R56 MINI denies warranty due to mods
#1
MINI denies warranty due to mods
In a nutshell, MINI has stated that they can't drive my car to test for defects because I've modified it. Here's my rebuttal.
This is tremendously important to the MINI community at large; it gives them a precedent to deny your warranty as well and sets up the aftermarket venders for a huge fall:
Dear Meg,
Thank you for the phone call the other day; I also received your letter yesterday that was dated 4/16/2009.
As I stated in our phone conversation, I am flabbergasted by MINI’s official reply to my request for remediation of my 2007 MINI Cooper S; I’ve attached a copy of the letter to this email in PDF form for reference. The reasons stated for refusing service/repurchase are opinion, untrue, and ridiculous.
For a company such as MINI-USA to propound that an automobile is at its safest when in stock trim is completely counter to the culture that it has fostered for the product in the first place. MINI Coopers are enthusiasts’ cars and enthusiasts modify their cars. Hitherto MINI-USA has been uniquely supportive of this well-known fact and has been embraced by the buying public for that. If MINI is indeed changing its stance on this, I feel that it will have dire consequences for the company in general.
I’m an average MINI owner; my car is lightly modified, I’ve taken the Phil Wicks MINI Driving Academy course at Little Talladega with my wife, and I belong to a couple of MINI/Mini clubs, enjoying the company of fellow Motorers. I’d estimate that 95% of the thousands of MINI owners that I’ve become acquainted with have modified their cars, especially the suspension, tires, and wheels.
The aftermarket industry for MINIs relies on MINI-USA for support. They build exceptional products that enhance the ownership experience as well as creating products that make an already great-handling machine work even better. I feel that it is an irresponsible affront for your technician Eric to take pot-shots at the MINI aftermarket industry and suggest that common products render the car unsafe. I believe that Ralph Nader would even be insulted by that proposition and MINI’s dereliction of action.
My car is equipped with track-oriented springs from H&R Special Springs, a rear antisway bar and camber links from Hotchkis Sport Suspensions, Enkei F1 wheels from Discount Tire Direct, and BF Goodrich g-Force Super Sport tires from Discount Tire; as equipped, I’d wager that my car will perform better in every measurable performance category and by every measurable criterion than it did when stock. It corners better, resists front-end plow better, & brakes in shorter distances --- all from tighter aftermarket suspension bits, lighter (much) wheels, and stickier/lighter tires.
The suspension bits were purchased from Harrison Motorsports in Alpharetta, Georgia, a MINI/BMW sport-oriented specialty shop; they were installed by King Motors in Canton, Georgia by an ASE certified technician.
MINI is being negligent by asserting that they are unable to diagnose my car’s problems due to its modifications. The car was brought to Global Imports before any changes were made to it and they were unable to figure out what was wrong with it; it was in their care for a sum total of 199 miles, 90 of which were on Eric’s last inspection when he finally gave up and declared the vehicle unsafe to test! It took him two attempts and nearly 100 miles to come to that conclusion…
The car is unsafe though. It has manufacturer defects that the dealership is unable to correct. I’ve looked online and have learned that there are many MINI owners worldwide with the same 2 safety-related defects and that MINI has had varied results trying to correct them. The defects are:
1)The car will at random intervals pop its hatch or “boot” open. This has occurred both in my garage, while backing down my driveway, at the carwash, and while driving on city streets. It happens most often after having been driven in the rain on the previous day or after a good wash.
2)The passenger airbag off light will illuminate while driving with a full-grown passenger in the passenger seat indicating that the passenger supplemental restraint “airbag” has been deactivated. This has occurred at least 10 times and I am at a loss as to how to reproduce the event; I can’t seem to figure out a pattern.
I trusted the service advisor at Global after the first couple of visits when they promised that MINI would figure out the problems. I trusted the advisor when they said that a PUMA would yield results. I acted in good faith and I feel like MINI has slapped me in the face.
Please ask management to reconsider my remediation request. I’ve made my personal feelings known about the car; my wife loves it and wants it fixed. If you are unable to properly diagnose it and fix it however, I believe that it is incumbent upon you to repurchase it or replace it. An implied warranty of merchantability would suggest that a car should have functioning & trustworthy airbags and a hatch that remains shut on the highway.
I truly believe that it is wholly unethical and potentially immoral for MINI to release this car back to us with these defects while trying to dismiss its responsibility to us as consumers.
If after reviewing this MINI-USA still insists on it, I will restore the car to stock trim and place it in the care of Minis of South Atlanta for one more round of diagnosis before embarking on legal action. I’ve heard that their technicians are a cut above the competition; they are quite a bit further away from us but I’m at a loss for other courses of action.
Very truly yours,
Bill
This is tremendously important to the MINI community at large; it gives them a precedent to deny your warranty as well and sets up the aftermarket venders for a huge fall:
Dear Meg,
Thank you for the phone call the other day; I also received your letter yesterday that was dated 4/16/2009.
As I stated in our phone conversation, I am flabbergasted by MINI’s official reply to my request for remediation of my 2007 MINI Cooper S; I’ve attached a copy of the letter to this email in PDF form for reference. The reasons stated for refusing service/repurchase are opinion, untrue, and ridiculous.
For a company such as MINI-USA to propound that an automobile is at its safest when in stock trim is completely counter to the culture that it has fostered for the product in the first place. MINI Coopers are enthusiasts’ cars and enthusiasts modify their cars. Hitherto MINI-USA has been uniquely supportive of this well-known fact and has been embraced by the buying public for that. If MINI is indeed changing its stance on this, I feel that it will have dire consequences for the company in general.
I’m an average MINI owner; my car is lightly modified, I’ve taken the Phil Wicks MINI Driving Academy course at Little Talladega with my wife, and I belong to a couple of MINI/Mini clubs, enjoying the company of fellow Motorers. I’d estimate that 95% of the thousands of MINI owners that I’ve become acquainted with have modified their cars, especially the suspension, tires, and wheels.
The aftermarket industry for MINIs relies on MINI-USA for support. They build exceptional products that enhance the ownership experience as well as creating products that make an already great-handling machine work even better. I feel that it is an irresponsible affront for your technician Eric to take pot-shots at the MINI aftermarket industry and suggest that common products render the car unsafe. I believe that Ralph Nader would even be insulted by that proposition and MINI’s dereliction of action.
My car is equipped with track-oriented springs from H&R Special Springs, a rear antisway bar and camber links from Hotchkis Sport Suspensions, Enkei F1 wheels from Discount Tire Direct, and BF Goodrich g-Force Super Sport tires from Discount Tire; as equipped, I’d wager that my car will perform better in every measurable performance category and by every measurable criterion than it did when stock. It corners better, resists front-end plow better, & brakes in shorter distances --- all from tighter aftermarket suspension bits, lighter (much) wheels, and stickier/lighter tires.
The suspension bits were purchased from Harrison Motorsports in Alpharetta, Georgia, a MINI/BMW sport-oriented specialty shop; they were installed by King Motors in Canton, Georgia by an ASE certified technician.
MINI is being negligent by asserting that they are unable to diagnose my car’s problems due to its modifications. The car was brought to Global Imports before any changes were made to it and they were unable to figure out what was wrong with it; it was in their care for a sum total of 199 miles, 90 of which were on Eric’s last inspection when he finally gave up and declared the vehicle unsafe to test! It took him two attempts and nearly 100 miles to come to that conclusion…
The car is unsafe though. It has manufacturer defects that the dealership is unable to correct. I’ve looked online and have learned that there are many MINI owners worldwide with the same 2 safety-related defects and that MINI has had varied results trying to correct them. The defects are:
1)The car will at random intervals pop its hatch or “boot” open. This has occurred both in my garage, while backing down my driveway, at the carwash, and while driving on city streets. It happens most often after having been driven in the rain on the previous day or after a good wash.
2)The passenger airbag off light will illuminate while driving with a full-grown passenger in the passenger seat indicating that the passenger supplemental restraint “airbag” has been deactivated. This has occurred at least 10 times and I am at a loss as to how to reproduce the event; I can’t seem to figure out a pattern.
I trusted the service advisor at Global after the first couple of visits when they promised that MINI would figure out the problems. I trusted the advisor when they said that a PUMA would yield results. I acted in good faith and I feel like MINI has slapped me in the face.
Please ask management to reconsider my remediation request. I’ve made my personal feelings known about the car; my wife loves it and wants it fixed. If you are unable to properly diagnose it and fix it however, I believe that it is incumbent upon you to repurchase it or replace it. An implied warranty of merchantability would suggest that a car should have functioning & trustworthy airbags and a hatch that remains shut on the highway.
I truly believe that it is wholly unethical and potentially immoral for MINI to release this car back to us with these defects while trying to dismiss its responsibility to us as consumers.
If after reviewing this MINI-USA still insists on it, I will restore the car to stock trim and place it in the care of Minis of South Atlanta for one more round of diagnosis before embarking on legal action. I’ve heard that their technicians are a cut above the competition; they are quite a bit further away from us but I’m at a loss for other courses of action.
Very truly yours,
Bill
Last edited by Arnbut; 04-21-2009 at 10:09 AM.
#3
These MINI dealerships are really getting out of control!! They can't fix your airbag light because you have a sway bar and springs???? Give me a F'in break!! I hope you have better luck maybe at a more competent dealer. Mini of the Hamptons in Southampton, NY has screwed me over lately and I've wrote them off as well. Unfortunately I think eventually anyone will run into a staff of incompetent technicians and service advisors. Good luck
Steve
Steve
#4
It's hard for me to understand how suspension mods and new tires/brakes affect an airbag light or a hatch release and make the car unwarrantable........I could see them disallowing a lower control arm bushing repair or something associated, but this?
Good luck, I hope you don't have to remove all your mods in order to get service on this.
I think I'd concentraste your efforts in the direction that your mods have nothing to do with your issues, and leave the discussion of what MINIs are and how they're used out of it for now. No sense in muddying the waters, eh?
Keep us posted, OK?
Good luck, I hope you don't have to remove all your mods in order to get service on this.
I think I'd concentraste your efforts in the direction that your mods have nothing to do with your issues, and leave the discussion of what MINIs are and how they're used out of it for now. No sense in muddying the waters, eh?
Keep us posted, OK?
#5
6th Gear
iTrader: (5)
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Southeast Missouri
Posts: 2,313
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's my understanding (and I might be wrong) that they have to show that the mods create/contribute to the problem you are having in order to deny warranty service. If they can't do that then they are responsible for the warranty work.
You might want to check into the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act to see what recourse you might have.
You might want to check into the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act to see what recourse you might have.
#7
I am really sorry to hear about all of your problems. I understand your frustration. It seems a shame that your repairs are being denied based on IMPROVEMENTS that you have made to your car.
When I had my VW Beetle TDI I made tons of mods (some of which the DEALERSHIP did! shhhhhhhh)
What a crapshoot. I feel for you. Seriously. That entire situation is just wrong.
When I had my VW Beetle TDI I made tons of mods (some of which the DEALERSHIP did! shhhhhhhh)
What a crapshoot. I feel for you. Seriously. That entire situation is just wrong.
Trending Topics
#8
if you want to talk with MINI-USA please contact Scott.Kuchta@bmwna.com
He help me in my problems with transmission.
He help me in my problems with transmission.
#9
Under the law, specifically the Magnusson-Moss Warranty Act, they cannot void your warranty for aftermarket parts unless they can prove that they caused the problem.
In some cases, it may be debatable. In this case, I don't think your lighter wheels make the airbag sensor think there's no one sitting in your passenger seat.
Here's a link to the SEMA Action Network detailing how to deal with manufacturers claiming aftermarket parts have voided your warranty:
http://www.semasan.com/main/main.aspx?id=60128
A couple interesting excerpts:
Good luck.
In some cases, it may be debatable. In this case, I don't think your lighter wheels make the airbag sensor think there's no one sitting in your passenger seat.
Here's a link to the SEMA Action Network detailing how to deal with manufacturers claiming aftermarket parts have voided your warranty:
http://www.semasan.com/main/main.aspx?id=60128
A couple interesting excerpts:
The Law
Federal law sets forth requirements for warranties and contains a number of provisions to prevent vehicle manufacturers, dealers and others from unjustly denying warranty coverage. With regard to aftermarket parts, the spirit of the law is that warranty coverage cannot be denied simply because such parts are present on the vehicle, or have been used (see Attachment A).The warranty coverage can be denied only if the aftermarket part caused the malfunction or damage for which warranty coverage is sought. Disputes in this area usually boil down to arguments over facts and technical opinions, rather than arguments over interpretations of the law.
Federal law sets forth requirements for warranties and contains a number of provisions to prevent vehicle manufacturers, dealers and others from unjustly denying warranty coverage. With regard to aftermarket parts, the spirit of the law is that warranty coverage cannot be denied simply because such parts are present on the vehicle, or have been used (see Attachment A).The warranty coverage can be denied only if the aftermarket part caused the malfunction or damage for which warranty coverage is sought. Disputes in this area usually boil down to arguments over facts and technical opinions, rather than arguments over interpretations of the law.
The Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act may also be helpful. Under this federal law, you can sue on breach of express and implied warranties. The main point of interest here is that the Act says warranty coverage may not be conditioned upon the use of only the vehicle manufacturer's parts unless the parts are provided free of charge. In other words, use of a non-carmaker product should not void your warranty unless it caused the problem.
#10
They're not saying the mods caused the failures. They're saying that they want to try and diagnose the problems further but the mods prevent them from safely driving the car to do so.
It's a sticky point; that's why I think we all need to pay attention to this tactic they're using.
Think of the ramifications. Any defect can be dismissed because you run BFG's??? C'mon.
Call MINI; let them know how you feel about it. 1(866)ASK-MINI --- that line is for owners with questions...
Last edited by Arnbut; 04-22-2009 at 06:23 AM.
#11
Thanks all.
They're not saying the mods caused the failures. They're saying that they want to try and diagnose the problems further but the mods prevent them from safely driving the car to do so.
It's a sticky point; that's why I think we all need to pay attention to this tactic they're using.
Think of the ramifications. Any defect can be dismissed because you run BFG's??? C'mon.
Call MINI; let them know how you feel about it. 1(800)ASK-MINI --- that line is for owners with questions...
They're not saying the mods caused the failures. They're saying that they want to try and diagnose the problems further but the mods prevent them from safely driving the car to do so.
It's a sticky point; that's why I think we all need to pay attention to this tactic they're using.
Think of the ramifications. Any defect can be dismissed because you run BFG's??? C'mon.
Call MINI; let them know how you feel about it. 1(800)ASK-MINI --- that line is for owners with questions...
So, they're trying to get around actually claiming the mods caused the problems by saying they can't replicate the problem... because it's unsafe to drive.
Man, I installed my Checkerboard Dash in my driveway. I wonder if my car is safe to drive?
#12
Sounds like a crok to me. Good luck.
A tactial point: I used to work in customer service. You need to shorten your letters and stop making their tirades. People who write letters like this are generally pidgeon-holed in the "troublemakers" category and will receive less, not more, help. What a CS person is looking for with a customer complaint is someone who is short, to the point, and has a specific reqest for what needs to be done to satisfy their needs. Along these lines, you could write a two-paragraph letter explaining that your car has two problems, both are completely and totally unrelated to the modifications you made, and that your car is completely safe to drive for the diagnosis. Then request that you talk/meet with the zone rep to discuss how to get your car serviced. That's all you need to say.
- Mark
A tactial point: I used to work in customer service. You need to shorten your letters and stop making their tirades. People who write letters like this are generally pidgeon-holed in the "troublemakers" category and will receive less, not more, help. What a CS person is looking for with a customer complaint is someone who is short, to the point, and has a specific reqest for what needs to be done to satisfy their needs. Along these lines, you could write a two-paragraph letter explaining that your car has two problems, both are completely and totally unrelated to the modifications you made, and that your car is completely safe to drive for the diagnosis. Then request that you talk/meet with the zone rep to discuss how to get your car serviced. That's all you need to say.
- Mark
#13
Sounds like a crok to me. Good luck.
A tactial point: I used to work in customer service. You need to shorten your letters and stop making their tirades. People who write letters like this are generally pidgeon-holed in the "troublemakers" category and will receive less, not more, help. What a CS person is looking for with a customer complaint is someone who is short, to the point, and has a specific reqest for what needs to be done to satisfy their needs. Along these lines, you could write a two-paragraph letter explaining that your car has two problems, both are completely and totally unrelated to the modifications you made, and that your car is completely safe to drive for the diagnosis. Then request that you talk/meet with the zone rep to discuss how to get your car serviced. That's all you need to say.
- Mark
A tactial point: I used to work in customer service. You need to shorten your letters and stop making their tirades. People who write letters like this are generally pidgeon-holed in the "troublemakers" category and will receive less, not more, help. What a CS person is looking for with a customer complaint is someone who is short, to the point, and has a specific reqest for what needs to be done to satisfy their needs. Along these lines, you could write a two-paragraph letter explaining that your car has two problems, both are completely and totally unrelated to the modifications you made, and that your car is completely safe to drive for the diagnosis. Then request that you talk/meet with the zone rep to discuss how to get your car serviced. That's all you need to say.
- Mark
This has been going on for 13 months and I'm at the end of my rope.
They didn't play fair.
#14
Arnbut: You've been around these forums long enough to know the deal. Some dealers are great and some suck. These guys suck if they are giving you that runaround. You have to get with a different dealer unfortunately. It's a drag but you pretty much know the deal and trying to make them come around is going to be a mess for you. Isn't there a different dealer somewhere?
#16
Sounds like a bunch of attorneys got together to figure out a loophole in the law. If this works, I'm sure pretty soon all car manufacturers will start going this route. It benefits them in a few ways. they wont have to work on cars to do warranty work. and we will be forced to buy oem parts at a higher cost. this just seems really unfair.
and how far will it go? is the car unsafe to drive if it has aftermarket headlight bulbs? Will it be unsafe to test drive in the rain with aftermarket wiper blades? If you get new brakes from a shop in your neighborhood, will it now be unsafe because the brakes were not put on by their mechanics?
and how far will it go? is the car unsafe to drive if it has aftermarket headlight bulbs? Will it be unsafe to test drive in the rain with aftermarket wiper blades? If you get new brakes from a shop in your neighborhood, will it now be unsafe because the brakes were not put on by their mechanics?
#17
#18
and how far will it go? is the car unsafe to drive if it has aftermarket headlight bulbs? Will it be unsafe to test drive in the rain with aftermarket wiper blades? If you get new brakes from a shop in your neighborhood, will it now be unsafe because the brakes were not put on by their mechanics?
#19
#22
I have no way of knowing if they contributed to MINI's decision to deny my claim or if MINI arrived at it on their own.
Global gave me very decent loaner cars, had the car ready on time, had the car washed, had the paint scratched, is about to have Magnum Collision repair the scratch, etc.
They've done everything diligently --- except repair the car. And if it is a genuine bred-in defect, something in R56 DNA, how can you blame them?
I just wish it was in their power to influence MINI to replace the car. They were my heroes on a previous problem and I think I've stuck up for them pretty well since then...
But I either need my car FIXED or I need a NEW CAR. And they haven't come through.
#23
#24
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Your Worst Nightmare :)
Posts: 3,880
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes
on
3 Posts
Over the nearly 6 years Ive been a MINI owner Ive seen a rising trend: dealers are getting VERY picky about mods of all kinds and warranty issues. So now I either keep it JCW, or get a written OK from my SA that my aftermarket dipstick (cause I cant read the stupid oem one ) will not void warranty work.
still I cant understand how BFG G-Forces, lighter wheels, and some minor susp mods would create a condition they feel the car is unsafe to drive and diagnose, esp for the problems you stated. good luck
still I cant understand how BFG G-Forces, lighter wheels, and some minor susp mods would create a condition they feel the car is unsafe to drive and diagnose, esp for the problems you stated. good luck
#25
Of course, you're not writing for the IEEE journal, so... ignore what I just said.
I wish you the best of luck with getting your MINI repaired! It seems kind of ridiculous. That's like me putting my car on winter tires and rims and them refusing warranty work. The springs and sway bars are semi-major components, but if they were installed by trained technicians I don't see the issue.
Does this perhaps fall under Magnuson-Moss?
1.The Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act (15 U.S.C. 2302©)
This federal law regulates warranties for the protection of consumers. The essence of the law concerning aftermarket auto parts is that a vehicle manufacturer may not condition a written or implied warranty on the consumers using parts or services which are identified by brand, trade, or corporate name (such as the vehicle maker's brand) unless the parts or service are provided free of charge. The law means that the use of an aftermarket part alone is not cause for denying the warranty. However, the law's protection does not extend to aftermarket parts in situations where such parts actually caused the damage being claimed under the warranty. Further, consumers are advised to be aware of any specific terms or conditions stated in the warranty which may result in its being voided. The law states in relevant part:
No warrantor of a consumer product may condition his written or implied warranty of such product on the consumers using, in connection with such product, any article or service (other than article or service provided without charge under the terms of the warranty) which is identified by brand, trade or corporate name... (15 U.S.C. 2302©).
This federal law regulates warranties for the protection of consumers. The essence of the law concerning aftermarket auto parts is that a vehicle manufacturer may not condition a written or implied warranty on the consumers using parts or services which are identified by brand, trade, or corporate name (such as the vehicle maker's brand) unless the parts or service are provided free of charge. The law means that the use of an aftermarket part alone is not cause for denying the warranty. However, the law's protection does not extend to aftermarket parts in situations where such parts actually caused the damage being claimed under the warranty. Further, consumers are advised to be aware of any specific terms or conditions stated in the warranty which may result in its being voided. The law states in relevant part:
No warrantor of a consumer product may condition his written or implied warranty of such product on the consumers using, in connection with such product, any article or service (other than article or service provided without charge under the terms of the warranty) which is identified by brand, trade or corporate name... (15 U.S.C. 2302©).