Deceit and the Warranty
Thread Starter
|
Senior Member
Joined: Jul 1999
Posts: 1,642
Likes: 0
From: South East USA
In a voice somewhat like Edith Bunker...
Im my SVT handbook that was by the way sent out because it was not in the glove box..as many others were not, It states Ford does not recommend modifications....
Im my SVT handbook that was by the way sent out because it was not in the glove box..as many others were not, It states Ford does not recommend modifications....
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 533
Likes: 0
From: "the land of Nod"
it's almost as bad as ...
Buying a telivision and after using it for ten years bringing it back and demanding a new one cause the picture tube failed - hahahahahahahaha - some ***** ...
I am no fan of dealers or big business in general, I have had my share of problems with both - but you sir, need a reality check...
If you were so fuvking concerned about your warranty you should have kept those mods out of your engine bay - and by the looks of this thread you have had an engine replaced in the past under warranty ... two bites at the apple consider yourself blessed
Sorry for the straight talk - I know most people can't take the truth or straight talk in general - oh well - oh well ...
I am no fan of dealers or big business in general, I have had my share of problems with both - but you sir, need a reality check...
If you were so fuvking concerned about your warranty you should have kept those mods out of your engine bay - and by the looks of this thread you have had an engine replaced in the past under warranty ... two bites at the apple consider yourself blessed
Sorry for the straight talk - I know most people can't take the truth or straight talk in general - oh well - oh well ...
Thread Starter
|
Senior Member
Joined: Jul 1999
Posts: 1,642
Likes: 0
From: South East USA
Warranty, What warranty ?
Yeah the TV comparision is spot on.
Have you seen any that actually have a 10 year warranty.
My Hitachi 46" Ultra Vision was purchased around 1988 and brought home in My XLT F-250 4x4....The TV is in the living room..never missed a beat...
Yeah the TV comparision is spot on.
Have you seen any that actually have a 10 year warranty.
My Hitachi 46" Ultra Vision was purchased around 1988 and brought home in My XLT F-250 4x4....The TV is in the living room..never missed a beat...
Senior Member
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 4,928
Likes: 1
From: The People's Republic of Los Angeles
Originally posted by reality1
Tim,
What is your opinion on the Spark Plug issue as well as the leaking passenger side head?
Jim
Tim,
What is your opinion on the Spark Plug issue as well as the leaking passenger side head?
Jim
On my stock engine, they would do the repairs or . . .
Frankly, I'm a little disgusted that Ford has not stepped up to the plate on the spark plug issue. Not even a TSB.
Senior Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 127
Likes: 0
From: Northern Virginia
a few points
Everybody thinks they're a lawyer.
Well, I AM a lawyer. You have somewhere between zero and zero chance of proving fraud against Ford for never intending to honor its warranty. Ford only needs to put up one simple piece of evidence: the millions of dollars it spends on warranty repairs on Lightnings.
[SS] I will venture to say that you are a lawyer that does not handle state lemon law suit claims then; While most of what you assert herein is true from a technical standpoint, some of it is wrong. No, I am not a lawyer, however, I *have* been successful in a lemon lawsuit, did all of the items you suggested and more. Part of that was getting my lawyer to provide me with some case history to study... I will comment instream. I mean no disrespect, or to insult, just to relay the practical experience I have with this (against GM, mind you).
If you were unfairly denied warranty coverage, you have a simple breach of contract case. Other laws, such as the Magnuson-Moss Act and your state's unfair business practices laws, may also assist you. But fraud--forget about it. You will lose 100 times out of 100.
[SS] This varies state to state, however, there could additionally be an issue of violating Magnusson Moss. I am familiar with the state lemon law statute from VA & MD, which requires a 'significant problem' "which affects the use or market value of the vehicle". ... "manufacturer will have attempted to fix said problem at least 4 times / or over 30 days of down time" That is not the precise wording. In both states, at the time I filed suit, neither statute had been "ruled on" as to whether or not you needed 4 visits + to the manufacturer's authorized repair facility ( the dealer) AND 30 + days... However, I had both.
The law is invoked differently for "safety" system defects (brakes, steering, restraints). The "manufacturer" gets ONE, and ONLY one attempt to fix this, and if the problem occurs again, or a related problem, the statute is triggered and the manufacturer is obliged to provide relief to the consumer through, $$$, replacement vehicle, or the like. Some states have the State itself represent the consumer; I'm not sure if this is the case here, but results tend to be better for the consumer through the consumer paying & getting his/her own representation.
Legally speaking, the burden of proof is on you, the plaintiff, to prove that the dealer breached the warranty. As a practical matter, however, the dealer would need to prove that your modification caused the problem.
[SS] Technically, and somewhat to a practical sense, this is true. In my case, once I filed the suit, the manufacturer was given a chance to inspect and determine if they would be able to repair the vehicle AND determine abuse. I was entitled to, and availed myself of an expert witness. OF COURSE, the 1st thing they did, was start the inspection without me, and my witness being present - We arrived to find the dealer already under the hood, and having already been in the cab - I'd taped the doors with clear tape on the bottom, showed my 'witness' and he noted that the "vehicle had been tampered with by the manufacturer's agent without witness or owner being present in violation of statute".
The rest of the inspection was a wash, no side finding a "smoking gun" but because they jumped the gun, it was a net gain for me.
The manufacturer does this as a "stalling tactic" and to attempt to convince the consumer to allow them one last chance to fix it.
In the case of modifications, this is where the "expert witness" comes in. Mechanic sees a "non factory part" - Each and every non factory part, right down to the spark plugs. Manufacturer's counsel notes this, Expert witness also notes it. IF the mechanic says 'this could be the problem' or something like that, the expert witness's job is to enforce the "PROVE IT" portion. These guys aren't cheap, but they're worth their weight in gold, because of the challenge to the 'possible causes'. Now, in the case of a performance chip, it could come down to programming, a/f ratios, etc. and quite frankly, in the Lightning's case, a chip would likely cost you the warranty even with a good expert witness. OTOH, a chip with a blown plug - there's not a whole lot of relationship there, and that's what the manufacturer must prove - in a case using a statute like this. At THIS point, the manufacturer must then prove the chip caused the plug to launch or your lawyer will request the court to compel them to honor the warranty.
...
(from a previous post of mine):
"First, if the dealer is plainly in the wrong, keep escalating the issue at the dealership until you are talking directly to the owner if required. Make it clear that you will never stop until you are satisfied. If the owner won't deal with you, whip out the manual and have him call customer service (number in the owner's manual) on the speakerphone.
Second, you can call the customer service number in your owner's manual on your own. They can reason with a f*cked up dealer.
Third, demand arbitration--the number is also in the owner's manual.
Fourth, call the Better Business Bureau. They also have free arbitration (I am enrolling in a class to be a volunteer BBB arbitrator).
Fifth, you can file a small claims court action. Attorneys are not allowed there, so you needn't fear the swarm of Big Blue lawyers.
[SS] 1-4 are all "necessary steps" to show good faith in attempting to resolve the issue with the manufacturer. They may not be required by law in a particular state, but it allows you to state in court that you exhausted all means available to you before going to court. All but the most eggregious (sp?) cases are not resolved in arbitration, or through local consumer protection agencies, BBB. In our case, calling SVT _can_help_ and should also be done.
Small claims typically has a 'cap' on the amount of money of the claim, and in some cases, would not be applicable.
Remember, Ford does not have unlimited access to lawyers. Their lawyers have a fixed amount of time per year. Farting around with your petty claim is not something worth a lot of time from an employee for which that have to pay $200K of more including benefits. Further, the dealer itself does not have free lawyers.
[SS] Again, while technically true, for all practical purposes, they do have unlimited access to counsel. More importantly, they have sufficient access to "good, and experienced" counsel, who know exactly how to get the case delayed as long as possible.
If you are right, stand your ground. Don't back down an inch. Not an inch. If one guys says no, demand to speak with his boss. You would be surprised how far that will get you.
[Dave] That's really what it comes down to. I would add that polite, respectful - but not overly so - and thorough typically win the day.
Go through all the "necessary steps to show good faith" 1st, then, learn the state warranty / lemon law statute - sue if you can. Don't forget to get SVT involved 1st though.
Remember, a while back, SVT Enthusiast had an article on computer chips which contained the language that it COULD void your warranty, but not necessarily should.
This can be used to your favor in court.
Good luck.
Well, I AM a lawyer. You have somewhere between zero and zero chance of proving fraud against Ford for never intending to honor its warranty. Ford only needs to put up one simple piece of evidence: the millions of dollars it spends on warranty repairs on Lightnings.
[SS] I will venture to say that you are a lawyer that does not handle state lemon law suit claims then; While most of what you assert herein is true from a technical standpoint, some of it is wrong. No, I am not a lawyer, however, I *have* been successful in a lemon lawsuit, did all of the items you suggested and more. Part of that was getting my lawyer to provide me with some case history to study... I will comment instream. I mean no disrespect, or to insult, just to relay the practical experience I have with this (against GM, mind you).
If you were unfairly denied warranty coverage, you have a simple breach of contract case. Other laws, such as the Magnuson-Moss Act and your state's unfair business practices laws, may also assist you. But fraud--forget about it. You will lose 100 times out of 100.
[SS] This varies state to state, however, there could additionally be an issue of violating Magnusson Moss. I am familiar with the state lemon law statute from VA & MD, which requires a 'significant problem' "which affects the use or market value of the vehicle". ... "manufacturer will have attempted to fix said problem at least 4 times / or over 30 days of down time" That is not the precise wording. In both states, at the time I filed suit, neither statute had been "ruled on" as to whether or not you needed 4 visits + to the manufacturer's authorized repair facility ( the dealer) AND 30 + days... However, I had both.
The law is invoked differently for "safety" system defects (brakes, steering, restraints). The "manufacturer" gets ONE, and ONLY one attempt to fix this, and if the problem occurs again, or a related problem, the statute is triggered and the manufacturer is obliged to provide relief to the consumer through, $$$, replacement vehicle, or the like. Some states have the State itself represent the consumer; I'm not sure if this is the case here, but results tend to be better for the consumer through the consumer paying & getting his/her own representation.
Legally speaking, the burden of proof is on you, the plaintiff, to prove that the dealer breached the warranty. As a practical matter, however, the dealer would need to prove that your modification caused the problem.
[SS] Technically, and somewhat to a practical sense, this is true. In my case, once I filed the suit, the manufacturer was given a chance to inspect and determine if they would be able to repair the vehicle AND determine abuse. I was entitled to, and availed myself of an expert witness. OF COURSE, the 1st thing they did, was start the inspection without me, and my witness being present - We arrived to find the dealer already under the hood, and having already been in the cab - I'd taped the doors with clear tape on the bottom, showed my 'witness' and he noted that the "vehicle had been tampered with by the manufacturer's agent without witness or owner being present in violation of statute".
The rest of the inspection was a wash, no side finding a "smoking gun" but because they jumped the gun, it was a net gain for me. The manufacturer does this as a "stalling tactic" and to attempt to convince the consumer to allow them one last chance to fix it.
In the case of modifications, this is where the "expert witness" comes in. Mechanic sees a "non factory part" - Each and every non factory part, right down to the spark plugs. Manufacturer's counsel notes this, Expert witness also notes it. IF the mechanic says 'this could be the problem' or something like that, the expert witness's job is to enforce the "PROVE IT" portion. These guys aren't cheap, but they're worth their weight in gold, because of the challenge to the 'possible causes'. Now, in the case of a performance chip, it could come down to programming, a/f ratios, etc. and quite frankly, in the Lightning's case, a chip would likely cost you the warranty even with a good expert witness. OTOH, a chip with a blown plug - there's not a whole lot of relationship there, and that's what the manufacturer must prove - in a case using a statute like this. At THIS point, the manufacturer must then prove the chip caused the plug to launch or your lawyer will request the court to compel them to honor the warranty.
...
(from a previous post of mine):
"First, if the dealer is plainly in the wrong, keep escalating the issue at the dealership until you are talking directly to the owner if required. Make it clear that you will never stop until you are satisfied. If the owner won't deal with you, whip out the manual and have him call customer service (number in the owner's manual) on the speakerphone.
Second, you can call the customer service number in your owner's manual on your own. They can reason with a f*cked up dealer.
Third, demand arbitration--the number is also in the owner's manual.
Fourth, call the Better Business Bureau. They also have free arbitration (I am enrolling in a class to be a volunteer BBB arbitrator).
Fifth, you can file a small claims court action. Attorneys are not allowed there, so you needn't fear the swarm of Big Blue lawyers.
[SS] 1-4 are all "necessary steps" to show good faith in attempting to resolve the issue with the manufacturer. They may not be required by law in a particular state, but it allows you to state in court that you exhausted all means available to you before going to court. All but the most eggregious (sp?) cases are not resolved in arbitration, or through local consumer protection agencies, BBB. In our case, calling SVT _can_help_ and should also be done.
Small claims typically has a 'cap' on the amount of money of the claim, and in some cases, would not be applicable.
Remember, Ford does not have unlimited access to lawyers. Their lawyers have a fixed amount of time per year. Farting around with your petty claim is not something worth a lot of time from an employee for which that have to pay $200K of more including benefits. Further, the dealer itself does not have free lawyers.
[SS] Again, while technically true, for all practical purposes, they do have unlimited access to counsel. More importantly, they have sufficient access to "good, and experienced" counsel, who know exactly how to get the case delayed as long as possible.
If you are right, stand your ground. Don't back down an inch. Not an inch. If one guys says no, demand to speak with his boss. You would be surprised how far that will get you.
[Dave] That's really what it comes down to. I would add that polite, respectful - but not overly so - and thorough typically win the day.
Go through all the "necessary steps to show good faith" 1st, then, learn the state warranty / lemon law statute - sue if you can. Don't forget to get SVT involved 1st though.
Remember, a while back, SVT Enthusiast had an article on computer chips which contained the language that it COULD void your warranty, but not necessarily should.
This can be used to your favor in court.
Good luck.
Thread Starter
|
Senior Member
Joined: Jul 1999
Posts: 1,642
Likes: 0
From: South East USA
Thanks for the elaboration....
I am presently exhausting the avenues and working this.
The vehicle was purchased in the State of Florida worked on in Alabama and resides in Alabama. I will pursue the issue untill
The law convinces me otherwise. Lemon laws....yeah, I heard that.
Many Factors came into play that influenced my decision to be tenacious in my resolve.
I have No problem with voicing my thoughts, emotions and beliefs.
Contrary to insinuations otherwise...I consider this my right and inheritance. I am getting tired of capitulation to the system and choose to act. Lackadasical exuberance will not hinder me.
Is that an oxy moron......laughin'
I will continue to post for deconstruction...
Now off to the SVTOA Forum.....
I am presently exhausting the avenues and working this.
The vehicle was purchased in the State of Florida worked on in Alabama and resides in Alabama. I will pursue the issue untill
The law convinces me otherwise. Lemon laws....yeah, I heard that.
Many Factors came into play that influenced my decision to be tenacious in my resolve.
I have No problem with voicing my thoughts, emotions and beliefs.
Contrary to insinuations otherwise...I consider this my right and inheritance. I am getting tired of capitulation to the system and choose to act. Lackadasical exuberance will not hinder me.
Is that an oxy moron......laughin'
I will continue to post for deconstruction...
Now off to the SVTOA Forum.....
Thread Starter
|
Senior Member
Joined: Jul 1999
Posts: 1,642
Likes: 0
From: South East USA
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 356
Likes: 0
From: Miami, Florida
Originally posted by Twisted99
Thanks for the elaboration....
I am presently exhausting the avenues and working this.
The vehicle was purchased in the State of Florida worked on in Alabama and resides in Alabama. I will pursue the issue untill
The law convinces me otherwise. Lemon laws....yeah, I heard that.
Now off to the SVTOA Forum.....
Thanks for the elaboration....
I am presently exhausting the avenues and working this.
The vehicle was purchased in the State of Florida worked on in Alabama and resides in Alabama. I will pursue the issue untill
The law convinces me otherwise. Lemon laws....yeah, I heard that.
Now off to the SVTOA Forum.....
Gary
Last edited by nostreetracing; Feb 18, 2003 at 05:00 PM.
Senior Member
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 3,300
Likes: 0
From: Richmond, VA, USA
Originally posted by Twisted99
There is No proof or substatiation that said chip, If installed cause
mechanical failure.
There is No proof or substatiation that said chip, If installed cause
mechanical failure.
There may very well be PROOF or substatiation (which I think is supposed to be substantiation) that "said chip" which obviously was installed caused mechanical failure.
The problem is that they just haven't done the tests to prove it. and you are apparently hoping that they don't go to the trouble of looking hard enough.
this would be like saying that if you installed nitrous on your Lincoln Town car and burned a piston, but removed the nitrous kit before you went in for service that your warranty should be honored because they didn't see or can't prove your modification caused the failure or even existed.
Now, THAT is the definition of DECEIT!
you are trying to pull the wool over their eyes by not telling the truth right?
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 1,985
Likes: 1
From: Cincinnati, OH
[i]
this would be like saying that if you installed nitrous on your Lincoln Town car and burned a piston, but removed the nitrous kit before you went in for service that your warranty should be honored because they didn't see or can't prove your modification caused the failure or even existed.
[/B]
this would be like saying that if you installed nitrous on your Lincoln Town car and burned a piston, but removed the nitrous kit before you went in for service that your warranty should be honored because they didn't see or can't prove your modification caused the failure or even existed.
[/B]
G