This might help calrify issues with aftermarket parts and dealers.

http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/edu/pubs/cons...ts/alt192.shtm

http://www.business.ftc.gov/document...l-warranty-law

 

Thank you for posting - Should be a sticky....

BTW, waved at three Mini yesterday and got one wave back. Getting funny looks for others...

 

Totally needs to get stickied because this is one of those questions that is asked about 100 times a day.

 

Thats why I posted it.

 

Just want to toss in there that this DOES NOT cover performance parts. You can't scream warranty if you pop an engine that you have heavily modified.

Also, this should put to bed the garbage about warranty claims being denied because you use a certain brand of oil.

 

Magnusson-Moss is not new and dates back to 1975. I spent a career of 42 years operating and owning new car dealerships. Not once did I ever see a Magnuson-Moss action successfully used against a dealer or manufacturer by a single consumer.

Let's use oil changes as an example. Simply stating you changed the oil using an independent source or did it yourself will not suffice. You would be required to present indisputable proof this took place at the proper time using the proper product and following the proper procedures. You would need receipts for the oil purchase and contemporaneous written records corresponding to the proper time interval. You would also be responsible to prove the oil used fits the guidelines of the manufacturer and their written specifications.

You can state you did the proper maintenance and then MINI, in this case, can dispute the claim. Next we are going to have a legal action. While you and I would then need to hire an attorney and pay them hundreds of dollars an hour for an extended period of time, the manufacturer hires attorneys in-house like we buy shoes. It then becomes a game of attrition and deep pockets for a cause that may or may not be won and for what value?

Magnuson-Moss has been used very successfully when government chooses to pursue action against a manufacturer involving a large class of people. A little more difficult when one auto owner tries to force action on warranty from one manufacturer. While the cause may be just, the prosecution of the cause is problematic.

In this case, I am certainly firmly on the side of the consumer. I only caution going into a dealership waiving Magnuson-Moss paperwork and expecting immediate action. Most often you will receive a blank stare and then muted laughter.

 

And at my 20+ years of being around vehicles, I have never once heard of a car being denied a warranty because of the oil they used unless it was clearly the wrong type (two stroke oil in a regular engine and yes, that did happen). So basically your point is moot. The proof lies on the dealer, not you but I do agree, don't go spouting MM in a dealership but do contact a lawyer and see what happens. In most cases the dealers make good on many issues anyway as they know how quickly it can cause problems nowadays.

 

I understand what you are saying but you are taking my point too literally. The process would be to make the consumer prove every step when and if they chose not to honor a warranty because of not changing the oil often enough. That would include proving the use of the recommended oil. I have been involved in cases of that type and they ask for every record imaginable.

Dealers don't make the decision to not honor a warranty. It is not their warranty and they do not have the final decision making authority. They act as the agent of the manufacturer. There are in fact a number of ways to save money during car ownership. Changing your own oil during the warranty period or trying to prove the required maintenance was done by you during the warranty period, might not be among the very best. Any time you ask for a policy adjustment past warranty, the first item the manufacturer will want to see is the maintenance record.