Has anyone had a warranty claim denied? Seized engine! Pics of teardown added 6/5

[oofie]

Originally Posted by FirestormFRS

I'll play devils advocate here.

The car has its suspension and wheels modified. The car has had a non manufacturers exhaust (ie Performance) installed.
The car has been taken to a closed course and driven outside of normal operating guidelines. The engine failed due to the off highway use. Closed racing circuits are considered off highway driving. Period end of story.

You may get a really good lawyer to use them touting the "track days" statement in advertising and get it fixed. The lawyer fees in most administrative cases are covered by the losing party so shouldn't cost you a dime if you win.

So what is the "normal operating guidelines"? Would redlining at every shift, but on the highway fall under it?

[CSG Mike]

Originally Posted by FirestormFRS

I'll play devils advocate here.

The car has its suspension and wheels modified. The car has had a non manufacturers exhaust (ie Performance) installed.
The car has been taken to a closed course and driven outside of normal operating guidelines. The engine failed due to the off highway use. Closed racing circuits are considered off highway driving. Period end of story.

You may get a really good lawyer to use them touting the "track days" statement in advertising and get it fixed. The lawyer fees in most administrative cases are covered by the losing party so shouldn't cost you a dime if you win.

I will also play devil's advocate.

Can you prove to me that the car's warranty requires it to be used on public roads only? If it breaks on my driveway that I own, it's technically off highway.

Can you prove to me that the exhaust (muffler) altered the parameters of the engine to ANY degree that it caused the failure? We'd be more than happy to subject a complete exhaust system to flowbench testing. Header to exhaust tip, with just the axleback portion swapped, and compare the results.

In what way does changing the suspension and wheels cause the engine to fail?

Does the burdon of proof not lie with the manufacturer here?


I'm not an attorney, nor do I claim to be.

[ATL BRZ]

Subscribed. This is really frustrating me. Mike and every owner that participates in a HPDE don't deserve to be denied warranty work for bs reasons like this.

[Hanakuso]

I feel like there's got to be some type of middle ground in all this. Mike isn't babying the car, yet I dont feel he's abusing it either. The maintenance he's doing seems to be adequate and he hasn't mentioned anything about abuse (overrevving, etc).

We could probably all bust the engines easily and legally on the streets if we just stayed in 1st and 2nd. Just cruising around 7-7.5k all day..

[whtchocla7e]

This is what Scion uses to advertise the car:
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W7jBnYS_Ot8"]2013 Scion FR-S Teaser (Extended) [HD] - YouTube[/ame]


How is this different, with regards to wear and tear, than driving on a track?
Yes, I know this scenario is an exaggeration but why should a big company be allowed to get away with this kind of advertising and not cover the same kind of use?

[AVOturboworld]

I encourage you all to research on NASIOC just how all this generally plays out. This is a definite been there, seen that with Subaru. Including how people are bringing up the track day advertising.

I don't think that Subaru/Toyota should deny the coverage on the motor for track use, no. What probably raised the red flag (in their minds) is that it's the second time.

And from long track experience - no, nothing you do on the street will equal the beating you can do to a car at the track. That's why so much money has to go into prepping cars for any extended track duty. The question, though, is what caused the damage to the motor in this case. If it's not because of DI seals or similar, and is instead of prolonged high-rpm use at the track, it's going to be a battle.

That's because Subaru and/or Toyota will want to cover their rears in regards to replacing parts that are going to fail under extensive racing usage. This is the flip side of all the warranty claims from people that did abuse the cars, and then just claim they were driving 35mph when the motor just grenaded spontaneously.

[CSG Mike]

Originally Posted by Hanakuso

I feel like there's got to be some type of middle ground in all this. Mike isn't babying the car, yet I dont feel he's abusing it either. The maintenance he's doing seems to be adequate and he hasn't mentioned anything about abuse (overrevving, etc).

We could probably all bust the engines easily and legally on the streets if we just stayed in 1st and 2nd. Just cruising around 7-7.5k all day..

This ECU logs everything. If we had overreved at ANY point, I'm sure they would have been prompt in giving us a copy of the maximum RPM the ECU logged, and used that as grounds for warranty denial due to driver error.

Has ANYONE here ever seen me fly off track? My driving is rather conservative, because I cannot afford to break a component on the car (I pay for it if I break something while driving), and certainly cannot afford to wreck a car. Is there a risk of that happening on track? Sure. I'm sure as hell going to minimize it by driving well within my limits. It's also what holds back my development as a driver. As such, I have a good amount of mechanical sympathy, and do not dump the clutch, abuse the car, etc., unless specifically asked to do so by the owner.

Example: My S2000 has had the same clutch it in for over 115k miles, and is still going. It's got plenty of hard driving on it.


@AVOturboworld: the 2nd engine showed every sign of a DI seal failure; we were told by a dealer to come back when there was a CEL.

[ATL BRZ]

Originally Posted by CSG Mike

The 2nd engine showed every sign of a DI seal failure; we were told by a dealer to come back when there was a CEL.

WTF

[AznBRZer]

Originally Posted by CSG Mike

This ECU logs everything. If we had overreved at ANY point, I'm sure they would have been prompt in giving us a copy of the maximum RPM the ECU logged, and used that as grounds for warranty denial due to driver error.

Does it? I'm under the impression that the "black box" only records the last 30 seconds of operation and I doubt that anything that the ECU has is really usable or else insurance companies would be pulling ECU data for every accident.

[FirestormFRS]

Mike I'm not in anyway saying that your claim isn't valid. I'm just giving you what the manufacturers attorney is going to say if it gets to that point.

Semantics of "off highway use" and the driveway remark aside, you and I both know that if a judge/jury/warranty claim arbitor hear that you tracked the car it's gonna throw a red flag. Unless you have a helluva lawyer you face a Mt. Everest size climb getting them to replace the engine under warranty.

[track_warrior]

The issue here is the direct injector system is crap, it is failing due to heat. Subaru and Toyota are starting to put the puzzle together and notice this is happening to cars that are being driven under extreme heat aka track driving. I think it would be important to find out if anybody else that is not tracking their car having this problem, if you can prove the direct injector caused the failure like it did on my car they cannot deny warranty on it and i think this is why subaru is trying as hard as they can as to not tear down the engine and investigate. Toyota did a teardown on my engine and found the cause of a broken piston to be the car running lean because of a direct injector seal. I got covered but i am this close to selling my car and parting out, since they warned me that this was going to be the only engine they would warranty since i drove it hard, im afraid to be in your boat.

[Ozzman]

What octane fuel have you been running?

[CSG Mike]

Originally Posted by Ozzman

What octane fuel have you been running?

91, the highest regularly available in California.

[maj75]

Originally Posted by FirestormFRS

Mike I'm not in anyway saying that your claim isn't valid. I'm just giving you what the manufacturers attorney is going to say if it gets to that point.

Semantics of "off highway use" and the driveway remark aside, you and I both know that if a judge/jury/warranty claim arbitor hear that you tracked the car it's gonna throw a red flag. Unless you have a helluva lawyer you face a Mt. Everest size climb getting them to replace the engine under warranty.

I am an attorney and you have no clue what you are talking about.

The manufacturer wrote the warranty. If it does not explicitly exclude track days or HPDE or "driving the car on a closed track". Then they can't legally deny the warranty claim. He wasn't racing the car in an event or competition. There is no "red flag." (or green, white or checkered, in its racing context) Of course the company's lawyer is going to argue its not covered. But right now, it sounds to me like no expert has determined what caused the engine to fail. If it is the injector seal, then it is hard to see how the manner of driving had anything to do with it. If it over-revved, then there are a bunch of new issues, like why the ECU didn't cut fuel, and since the car was never tuned the stock rev-limiter should prevent this.

Lastly, the winner does not get their attorney's fees paid by the loser. Each side pays their own attorneys' fees. (Unless the contract states that attorneys fees are recoverable, which I do not believe the Subaru warranty does) The winner can sometimes recover a portion of their costs (like expert fees for testing and testimony). That makes it difficult for most people to sue the company. The fees come out of your recovery. If we are talking about an engine that's worth, say $8K, an attorney could easily run up fees higher than that. So if you win, you still lose.

However, the company is also having to pay their lawyer. They are paying a higher rate than you are, trust me. So the longer the case lasts, the more they have to pay their attorney. At some point, settling the case makes economic sense for them.

I have an FRS so I don't have a copy of the Subaru warranty, but I would be surprised if it doesn't include an arbitration provision. Sometimes the arbitration provision is mandatory, sometimes it is optional. It is a faster process, so there are less attorneys fees, and the results can be good for the consumer. Many insurance companies gave up on arbitration because they were always losing.

Try to find a local lawyer to help. A local law school will often have a free legal clinic where you can get advice. Also, small claims court is really friendly to consumers. Many don't allow the company to use a lawyer, so the field is more even. Also, contact your state consumer advocate, find them on line. I have to believe that you state is pretty consumer friendly.

You have some good arguments in your favor. What you need are facts, that an expert can testify to in court, about why the engine failed and why the failure is a defect that the warranty would cover.

Again, good luck and other than moral support, don't look for legal advice on a car forum