Beware MAZDA North America monitors Car Domain!!!!

[Sport6]

What kind of service did you bring your car in for?

 

[ZyrehT]

Maybe I am mistaken.

You are. MM was put in place so you can do things to the vehicle you own. If you put a bigger turbo on they have to prove the bigger turbo caused the damage. Not that just because you did it the warranty's gone. But once they know you have the bigger turbo removing it doesn't remove their knowledge in regards to future problems. You just have to find the right lawyers.

 

[CHIEFSMS3]

You are. MM was put in place so you can do things to the vehicle you own. If you put a bigger turbo on they have to prove the bigger turbo caused the damage. Not that just because you did it the warranty's gone. But once they know you have the bigger turbo removing it doesn't remove their knowledge in regards to future problems. You just have to find the right lawyers.

That is how you interpret it. I stated how I interpret it. How do you think the automobile manufacturers interpret it. The wording is pretty vaque in my opinion. I think it is you who are mistaken if you think that MM gives you Carte Blanche to mod though.

 

[hyperpasta]

I'm thinking Mazda NA just ****** their dealer network!

Boy I hate to be a Mazda dealer in this market place today.
With a bad economy you have Mazda N.A. pulling food from your table.

I was thinking of having my dealer do all of my services. He's done a couple and I even purchased some "Bling" stuff for my car through his parts department, but now with this I don't think I can support my dealer. He's a nice enough fellow...but why should I take the risk? What is sad he's doing his best like me to make a living at what he does....now because of this silly methodology of bumping warranties he won't get any of my money. I'll have the local oil change place down the street do my changes and I'll keep all of my receipts.

If I need something done I'll take it factory trained wrench who is no longer with a dealership. There are lots of these fellows around out of work, and soon maybe even more if Mazda keeps up with this silly antics.

Sorry Mazda N.A., you have Zoom Zoomed me right out of your showroom floors, your service centers, and your parts departments forever. I was seriously thinking of a RX8 because I liked the Speed3 so much, now those thoughts have been dashed.....

 

[mo08ms3]

As sad as it sounds ... I can't wait until my warranty is up so I can mod away without worrying. (at least about a voided warranty anyways)

 

[60181]

You are. MM was put in place so you can do things to the vehicle you own. If you put a bigger turbo on they have to prove the bigger turbo caused the damage.

putting a bigger turbo on it would be pretty easy for the dealer to axe you on though...anything that's going to up the HP or Torque / specs the car came with its likely going to apply more stress than the car was designed to handle leading to failures. Not much to prove really.

 

[parkerfe]

That is how you interpret it. I stated how I interpret it. How do you think the automobile manufacturers interpret it. The wording is pretty vaque in my opinion. I think it is you who are mistaken if you think that MM gives you Carte Blanche to mod though.

It is how the court interprets it that counts. Regardless, pursuant to MM, the dealer has the burden of proof, not the car owner. Stated another way, it is presumed that the aftermarket part DID NOT cause the problem unless the dealer can prove it did beyond a preponderance of the evidence.

 

[niky]

The turbo is pretty much a free pass for them to void the warranty. MM will protect you if the part or power adder does not change the way the vehicle operates. In other words, your intake is covered as long as the air goes through all the stock sensors and you don't replace a MAF housing and f*ck up the signal. An exhaust is covered as long as the O2 sensors are still in place (and a CARB certification is also nice). A turbo can not be covered, because you're changing the boost parameters and boost pressure, both of which were set by the factory to be safe and streetable.

MM can protect you when you claim warranty on a blown engine and they try to void it for you having a new muffler. It won't protect you if you're making significantly more horsepower than stock and blow a clutch or break a driveaxle.

 

[oaklandopen]

It is how the court interprets it that counts. Regardless, pursuant to MM, the dealer has the burden of proof, not the car owner. Stated another way, it is presumed that the aftermarket part DID NOT cause the problem unless the dealer can prove it did beyond a preponderance of the evidence.

i automatically thought "my cobb SRI is innocent until proven guilty"

i just looked up the MM act and the way i read it makes me think it was written in regards to ppl having outside work (ie not at dealership) done to their car. then a problem happening, them going back to the dealer, and the dealer giving false information so as to not warrant a claim. kinda like making the fine print readily available to you in a language you can understand

but there are some key features like this:
The federal minimum standards for full warranties are waived if the warrantor can show that the problem associated with a warranted consumer product was caused by damage while in the possession of the consumer, or by unreasonable use, including a failure to provide reasonable and necessary maintenance.
that's where you get your "prove my aftermarket brake lights caused my AC compressor to explode" sort of thing

but then this caught my eye...

Under a full warranty, in the case of a defect, malfunction, or failure to conform with the written warranty, the warrantor:

may not exclude or limit consequential damages for a breach of any written or implied warranty on the product, unless the exclusion or limitation conspicuously appears on the face of the warranty;
to me that says clearly that any aftermarket stuff cannot be warranted on your car as long as it's clearly stated....which it is in the owners manual. but i know most ppl dont read that annoying little glove box filler anyway (i do)

 

[ZyrehT]

That is how you interpret it. I stated how I interpret it. How do you think the automobile manufacturers interpret it. The wording is pretty vaque in my opinion. I think it is you who are mistaken if you think that MM gives you Carte Blanche to mod though.

I already know how the courts interpret it, please don't hurt yourself.

 

[ForceFed]

LOL @ this thread.

 

[ZyrehT]

LOL @ this thread.

I guess that's how you get to 9000 posts.

 

[parkerfe]

i automatically thought "my cobb SRI is innocent until proven guilty"

giving false information so as to not warrant a claim. kinda like making the fine print readily available to you in a language you can understand

but then this caught my eye...

Under a full warranty, in the case of a defect, malfunction, or failure to conform with the written warranty, the warrantor:


to me that says clearly that any aftermarket stuff cannot be warranted on your car as long as it's clearly stated....

You are debating apples and oranges. You are 100% correct that the after market part itself is not covered under the Mazda warranty. But if you have a failure the Mazda warranty will cover the labor and parts needed(other than the after market part itself) to repair that failure unless it can prove that the after market part caused the failure. FYI, the Mazdaspeed CAI itself is only covered for 12/12 if installed by Mazda dealer even though the Mazda warranty of the power train is 60/60.

 

[ForceFed]

I guess that's how you get to 9000 posts.

No..actually I just think its funny you guys pull the MM act....It has been tried many times and usually the owner loses.
The Dealers and MNAO has far too many resources and power for a little guy like us to fight.

Also....If you have modded.....And they find proof...Then it is what it is.
You pay to play.

However....for an Example...Changing your turbo in no way could void your warranty on a seat..or a radio...or any other part not directly related to the item you have changed.

And Entire Vehicle Warranty cannot be voided based solely Upon what the Dealer or MNAO had viewed on a website.

But....If you were smart...you wouldn't advertise your mods in any way that directly link them to your particular car.

Now..with this said.....Is this a little better response to the ridiculous thread at at hand here?
Did I satisfy your need for a longer response?


I have plenty of good ,Informative and helpful posts in my whopping 9K....But this thread warranted only the response I gave as its laughable at the responses that were posted.

Now....Get your panties out of the bunch they are in.

 

[parkerfe]

. The wording is pretty vaque in my opinion. I think it is you who are mistaken if you think that MM gives you Carte Blanche to mod though.

FYI, vague language in both a statute and/or contract is almost always a benefit to the consumer. Especially in an adhesion contract such as a car warranty which the consumer must accept as written by the manufacturer and has no ability to negotiate the terms thereof. While the MM does have its limitations, the dealer/manufacturer still has 100% of the burden of proof that any after market part caused the failure for which warranty coverage is sought. It has been my experience that the consumer usually wins in such cases. In fact, most of the time the dealer will capitulate and cover the problem once they are served with a formal lawsuit. If anyone ever has such a problem, I would suggest that you file suit pro se(without a lawyer)in the Small Claims-Magistrate Court system of your state and make the dealer meet its burden to prove that the after market part(s) on your car caused the failure which you want covered under warranty. I suspect they will then realize their error and cover the problem.

 

[CHIEFSMS3]

I already know how the courts interpret it, please don't hurt yourself.

Performance mods are not put on the vehicle for the purpose of normal operation. Normal operation is going to be a phrase that you see in MM and in your Mazda warranty.

This is all about an individual who posted all of his mods, photos, videos, of his vehicle in autox events with his license plate in clear view. He then had a mod related problem with his car. So he then removed all of the mods and then tried to go in and fraudently get the problem repaired under warranty.

Why don't you show me and others where Mazda was wrong in denying his claim and then cancelling his warranty? I don't see how you can apply MM here due to the intended purpose or normal operation phrase in the MM and warranty.

Sure there have been others whose warranty was cancelled under questionable circumstances.

I think if you look at this logically Mazda was not the one in the wrong here. The guy going in or the warranty work under fraudulent circumstances is.

How is this case any different from insurance fraud?

If you are so sure of your opinion being right then go ahead and take a fully modded vehicle in for service and see where you get.

Not far I bet.

 

[parkerfe]

...It has been tried many times and usually the owner loses.
The Dealers and MNAO has far too many resources and power for a little guy like us to fight.


Band here?
Did I satisfy your need for a longer response?

And you base this on personal experience or antidotes you have read about on the internet? As an attorney for ~23 years I have handled several warranty denial cases over the years and they were all settled in the consumer/my client's favor. The dealer's burden is much more than just having a mechanic or service adviser merely claim that the after market part at issue caused the failure; they must prove it to the legal standard termed a "preponderance of the evidence"...the consumer has no burden of proof whatsoever. It is rarely worth it to a dealer to incur the legal costs and bad PR to fight a consumer over a warranty claim. The consumers who usually loose these type cases are the ones that merely accept the dealer's denial and open up their wallet.

 

[ForceFed]

And you base this on personal experience or antidotes you have read about on the internet? As an attorney for ~23 years I have handled several warranty denial cases over the years and they were all settled in the consumer/my client's favor. The dealer's burden is much more than just having a mechanic or service adviser merely claim that the after market part at issue caused the failure; they must prove it to the legal standard termed a "preponderance of the evidence"...the consumer has no burden of proof whatsoever.

Like I have said Previously Mr. Lawyer.

I simply said it depends on the Mod and what was it was being taken in for.
If they guy upgrades the turbo and has a motor failure...You could be the best lawyer in the world....But how could you argue that the upgraded Turbo did not cause the Catastrophic failure of an engine.(now remember..this is an Example only)

I did however say that MNAO should not/Can not void an entire car warranty based off of a few mods.

Some items that are warrantiable are in no way, nor can they be connected to performance upgrades and be voided because of so.

I never claimed to be a lawyer...I simply laid out what the average Joe can plainly see.

And if you, as a lawyer, could get this persons "said" engine warrantied after it is shown that a Mod was placed on it that added stress to the OEM Engine over its designed parameters....Then you sir are the Same as the Owner of the Car.

A crook looking for someone else to pay.

Thats all.

 

[parkerfe]

I think if you look at this logically Mazda was not the one in the wrong here. The guy going in or the warranty work under fraudulent circumstances is.

How is this case any different from insurance fraud?

If you are so sure of your opinion being right then go ahead and take a fully modded vehicle in for service and see where you get.

Not far I bet.

That analogy would only apply if the consumer had after market parts on the car but claimed they were OEM parts. While I find that highly unlikely, I'm sure that there are people out there so stupid that would go into a dealer with an after market turbo and claim that it was on the car when they bought it new from Mazda.

 

[ForceFed]

SO a boost controller, Intake, Any EMS Support , FMIC or other mods like this you think should get warranty work on an engine failure or problem if the Customer says "Yes....There are not OEM Parts....Warranty my problems"

I am confused on your "Saying they are OEM" statement.

I dont know anyone who says there stuff is OEM.
I also dont think if they have been caught with aftermarket parts on the car and taking it back to "Stock" forwarranty work should be OK either.

I used to think just like these guys...but now I realize its just not worth the hassle...and in Reality...If you cant afford to repair something you cause....Then leave it stock and there will be no issue getting your warranty work done.

Be responsible....Pay to play....Or stay in the house.