are not specified for your vehicle. That's what the dealer may use as leverage to deny a warranty if they determined the filter was the cause of any engine related failure/damage.
I got a different view regarding aftermarket parts as I read the Magnuson Moss Warranty Act. Before a car manufacturer could void your warranty if you used anything aftermarket on the vehicle, after the act the manufacturer had to prove that the part had done damage to the vehicle. But one interesting point is during the warranty period a car manufacturer offered free oil and filter change during the warranty and you did not use it then they could void your warranty. The key word is free.
Per the .gov page
Will using 'aftermarket' or recycled parts void my warranty?
No. An 'aftermarket' part is a part made by a company other than the vehicle manufacturer or the original equipment manufacturer. A 'recycled' part is a part that was made for and installed in a new vehicle by the manufacturer or the original equipment manufacturer, and later removed from the vehicle and made available for resale or reuse. Simply using an aftermarket or recycled part does not void your warranty. The Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act makes it illegal for companies to void your warranty or deny coverage under the warranty simply because you used an aftermarket or recycled part. The manufacturer or dealer can, however, require consumers to use select parts if those parts are provided to consumers free of charge under the warranty.
Still, if it turns out that the aftermarket or recycled part was itself defective or wasn't installed correctly, and it causes damage to another part that is covered under the warranty, the manufacturer or dealer has the right to deny coverage for that part and charge you for any repairs. The FTC says the manufacturer or dealer must show that the aftermarket or recycled part caused the need for repairs before denying warranty coverage.
Well both of you are close, but not quite there.
The M/M act is essentially a means to describe how warrantors (product maker/provider) can limit their liability, and how that in turn applies to the purchasers (consumers). It also assigns certain rights to the buyers.
In a nutshell, if there is a product failure and there is a written limited warranty, it comes down to a single question, with multiple possible outcomes ... if a product fails, who has to prove why?
- If you used a product that conforms to the OEM criteria, which the OEM either provided or recommended, then the burden of proof of the failure is upon them, and they are essentially bound to cover said failure. (this would be like using an ACDelco oil filter on your GM truck where the filter was bought at the dealer or 3rd party)
- If you used a product that conforms to the OEM criteria, but was supplied by an aftermarket source, it still must be covered by the OEM, (think of this as a product verified by the aftermarket company which has it's own limited warranty, and the product is a "licensed" item via the OEM .... ala oil that meets GM Dexos specs and has a license, but is not ACDelco branded oil.)
- If you use a product that does not conform to the OEM via no license held, but the aftermarket item has its own written limited warranty, then the Aftermarket warranty is primary. There may be an argument between the OEM and Aftermarket trying to assign blame. For example Valvoline has some ATFs such as MaxLife which are "recommended" for use in many apps but it is not licensed for those. Valvoline has a written warranty to cover this. The burden of proof of failure shifts from the OEM to the aftermarket company.
- If you use a product that neither conforms to the OEM applications and also does not conform to the aftermarket application/specs, then the burden of proof is upon the consumer to prove that the use/application is not at fault for failure. The OEM and aftermarket written limited warranties may have specific limitations in this regard, and can delay/deny coverage unless you'd be able to force them into submission via court or arbitration.
Much of this has come down from case decisions as a refinement of the M/M act (very typical for our legal system; laws cannot prescribe all conditions, and so judges/arbitrators help delineate the nuances of applicability). The interpretation is that the burden of proof follows a sensible trail; licensed products are the OEM burden, aftermarket non-licensed are the the aftermarket burden, and non-approved applications are the user's burden.
Use an oil filter that does not conform to the Ford or Fram list? It's on you, buddy! You now have to go up against their mounds of money, their litany of lawyers, their gaggle of engineers and piles of data. And likely all on their timetable. And why not? Why is it Ford or Fram's responsibility to cover something you thought was cool to use? If you want to run GL-5 gear oil in your engine, go right ahead, but neither Ford nor Mobil has to cover that immediately, and would be well within their rights under M/M to delay/deny coverage if their written limited warranties state such Tom-foolery is prohibited. If you run an oil filter that neither Ford nor Fram OKs, it's all on you because you accidentally (or on purpose) chose something that didn't conform.
You might be able to actually win, should you choose to use a Wix 51516 (FL400) in place of a 51348 (FL910). This is because other than the physical size, the other traits are similar (BP pressure, efficiency, etc). BUT ... That could be after a very long, tedious battle in court/arbitration, all while your vehicle sits waiting for repairs, and you're still making payments on it perhaps. And you're without a car. And while you might be able to get them to cover the engine repair, they will often NOT cover things that are ancillary such as labor, car rental, etc ... Ever read the little sentence that is often present which states the warranty only applies to the cost of replacement and excludes labor and other things? Read the limited warranty CLOSELY next time.
Companies cannot be expected to test every single absurd combination of all things under the sun that some well-meaning (or even ill-meaning) goofball comes up with, and they are therefore allowed to have written limited warranties. And the conditions of those are allowed to be confining in many aspects.
It's not that you cannot use whatever you want on your items, but you are not allowed a cart-blanche approach to warranty coverage. If the provider of the product (OEM or aftermarket) has a limited warranty, then your use of that product assumes the conditions of that limited warranty. And just about every limited warranty I've ever read has statements as to the conditions that will void the warranty. Pick a product that does not conform from an approved list? Then the burden of blame shifts from them onto you; it's now your job to prove how your selection was not at fault to cause the failure, not theirs. And so they get to take their sweet time, and put up all the resources against you.
Again - Caveat Emptor.
![[Linked Image]](https://i.ibb.co/h1KPZNH/fram-1.jpg "[Linked Image]")
![[Linked Image]](https://i.ibb.co/6skF8Bd/fram-2.jpg "[Linked Image]")
