Response from Mazda USA re: warranty
- Thread starter Larone
- Start date
...ya exactly, if someone is trying to cover up a mod that actually *was* the cause of the failure, then i have no sympathy for that person, they are the reason that getting warranty work done is so hard, the dealerships can only deal with losing so much money due to faulty equipment, they cant afford to be shelling out tons of money to people who broke their own s***, it would be like me dropping my TV while i was moving, and then expecting sony to replace it, just doesn't sound logical...
WillisW555
Member
- :
- 2003.5 MSP
I kind of have to agree with JHew on this one.
Although I think it's kind of stupid that Subaru was giving away 1 year membership to SCCA if you bought a WRX. That's like giving a kid a chocolate bar and telling him that you can eat it.
Although I think it's kind of stupid that Subaru was giving away 1 year membership to SCCA if you bought a WRX. That's like giving a kid a chocolate bar and telling him that you can eat it.
rktktpaul said:
i dont see anything wrong with them being proud of people putting time/money into a mazda, but if someone puts aftermarket parts on their car that result in damaging something, i dont see why mazda should foot the bill for something that person did all on their own...
i guess its just hard for consumers and car companys to come to a level agreement in regard to warrantys...
I never said that I didn't agree with you - if there is an aftermarket part that can be shown to have had a direct cause for requiring service, then I agree with you, it should not be covered by the warranty. But I feel its hypocritical of MNAO to act as if they are supportive of tuning, when many of their dealerships have voided warranty service because of unrelated aftermarket part installations.JHew84 said:
I took my car in for a sticky shifter and also the front bushing squeek about a month ago. Got a rental car because I was pretty sure it would be warranty work...Guess what? Three hours later I received a call telling me that my car was ready.
So I arrived there and was told that my rental was not covered because there were no warranty work done. Instead, the SA lectured me about installing aftermarket parts. He then asked the tech to speak to me (in broken english) ...
I don't know when he got off the boat, but it was just a waste of my time. He told me that when he started the car, the whole car shooked really hard and that he pretty much took it out for a test drive and concluded that the rattling was caused by the mounts (duh!). The sticky shifter was also caused by the mounts...
I thought I was in for the front sway bar bushing...(worth about 3 warranty hours for them).
SO in the end I paid for the rental ($50) and I skipped two classes just to pick up my car.
So I arrived there and was told that my rental was not covered because there were no warranty work done. Instead, the SA lectured me about installing aftermarket parts. He then asked the tech to speak to me (in broken english) ...
I don't know when he got off the boat, but it was just a waste of my time. He told me that when he started the car, the whole car shooked really hard and that he pretty much took it out for a test drive and concluded that the rattling was caused by the mounts (duh!). The sticky shifter was also caused by the mounts...
I thought I was in for the front sway bar bushing...(worth about 3 warranty hours for them).
SO in the end I paid for the rental ($50) and I skipped two classes just to pick up my car.
Fun with Mazda.
I challenged Mazda, and won...
When I bought my car, the reverse lockout was broken. I could shift from 5th to reverse at any time.
Mazda repaired the transmission under warranty, @ 11,000 km (2 months old).
5 months later, it broke again, I was @ 33,000 km. Mazda said no way, it's your fault. So I paid $2200 to get it fixed. I had the intention of suing. A week later after having the tranny fixed, I was able to slip into reverse from fifth, no prob. I took it back to the dealership, and they refused to do anything.
Fortunately there is an arbitration process in Canada called CAMVAP (www.CAMVAP.ca). So I challenged Mazda. it took a little while (filed in early June, hearing was October). The arbitration wanted to inspect the car, so I took it to a place they suggested, and they were able to slip from fifth to reverse, bypassing the lockout, with ease. the spring that is in place when you shift to 5th/reverse was also very loose, no force needed to go in that direction.
So tranny has been rebuilt twice, and still doesn't work.
The ruling came back, I get my money back (no rental, but was left open for me to take to small claims court) and Mazda is to replace my transmission.
Mazda didn't want to provide me with a rental, but I found a way to get around for a day.
So this week the tranny was replaced.
Now here is the funny part. with a new tranny, it is still not working properly, I can shift from 5th to reverse at anytime. Straight down.
I took it for a drive with the service manager, and he saw it, and didn't understand (kind of stood there dumbfounded). We took another P5 for a drive, was much harder to do (it also was modified with a short shifter, as mine is NOT!). Shifting was a lot harder on the other car. He then tells me maybe it's because I has an accident or curbed the car, which neither of which has happened. The tranny had only 6.4 km on it, with the test drive after the replacement, and he was with me and I reproduced it in front of him.
So I called back the arbitrator, waiting to hear back from them..
Now that is funny!!!
This car only had an alarm, stereo, amp and sub put in it, I have had no desire to do anything to this car, I have speakers for the front collecting dust over a year because I have had nothing but probs with this car.
Now it's time to see what Mazda is going to do, I am not even going to talk to the regional manager, just the arbitrator..
Here I come again Mazda....
I challenged Mazda, and won...
When I bought my car, the reverse lockout was broken. I could shift from 5th to reverse at any time.
Mazda repaired the transmission under warranty, @ 11,000 km (2 months old).
5 months later, it broke again, I was @ 33,000 km. Mazda said no way, it's your fault. So I paid $2200 to get it fixed. I had the intention of suing. A week later after having the tranny fixed, I was able to slip into reverse from fifth, no prob. I took it back to the dealership, and they refused to do anything.
Fortunately there is an arbitration process in Canada called CAMVAP (www.CAMVAP.ca). So I challenged Mazda. it took a little while (filed in early June, hearing was October). The arbitration wanted to inspect the car, so I took it to a place they suggested, and they were able to slip from fifth to reverse, bypassing the lockout, with ease. the spring that is in place when you shift to 5th/reverse was also very loose, no force needed to go in that direction.
So tranny has been rebuilt twice, and still doesn't work.
The ruling came back, I get my money back (no rental, but was left open for me to take to small claims court) and Mazda is to replace my transmission.
Mazda didn't want to provide me with a rental, but I found a way to get around for a day.
So this week the tranny was replaced.
Now here is the funny part. with a new tranny, it is still not working properly, I can shift from 5th to reverse at anytime. Straight down.
I took it for a drive with the service manager, and he saw it, and didn't understand (kind of stood there dumbfounded). We took another P5 for a drive, was much harder to do (it also was modified with a short shifter, as mine is NOT!). Shifting was a lot harder on the other car. He then tells me maybe it's because I has an accident or curbed the car, which neither of which has happened. The tranny had only 6.4 km on it, with the test drive after the replacement, and he was with me and I reproduced it in front of him.
So I called back the arbitrator, waiting to hear back from them..
Now that is funny!!!
This car only had an alarm, stereo, amp and sub put in it, I have had no desire to do anything to this car, I have speakers for the front collecting dust over a year because I have had nothing but probs with this car.
Now it's time to see what Mazda is going to do, I am not even going to talk to the regional manager, just the arbitrator..
Here I come again Mazda....
I can understand why Mazda lost arbitration in your case; its pretty clear that the car is defective, especially since you made no mechanical changes. Now had you put in a short shifter, or changed the bushings, I'm quite sure it would have been a completely different story.
- :
- MP5T / 944
I have no problem with my waranty, I didn't have one after 500Km!
rktktpaul said:
ya, i do agree with you as well
... its a 2 way street, if the part you installed *didn't* directly affect the malfunction, and you can prove it, then they should have to do the work, the biggest problem i see in most peoples stories (and it might just be because they left it out), is because noone seems to actually *prove* to mazdaNA that the aftermarket part they have installed did not in fact contribute to the malfunction of whatever broke, and this might be part of the reason mazda still thinks they can get away with it :shrug:...who knows, just seems like a bad situation all around, i'm sure they are VERY worried about getting ripped off, i guess it is a BIG problem with subaru, there are lots of people who turn the boost way up on the WRX's, blow the engines, then take them in to get replaced under warranty, mazda might just be trying to learn from subaru's mistakes, possibly? who knows...
