I'VE SAID IT BEFORE WARRANTY COMPANIES ARE A RIP OFF WITH A CAPITAL R
 

I've just had a frustrating phone call with RAC Warranties on behalf of a customer with a failed engine in an STi Hatch.

It's a "Platinum Warranty" sold with the car by Shukers. Worth £2000.00

Inevitably the engine has suffered the failure of the oil pick up strainer and destroyed itself. An engineer came last Thursday and agreed within seconds that it was a 'sudden mechanical breakdown ' and whilst not saying that it would be accepted. Advised that the failure was a "cut & dried" claim.

About 30 minutes ago the "engineer" at RAC Warranties smugly advised that the claim was rejected on the basis that it was a failure of "a pipe". I argued that they meant a pipe is as much as; a water pipe, a clutch or brake hydraulic pipe, a power steering pipe, or an oil cooler pipe.

MR Smug said; " " pipe" it is a failure of a "pipe", we do not cover "pipes".

I said, "it is the oil pick up strainer in the sump"

He said " it is a "pipe", we do not cover "pipes" "...............

So I have advised my customer that he needs to start yelling and make as much fuss as he can and be a persistent nuisance. That will win it eventually. We are all busy and he is no less busy than anyone, but there is 2 grand at stake here. Time to start arguing.

SO; l'll say it again; Save your money on an aftermarket warranty or Mechanical Breakdown Insurance it is a rip off and you are better off saving the money for the policy and putting it towards the failure if it ever happens.

David APi Alias Mr Angry.

That's a piss take, They will try anything they can to get out of paying... scum of the earth!

I've never known a car warranty to be anything other than a rip-off...so much so that I always try and buy cars without one...to help save a few quid on the car in the first place. They really are totally pointless. Most claims are put down to 'wear and tear' and so are not covered anyway.

The so-called warranty I got with my Merc (it came with the car, I didn't buy it) was for the replacement of any failed part, but not for any subsequent damage caused by the failure. Catastrophic engine failures are often caused by significant but inexpensive parts malfunctioning, an oil pump being just one example.
The real purpose of these worthless warranties is that they remove responsibility from the dealer. In fact the liability still remains with the dealer, warranty or no warranty.

Update: Subaru parts list for 15049 AA140 is " Oil Strainer Assembly, Engine " No mention of "pipe".

WOW.

I work for a very large warranty company who work for lots of different manufacturers administering their extended warranties.

I think this may be an example of the claims processor not knowing how a car works and has seen the word pipe in the assessors report.

I am a technical claims specialist (we only employ vehicle technicians for this role) and something like this would come across my desk and would be covered.

Yes we exclude pipes also - but David is correct this is meant to be coolant pipes/ air con pipes ect.

Depending on how his policy booklet is worded (either a list of included parts or a list of exclusions) it will usually say ALL INTERNAL ENGINE/GEARBOX COMPONENTS are covered.

As you have already instructed your cust get on to them and follow the complaints procedure as these kind of rejections will usually get overturned once it has got to someone who knows what there doing ( Hopefully the RAC should have techs in the office somewhere??????)

In my experience if this got to court a Judge will make them pay.:luxhello::luxhello:

That would be what a judge would ask for, the manufacturers definition of the part - therefore not a pipe - this is the kind of thing the customer needs to advise the Warranty company about but ask for a technical claims handler and not just some numpty!!!!!!

Sticky for you David.

I bought a 5 yr old at the time Impreza WRX 2.5 5 speed with 410 gee gees . I bought the car from a dealer and they also tempted me into buying a reduced price warranty (platinum edition) iirc for £200 for 12 months cover.
I thaught yeah why not and bought it. 11 and a half months into owning the car 3rd gear went BANG ! I straight away went on ebay and got another complete exact same 5 speed box for £550 delivered. Within 5 days of the gearbox breaking i got another box delivered and fitted by my local garage. After this had been done i remembered about the warranty. Got the paperwork out and realised i was covered for another week or so. So i got straight on the phone to them (withought telling them i had allready replaced the box )and very lethargictly they asked me to take the gearbox out and their inspector will be out to assess the damage . Luckily my local garage had kept the old broken box at their garage. The inspector asked where my car was and the garage told him it was on axel stands at my place waiting for a box to be put in. Luckily he did not want to see the car. Anyway after 3 months of me kicking up a stink and them trying everyway not to pay i eventually got a £1600 cheque from them . RESULT !:luxhello::luxhello: I dont know if i'll bother with warranty again tho because of the ball ache with trying to get them to pay up :freak3:

I had a similar issue last week with a potential valve stem seal that was faulty and resulted in a major issue with oil comsumption. Engine had to come out, new stem seals put in, new gaskets and of course a major bill for labour.

Called my Warranty company which is WarrantyWise. I have the 5 Star cover with them which supposidly covers you for everything. Every part under the sun covered on the policy except of course a valve stem seal. Head gaskets and all other items listed but the statement from the warranty company was, "sorry we dont cover valve stem seals and that was the part that failed so nothing else can be covered"

They a bunch of sharks, any excuse not to cover in the event of faliure. I truly believe they not worth the paper they written on.

Thanks Jimbob, appreciate your candour. I agree, the key to it is the manufacturers description. ANY judge will find in favour of the client.

The owner has been emailed the Subaru parts list screen-grab which l'll post on here ASAP anyway.

Thanks for the Sticky, Si.

David

That's a complete piss take. Hope it works out for your customer if there is any justice in the world.

I have had problems also with the so called pipe syndrome which was part of the failed item, and was not covered under a silver warranty on an internal gearbox slave cylinder. Like OP says save your money if you read the policies in depth they basically cover nothing. Even tried to wriggle with "its within 30 day of sale or under 2000 miles." Good enough the customer came back to us for the warranty work and we were able to save face, but if they were in a position 200 miles from home and at a franchised garage facing news of no warranty cover. Not a good position for them or us.
Had to cover the cost of work ourselves. As stated above sqeaky clean SHARKS

Always read the small print. When we started shipping engines from Japan all those years ago they came in 20ft containers and I took the trouble to read the small print on the back of the 'way-bill ' that is its transit document.

In a nutshell, it says that they contract to deliver your parts to the port of your choice, but cannot be held responsible if it has to go somewhere else. They also advise that shipping time is xx days from embarkation to disembarkation. But cannot be held responsible if that date changes.

So what they are actually saying is; that they can deliver your goods anywhere, anytime and that fulfills their contract.

A tad on the loose side I reckon.

David

Whats all this pipe talk? Why arent they covered? Even if a pipe of some sort fails and causes the engine or any other component that is covered under warranty to fail then why isnt the covered parts covered? They have still failed, regardless of cause through no malicious or deliberate means.

I was contemplating taking out break down cover with the AA and pay £58 extra for the parts and labour £500 cover. Even for £58 Im not sure if it worth taking it out due to the clauses. Im sure that in the event of a claim there will be some way for them not to pay.

Hi, I am the chap who is having probs with RAC warranties.
Just to keep everyone updated - we notified them that we were contesting the refusal of the claim on the grounds that Subarus do not describe the component as a pipe. They have asked for a copy of the Subaru parts list/diag and are currently reviewing the claim - 6 days now so they must be thinking hard. Will have to call them back soon as we want this sorted before Christmas.
regards
Colin

6 days is long enough....get back at them today. I would say what David said, nag, nag and keep nagging them until they sort this out.
My fingers are crossed for you:thumb:

I hope your customer gets a fair result David.
Good of you to flag it up for people.
It is sad to say that I am not suprised this has happened in this increasingly cut throat market capitalist world.

Just had an email over the weekend from the customer. We have won:luxhello::luxhello::luxhello::luxhello:

Just a few formalities to cover and we have the go ahead.

They have decided to do it as a gesture of goodwill .....

One up for the customers. keep at em guys they all buckle in the end.

David

:luxhello: :cool:

I'm 'shocked'. :freak3: Thought they'd never 'give in'.

How can they argue they don't cover ' pipes '? when the part concerned isn't called a pipe, by the people that make it...............

Just a case of structuring the argument to give them as little of an escape route as possible.

The original premise still holds good though

Mechanical Breakdown Insurance is a rip off.

Totally.

You've played them at their own game -- it's all in the wording (and thankfully Subaru never printed 'pipe' as part of the official description). Ha ha.

Nice result for your customer, David. :thumb:

Well done David and Ploughman1963....(blimey, he's older than me):D

.... but is wearing better :thumb: :lol1:

:notworthy

update: RAC warranty asked for service records which we forwarded.

They reply that the 20,000 mile service details are obscured - will require original service invoice (service carried out prior to me buying car at 23,000 miles)

I reply: mileage at service is legible even if service date is not. Service clearly carried out 6,000 miles before I bought it and prior to commencement of their warranty so how can it be relevant?

I await an explanation

#squirminggits

How can I say it differently?:wonder:, These turkeys that offer these warranties just duck and dive in the hope you'll go away.:mad::mad:

Fortunately many turkeys get their come-uppance quite soon........:luxhello::luxhello:

Lets hope we add RAC Warranties to the feast.:lol:

David

How can they stir it up anymore after giving the money as "goodwill" rather than under the terms of their warranty.
They can't have it both ways. Goodwill terms have been used as an excuse to avoid precedence, yet they are still arguing about the terms of a warranty.

Bunch of jokers.