Clutch Issue with Dealer and HPDE

[mav1178]

Originally Posted by strat61caster

...toss in some Scion Ken Gushi action in totally stock examples...

Originally Posted by gramicci101

...Ken Gushi sliding around in promotional vids...

I'd normally just page @Knshro13 to come in and talk about him sliding, but he's probably busy at 14000' right now.

-alex

[strat61caster]

Originally Posted by mav1178

I'd normally just page @Knshro13 to come in and talk about him sliding, but he's probably busy at 14000' right now.

-alex

Since you paged him anyway, color me impressed if he comes in with some warranty advice in regards to aggressive driving.

We all know he can work it.

[markw]

Originally Posted by gramicci101

But I agree; all the brochures and commercials and Ken Gushi sliding around in promotional vids made it a lot harder to say "this isn't proper usage."

That's what burned Mazda. Lawyers will make quick work of this. Like I posted earlier, if they advertise it as a sports car, they should expect it to be driven as a sports car. The other thing is to not take it in and talk about how you drive it. "It's making a clicking noise from the rear..." Don't volunteer anything they can possibly use against you.

[yzarc0g]

Originally Posted by sluflyer06

If that's is true then there would be no need for upgraded pads.

Also see your own signature and the accompanying description of your car.

Ass.. Ever been to the track?

[Reaper]

You still need a clutch?

[yzarc0g]

Ok so here we go, the follow up..


If you do go to the track, even with an instructor in a driver school (everyone who hasn't been and drives this car on the street DD is silly, are we 18?) make sure you put your car as close to 100% back to stock as possible.

The service manager judged the tires and brakes and stickers and took that to say the clutch was "abused". I drove my 2009 Mazda Speed3 the SAME as a drive this car and that clutch made it to 95,000 without BREAKING IN HALF.

I talked to another dealer who said since the clutch that I had left wasn't worn down, the flywheel was OK, and that it wasn't slipping then it wasn't wear and tear.

It was obviously a subjective situation....racetrack, HPDE, racing? not racing? warranty? etc. Point is protect yourself because Toyota provides no help at all. I called them and they said they would do their "research". They called the dealer and the rep and then told me they go with what the rep said and I was SOL.

I told them I did not feel that I was being treated fairly by the dealer and the rep. I told them since the dealer wouldn't show me the email stating the warranty was denied that I had no proof the dealer wasn't "double dipping". Furthermore, I was not allowed to talk to the rep myself. I was forced to have someone else (A**H*** service manager) represent me.......

I asked if there was anyone else I could talk to and they said no. I said then why does it say I can move to arbitration in my owner's manual? They said I had to say that for it to be an option....



Even driving at 80MPH>>> a shift is a shift. The clutch should not have BROKEN IN HALF on me. Even if you don't believe that this wasn't driver error, (it really, really wasn't) how is the TRACK involved???


Had to pay $1100 parts and labor to get my car back...

Why didn't they tell me they weren't going to cover because of stickers and brake pads BEFORE they dropped the transmission and exhaust out of the car to check the clutch???HMMMMM

[Reaper]

You can check all of that through the inspection port at the top of the transmission.

[gramicci101]

Originally Posted by yzarc0g

Ok so here we go, the follow up..


If you do go to the track, even with an instructor in a driver school (everyone who hasn't been and drives this car on the street DD is silly, are we 18?) make sure you put your car as close to 100% back to stock as possible.

So, if we knowingly do something that will likely void the warranty, you're saying we should commit fraud so we don't have to pay for it to be fixed?

[yzarc0g]

Yes. I don't call that fraud though. I'm just giving them a car to fix with stock pads. They can do what they will. Just like they did here. I feel that if the dealer and toyota will so easily call a "close one" abuse, then why not show them a car that is close to stock. Nothing illegal about that. No more than nixing the warranty for some stickers and pads that are un-related. Everyone has to play hard ball, unfortunately.

[gramicci101]

Originally Posted by Law.com Legal Dictionary

Fraud - n. the intentional use of deceit, a trick or some dishonest means to deprive another of his/her/its money, property or a legal right.

It doesn't matter what you choose to call it, it's still fraud. Which can be a misdemeanor or a felony depending on the state's laws and the value of defrauded goods or services. It doesn't become not illegal just because you don't want it to be.

[yzarc0g]

Well good thing I didn't commit "fraud" then.
What special scary word do we have for a dealer dropping your transmission knowing full well they won't cover the work but telling you it may be covered? Malpractice?

[wheelhaus]

Originally Posted by gramicci101

It doesn't matter what you choose to call it, it's still fraud. Which can be a misdemeanor or a felony depending on the state's laws and the value of defrauded goods or services. It doesn't become not illegal just because you don't want it to be.

I agree that returning a modified car to stock condition to get a warranty fix may be fraud, but it isn't always black and white. I disagree with the accusation of fraud when the warranty claim in question has little if nothing to do with the modifications.

For this instance, a clutch physically breaking in half (no premature wear or glazing) on a stock drivetrain, but the warranty claim was denied because of tires, brake pads, and stickers. If the service manager instantly makes the decision because of these criteria and then contrives his own "facts" then I fully support the "return to stock" MO because he is not playing fair. I don't consider this fraud, just the owner protecting himself from unfair judgement. On the other hand, returning a FI engine back to stock because of drivetrain problems, is certainly fraudulent and I do not support it. I do not believe an HDPE event or doing canyon runs should result in a warranty claim being denied for something like this. There's plenty of things that can go wrong and should be denied if a car is driven hard frequently, but not this.

In my opinion, the dealer proceeding with work that was already determined to be out of warranty was grossly unfair and unprofessional, if not illegal. As stated above, the inspection port should have been sufficient for a "yes or no". Instead, the owner is forced to pay for parts and labor without authorizing it.

[stugray]

Originally Posted by gramicci101

It doesn't matter what you choose to call it, it's still fraud. Which can be a misdemeanor or a felony depending on the state's laws and the value of defrauded goods or services. It doesn't become not illegal just because you don't want it to be.

Two things:
1 - I have read many cases on this forum where a dealer refused to work on a modified car whether they intended to deny warranty work or not.
I can see numerous reasons for this:
A - the dealer cannot perform their stock diagnostics on a car that is not nearly 100%. Even a non-stock CAI can make the engine diagnostics give different answers that lead to a misdiagnosis.
Now if they refuse to look an a CEL because you have tints, then they are playing hard ass.
B - They INTEND to deny warranty work, and are hoping that you just take your car somewhere else instead of going through the trouble of chaning back to stock parts.

SO NO just changing the car back to stock before a dealer visit is NOT neccessarily "fraud" in and of itself.

2 - Dealing with a dealership for warrantly work is similar to talking to the police. NEVER give any information that is not required to give.
Even if you think you are helping, "anything you say can be used against you".
Is it "fraud" to not provide any information about a failure of the car? - NO.

So to change back to stock tires & brakes, drop the car off with a simple "Clutch seems broken" and there you are. Fraud? - No.
In fact you are more in violation of the law by accusing someone of committing fraud then by what I suggested above.

AND $1100 for a new clutch and the labor to replace it? I think the OP got a deal.

[gramicci101]

Originally Posted by stugray

Two things:
1 - I have read many cases on this forum where a dealer refused to work on a modified car whether they intended to deny warranty work or not.
I can see numerous reasons for this:
A - the dealer cannot perform their stock diagnostics on a car that is not nearly 100%. Even a non-stock CAI can make the engine diagnostics give different answers that lead to a misdiagnosis.
Now if they refuse to look an a CEL because you have tints, then they are playing hard ass.
B - They INTEND to deny warranty work, and are hoping that you just take your car somewhere else instead of going through the trouble of chaning back to stock parts.

SO NO just changing the car back to stock before a dealer visit is NOT neccessarily "fraud" in and of itself.

2 - Dealing with a dealership for warrantly work is similar to talking to the police. NEVER give any information that is not required to give.
Even if you think you are helping, "anything you say can be used against you".
Is it "fraud" to not provide any information about a failure of the car? - NO.

So to change back to stock tires & brakes, drop the car off with a simple "Clutch seems broken" and there you are. Fraud? - No.
In fact you are more in violation of the law by accusing someone of committing fraud then by what I suggested above.

AND $1100 for a new clutch and the labor to replace it? I think the OP got a deal.

I actually do agree with you. Mods should only void a warranty if they're directly related to the broken part. Most dealerships are not willing to dig that deep into the problem just to figure out if the mod contributed to it, though. They'd rather say no and let it be your problem, not theirs. Which is illegal, but if you don't fight it they get away with it.

And I wasn't accusing him of fraud. I was responding to a specific comment that said that if you track your car (which is provided in the warranty as an example of misuse) then you should convert it back to stock to get work done under warranty. That IS fraud by its legal definition, no matter what he wants to call it. By converting it back to stock and denying any usage on a track, he is deceiving the dealership in order to have maintenance paid for by Toyota, instead of out of pocket. The dealer should have looked further into it to discover that the clutch broke in a way that is atypical of normal usage, but they saw evidence that it had been tracked and drew the line there.

And yes, the warranty says racing, blah blah blah. Two things though. First, it uses racing as an example and not a definitive list, and second, do you really think that just because there isn't an official timing source that driving on a track is no longer as hard on the car?

If someone wants to defraud Toyota out of parts and maintenance, fine. I really don't care. I do illegal things with my car somewhat frequently. The difference is that I know it and I'm fine with it. If I get called out on it then it's no one's fault but my own and I'm not going to whine about getting busted. I'm certainly not going to try to get someone else to pay for it.