Dealer says "Valve Problem"

[JDerbedrossian]

Hey Bob4x4 -- I'm not a moron so don't ask me rhetorical questions.



While we're asking what things mean, Bob4x4, Do you know the meaning of the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act? It basically says that any modification to your vehicle can't void your warranty if that modification didn't cause the failure.



Hey jawmail -- Yes, I read is his signature. I was just asking to try to get specifics on what aspects of his bombing would cause him to worry about warranty coverage. Please see my insightful response to the friendly Bob4x4 above.

don't get your panties in a wad now :-laf

 

[67guzzler]

Blabber? Who? The one that's going to school you below, that's who.

Instead of blabbing at the mouth and quoting text from an aftermarket parts dealer website (they wouldn't be biased, would they ) do some real research (google/lexis/nexxis) and look at case law/history. They maybe you won’t be the irrational one generalizing your opinion.

Do you really want to be saying things like "blabbing at the mouth" and expect to be taken seriously?



I just simply asked the question as to WHY his truck might not be covered under warranty. You paint with a broad brush. You state in so many words that it's obviously not covered because of all the bombs. You might be right. You might not be right. But who are you to say?



Then you have the nerve to insult me saying I blabber? I'll take my IQ and my common sense over you're black and white sarcasm any day. I reiterate -- You are irrational and you are wrong. You're so bent on this subject (obviously) that you even stated you were tired of people mis-interpreting or mis-applying the MMWA to bombing. Some sort of crusade on your part to set the universe straight?



Vehicles must be covered under warranty if the failure is not caused by the modification. That is what the caselaw has interpreted the MMWA to mean. You do not give up your warranty rights when you modify your vehicle even if you change the "manufacturer’s operating parameters. " They would have to show those changes caused the failure and such a conclusion would have to be reasonable. I did look it up. I did read the statute and I did read the caselaw. Did you?



From the United States Code Annotated Title 15 Commerce and Trade Chapter 50 Consumer Product Warranties 15 Section 2302:



"c) Prohibition on conditions for written or implied warranty; waiver by

Commission



No warrantor of a consumer product may condition his written or

implied warranty of such product on the consumer's 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; except that the

prohibition of this subsection may be waived by the Commission if--



(1) the warrantor satisfies the Commission that the warranted

product will function properly only if the article or service so

identified is used in connection with the warranted product, and

(2) the Commission finds that such a waiver is in the public

interest.



The Commission shall identify in the Federal Register, and permit public

comment on, all applications for waiver of the prohibition of this

subsection, and shall publish in the Federal Register its disposition of

any such application, including the reasons therefor. "



Again -- the caselaw confirms that the statement above means that the modified part has to cause the harm. The warrantor has to show that their part, their configuration, their specs were the only ones that would allow the product to function properly. They have to SHOW it. AND even that's not enough. And also, they have to show that waiving the warranty and not covering the product is in the public interest!!!! It's a two pronged test!



You can read more about it here:



http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode15/usc_sec_15_00002302----000-.html



But please don't misinterpret it -- again.....



There is one noteworthy exception, however. This is where they enumerate (I know big word -- that means they explicitly state or list) if the vehicle is used for certain purposes or modified in certain ways then the warranty is void. It doesn't say if you put in high performance parts the warranty is void.



There are several threads here about a guys who had bombed trucks and were worried that they would not be covered under their warranty. They went to the dealer and they were covered. Some other times, they're not.



There. I'm done blabbering.



Before you take up a cause, please, know your facts!

don't get your panties in a wad now :-laf

I think I have just unwadded my panties. What a relief! #ad

 

[Bob4x4]

J gann have you ever installed injectors?Specifically on a 3rd gen. Do you think just maybe the installer did not reinstall the rocker assy correctly?Was that a Cummins problem?Dodge maybe?Or possibly it may never have happened if some one hadn't played with it?I am not against modifing come check out my trucks sometime or the ones I build. You might not want to take these discussions so personally. You might even want to talk to a few Banks customers who were told Warranty no problem. (moss magnuson has not helped them). Then when they lost an engine were told sorry. I don't know what line of work you are in,but from the Chrysler/Cummins point of view... ... ... ... Double the amount of stress on anything and then ask the original designer to stand behind it?I doubt it. All this is just my opinion but I have been involved in this for quite some time and have seen many changes and many people get loud and belligerent trying to get their way,right or wrong



Bob

never enough torque in the IE

 

[67guzzler]

Bob -- I agree with everything you said above. It was a lot more explanatory than your comment before and I appreciate it.



I'm not making any point about who should cover what, where or when. I just wanted to know if there was a declaration in this particular case that the defect was or was not covered and why. I didn't think it was that obvious. I thought he had a lot of stuff on his sig but I still wanted to know.



You're right about taking it personally. I usually don't -- but I don't like being summarily dismissed as if the premise of my question is absurd when these situations are not consistent or clear.

 

[lmills]

If you are so right about the MMWA don't you think it is funny that the owner didn't try to run it through as a warranty fix? Not to mention that he didn't put up a fight abut being charged for the work? It seams as though everyone here on the TDR except you knows that the MMWA does not work in situations like this. I wouldn't even dream of taking my truck to the dealer for engine warranty work.

 

[67guzzler]

I didn't say it would be covered. I just asked!



So now you have a truck with an engine and no warranty?

 

[lmills]

I guess it doesn't hurt to ask. What's the worst they can do? Laugh and tell me to hit the road. .



Yep. no warranty to speak of. The dealer has always treated me fairly. I just wouldn't want to put them in a situation where they could have a D/C rep touring the facility and see my truck in getting warranty work done with twin turbos hanging off the side. It tends to raise an eyebrow.

 

[67guzzler]

I guess it doesn't hurt to ask. What's the worst they can do? Laugh and tell me to hit the road. .



Yep. no warranty to speak of. The dealer has always treated me fairly. I just wouldn't want to put them in a situation where they could have a D/C rep touring the facility and see my truck in getting warranty work done with twin turbos hanging off the side. It tends to raise an eyebrow.

I hear ya. But they might surprise you and fix it! :-laf



It's good that you have such a relationship with them that you're concerned about the position YOU might be putting them in. That's not usually where they're coming from. 1 out of the 4 area dealers down here do I feel that way about. That one reprogrammed my ABS revs per mile for my tires for no charge. I would never be unreasonable with that dealer. The rest of them down here suck.



Seriously tho. Here's another question. What if there is a TSB and you have an engine failure because they had a bad batch of crank bearings? No fault of your own. Just a manufacturing defect and before you got the recall notice, you had an engine failure. Are you saying you wouldn't be entitled to a fix because of your mods?

 

[Diesel Nut]

Before the hijack is complete, how did the repair come out? Did they find the knock? Hope your truck is back to normal. Tell us what they find/found.

 

[67guzzler]

Diesel Nut -- You're right about the hijack. Sorry for my part in that.



I think in post #19 above he gives a status for today...

 

[Bob4x4]

When there is a dispute over a customer thinking something should be covered and the dealer doesn't,rather than making it a ******* contest a D/c district manager will make a decision. Personally I don't want my truck scrutinized that close by anybody. I have seen Cummins get involved on modified trucks and so far the customer has lost every battle I have witnessed. Take a Hot rodded cummins into the majority of Cummins shops and they may drool on it for a little bit and the politely asked why you screwed it up. After seeing way too many poorly packaged ideas you get worn down dealing with modified trucks and the owners that spent tons of money modifing but unwilling to spend it to keep it up or repair it. I have handled reworks from some of the biggest names out there we all make mistakes sometimes and anybodies parts can fail I just can't seem to enjoy driving a stock diesel-too boring



Bob

 

[Vaughn MacKenzie]

Blake are you here in the Tri-Cities now or down south? Hope they get you fixed up. It could be those guys at DPU didn't get the rocker torqued down properly when installing the injectors.



I would be careful driving it if you get it back and it still doesn't seem right, especially if it's knocking. An injector problem can toast an piston real fast.



Vaughn

 

[BrianJ]

Ok JGann, since this thread is pretty much hijacked at this point, lets try this again. You were on the defensive about this before I even started on this thread, refer to posts 14 and 15. I was simply trying to clear up the intent of this particular part of the MMWA as briefly as possible. This is not intended as a personal attack on you, however, many people misunderstand the true intent of the "Tie-in Sales" section of the MMWA act. The purpose of the "Tie-in Sales" section of this act was so that average Joe could go to the corner parts store and spend $7. 50 on a Fram oil filter and not be held to "Brand" or dealer "maintenance" parts and subject to potentially higher costs. Honestly here, nothing you have quoted in your posts indicate anything otherwise. I am not trying to insult you, but that is the CORRECT intent and legal basis of the "Tie-In Sales" section of the act. And again, there are no provisions in the act covering the use of parts or devices that alter the operating parameters of the product. According to your reply I was being irrational and flat out WRONG. Well sorry, I look at this objectively and don't have any ties to either side of the issue.



Here is some text straight from a law library (Grimes & Reese PLLC) on the MMWA act:

While you cannot use a tie-in sales provision, your warranty need not cover use of replacement parts, repairs, or maintenance that is inappropriate for your product. The following is an example of a permissible provision that excludes coverage of such things.



While necessary maintenance or repairs on your AudioMundo Stereo System can be performed by any company, we recommend that you use only authorized AudioMundo dealers. Improper or incorrectly performed maintenance or repair voids this warranty.



Although tie-in sales provisions generally are not allowed, you can include such a provision in your warranty if you can demonstrate to the satisfaction of the FTC that your product will not work properly without a specified item or service. If you believe that this is the case, you should contact the warranty staff of the FTC's Bureau of Consumer Protection for information on how to apply for a waiver of the tie-in sales prohibition.

From the original post on this thread we don't know if the warranty is denied or if the vehicle is out of warranty, so I wasn't even speculating on that aspect. However, there are more than enough bombs on the truck in question that it would be very likely that the warranty is out the window. It doesn't appear that the original poster is questioning this, and unfortunately only he can answer your orignal question as to if it was denied warranty because of mods.

 

[lmills]

I hear ya. But they might surprise you and fix it! :-laf



It's good that you have such a relationship with them that you're concerned about the position YOU might be putting them in. That's not usually where they're coming from. 1 out of the 4 area dealers down here do I feel that way about. That one reprogrammed my ABS revs per mile for my tires for no charge. I would never be unreasonable with that dealer. The rest of them down here suck.



Seriously tho. Here's another question. What if there is a TSB and you have an engine failure because they had a bad batch of crank bearings? No fault of your own. Just a manufacturing defect and before you got the recall notice, you had an engine failure. Are you saying you wouldn't be entitled to a fix because of your mods?

If it got to that point, I would probably yank the twins off and run it in with the stock single. Only if I new that was the case would I do something like that.

 

[67guzzler]

Ok JGann, since this thread is pretty much hijacked at this point, lets try this again. You were on the defensive about this before I even started on this thread, refer to posts 14 and 15.

Ok Brian. I agree -- I had my panties in a wadd (as was so artfully suggested earlier) before you posted. My issue was the fact that my question was summarily dismissed as irrelevant. Nobody likes to be disregarded in that fashion and I thought warranty coverage, or the appropriate lack thereof, was a valid inquiry.

I was simply trying to clear up the intent of this particular part of the MMWA as briefly as possible.

Is that all you were trying to do? Really Brian? It seemed like you were making a political statement about people who have, in the past, in your opinion, incorrectly analyzed the MMWA and YOU were going to broadly correct anyone who disagreed with your view. I could be wrong here, but that's the way it seemed.

This is not intended as a personal attack on you, however, many people misunderstand the true intent of the "Tie-in Sales" section of the MMWA act. The purpose of the "Tie-in Sales" section of this act was so that average Joe could go to the corner parts store and spend $7. 50 on a Fram oil filter and not be held to "Brand" or dealer "maintenance" parts and subject to potentially higher costs.

Nobody is saying that this isn't the purpose of the section. But you're saying that the courts have limited it's meaning / power only to replacement parts. I have to disagree with that analysis. I believe that it has a broader meaning -- the notion that if an aftermarket part does not cause the harm, the warranty is still valid. I'm not the only one who's analyzed the application of this code and come to this conclusion.

From the original post on this thread we don't know if the warranty is denied or if the vehicle is out of warranty, so I wasn't even speculating on that aspect.

DUDE! That's my whole point. That is the reason why I asked in the first place. Now does it all make sense?

However, there are more than enough bombs on the truck in question that it would be very likely that the warranty is out the window. It doesn't appear that the original poster is questioning this, and unfortunately only he can answer your orignal question as to if it was denied warranty because of mods.

I agree 100%

 

[BrianJ]

Nobody is saying that this isn't the purpose of the section. But you're saying that the courts have limited it's meaning / power only to replacement parts. I have to disagree with that analysis. I believe that it has a broader meaning -- the notion that if an aftermarket part does not cause the harm, the warranty is still valid. I'm not the only one who's analyzed the application of this code and come to this conclusion.

You are correct in that I am saying that both the intent and (successful) court history of MMWA related issues are limited to “replacement” or “maintenance” parts. However, I am not saying that there is not other legal precedent or case history for “performance” related parts. I definitely agree that if a part is not directly or indirectly responsible for a failure of a non-related part, coverage should be applied via warranty. I am just saying that I am not going to quote MMWA to try support that case.



I won’t hijack this thread anymore. I apologize to Blake and hope that you have a successful conclusion to your problem. JGann (or anyone else), if we want to continue this debate we should do it in the appropriate forum.

 

[WinRice]

My money is on AK RAM's diagnoses. A dropped seat will usually open up the rocker clearance, making it appear like the rocker loosened.

 

[blake underwood]

Well the part to do the cylinder compression test didn't turn up. Tried every dealer in town-nothing. So my truck got torn down, and then put back together w/o a fix because the toll to do the test is out 'til OCT. 10.



I'll pick it up tomorrow.



Vaughn,



They were Don M Flux injectors put in by Diesel Injection Service in Pasco. He's the only Bosch Certified Intaller in the Tri-Cities!

 

[Vaughn MacKenzie]

That's good Blake, I would've shied away from having them installed out there on Road 68. Chances are Mike my old neighbor in Pasco put them in (works at TC Diesel Inj).



Vaughn

 

[blake underwood]

I picked the truck up this morning. The ticking under acceleration is gone, but the low idle and jumpy RPM's are still there.



If the truck is in Park or Neutral idle is normal and so are EGT's. If I put it in gear RPM's jump to 1000 while my foots on the brake, and then it idles down to 600 RPM, bellows out black, and EGT's continue rising. While driving though truck acts completely normal.



So ticking is gone, idle is still messed up, and the tool to do the compression test is out 'til mid October.