Oils and Warranty

[Analog-1]

Also I don't think you're up to date with the laws. Many techs are now loving warranty work.

I work with 5 techs every day and i can tell for a fact they are shafted on warranty work and hate it. Often making much less in flat rate than normal shop work. It was the same way when i was working at a Ford dealer. So yes i am up to date you are the one thats not up to date. This is fact.

 

[Mechanician]

Those 5 techs work for a shop that makes money every time, whether they get shafted or not.
Who's the boss? You missed my point, the DEALER makes a lot of money off warranty repairs.
I never said anything about techs in that first post you disputed.

I retired in 2021 - but keep in touch with the guys. They are currently making 1.5 times book rate and loving it.
Did you look at the laws? Maybe in your area they're still screwing the techs.

 

[Glenda W.]

It isn't the consumer that has to prove the oil CAUSED the damage.

Bingo. We have a winner!!

 

[Glenda W.]

The manufacturer already will have the advantage by simply showing you used the incorrect oil which the engine was not designed for.

Will a UOA show this? On an engine with a catastrophic failure?

Heck 75% of the UOA’s here are out of grade on healthy engines.

 

[TiGeo]

Bingo. We have a winner!!

Correct. But you are going to have to take the time and effort to deal with it and bring your own expert ($$$) to deal with it. You don't sit at home for free because they said no and you said prove it.

 

[TiGeo]

Will a UOA show this? On an engine with a catastrophic failure?

Heck 75% of the UOA’s here are out of grade on healthy engines.

This assumes you were asked to provide records of the oil changes and the records indicate oil was used that didn't meet whatever requirements the OEM had.

 

[nomas]

So , how many engines have actually failed internally while under warranty ? 1% ? Less ? Just trying to put all of this nonsense in perspective .

 

[Reloader59]

No, he doesn't. Mag-Moss was a case that started because a dealer tried to void a warranty on a car that had a supercharger on it when it wasn't the cause of the failure.

The case clearly states that warranties cannot be denied unless the dealer can prove anything the dealer/manufacturers did not install was the cause of the failure. It doesnt have to be just an aftermarket part.

This guy gets it!

 

[Glenda W.]

This assumes you were asked to provide records of the oil changes and the records indicate oil was used that didn't meet whatever requirements the OEM had.

Records or not they can’t prove an oil related failure because there wasn’t one. Dealer will not be able to prove what oil was used either. Engine will be spotless inside if using boutique oils and dealer won’t even go in oil related failure direction.

 

[Glenda W.]

Correct. But you are going to have to take the time and effort to deal with it and bring your own expert ($$$) to deal with it. You don't sit at home for free because they said no and you said prove it.

The dealer will bring a professional witness(tech/foreman)to arbitration. You as a consumer will just bring yourself. It will cost your time. Very rarely do the arbitrators side with the dealer. The dealer wants to avoid arbitration at all costs. The dealer won’t even be going in oil related failure direction after they inspect inside engine and see cleanliness.

 

[Glenda W.]

So , how many engines have actually failed internally while under warranty ? 1% ? Less ? Just trying to put all of this nonsense in perspective .

Warranty engine failures=your probably right >1%. Oil related failures=fractions of a percent.

I did experience one oil related failure in my lifetime. I believe early 80’s. Quaker State had a bad run of oil. Quaker Stater had to replace many engines free of charge. My dealer used them as their bulk oil at the time. If I remember correctly the oil was solidifying under a certain temperature.

 

[dnewton3]

The grand irony is that there are some folks here that insist on using licensed oils in the application (and there's certainly nothing wrong with that approach), but then advocate for using oversized, non-standard oil filters ... The hypocrisy of some BITOGers is palpable. But that's a different story for a different day.

The Steve Lehto video was very good, and helps understand the risks of using non-approved products. Further, the FTC webpages I linked also linked previously have very good details about the M/M warranty law. It should be required reading before anyone adds to the discussion, because facts and law matter; that's what this topic is about after all.

BOTTOM LINE regarding warranty is that any OE can deny a claim, but they have to prove that the product in question CAUSED the failure.
If you have the time/money to sit out that process after using a suspect part or a product, go for it!

- Using a high quality product (regardless of license status) that does not induce added stress to the system in question is likely to not be met with any significant claim denial.
- Using a low quality product or putting the equipment into a state of stress higher than the OEM design intent is likely to be met with a significant claim denial attempt by the OEM.


.