ScoobyNet.com - Subaru Enthusiast Forum

ScoobyNet.com - Subaru Enthusiast Forum (https://www.scoobynet.com/)
-   Non Scooby Related (https://www.scoobynet.com/non-scooby-related-4/)
-   -   Car warranty (https://www.scoobynet.com/non-scooby-related-4/1050902-car-warranty.html)

stevie1982 02 November 2017 06:03 PM

Car warranty
 
So looking for some advice. There are loads of 3rd party warranty companies out there but which ones would you recommend? Who have you had dealings with? If you were or are a trader who would you use and who would you stay clear of? Any tips or pointers appreciated

Thanks in advance

alcazar 05 November 2017 01:23 PM

You don't read the forums then?

https://www.scoobynet.com/general-te...capital-r.html

chocolate_o_brian 06 November 2017 07:50 PM

Yes, I had an RAC gold or platinum one on my old e92 BMW 330d. Cost me £400 for the year and I made two claims.

One for a clogged DPF caused by an oil leak and the snowball effect. And one for a knackered hydro module. One claim was about £650 as I had the DPF gutted on the hush and the other £2200. Some arguing and proof was needed But he coughed up in a matter of days for the first one and hours for the second.

I'd advise one but check the small print like I did. Saved me 3 grand (well over 2 1/2 after you subtract the cost of the warranty).

scunnered 07 November 2017 11:10 AM

When I bought my last second hand car four years ago, I declined the offer of a warranty. The car lasted two weeks before a major fault occurred. The cost to repair it was £2700

I knew the sale of goods act would cover me. The dealer at first refused to have it repaired. I quoted the relevant section of the act, and he very reluctantly agreed he was responsible for any faults that occur within six months of purchase, other that consumables such as bulbs, tyres, brakes, or general wear.

As I see it, the warranty covers the dealer, not the buyer. The sale of goods act covered me, at no outlay on my part.
Why should the customer have to pay for a warranty that ensures the dealer doesn't have to stump up the cost of repairs?

chocolate_o_brian 07 November 2017 11:34 AM


Originally Posted by scunnered (Post 11976982)
When I bought my last second hand car four years ago, I declined the offer of a warranty. The car lasted two weeks before a major fault occurred. The cost to repair it was £2700

I knew the sale of goods act would cover me. The dealer at first refused to have it repaired. I quoted the relevant section of the act, and he very reluctantly agreed he was responsible for any faults that occur within six months of purchase, other that consumables such as bulbs, tyres, brakes, or general wear.

As I see it, the warranty covers the dealer, not the buyer. The sale of goods act covered me, at no outlay on my part.
Why should the customer have to pay for a warranty that ensures the dealer doesn't have to stump up the cost of repairs?

I agree and the only two points I can add for the warranty I had are;

1) extended (if that actually includes anything else not covered under the consumer act).
2) it was 12 not 6 months.

As said for me it paid for itself over 7 fold and apart from a bit of arguing on the phone was pretty straight forward.

^Qwerty^ 07 November 2017 12:17 PM

https://www.scoobynet.com/non-scooby...ny-rights.html

Mine from a while back.


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:06 PM.


© 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands