Warranty Void!!!

[FStop7]

Originally Posted by quality_sound

You REALLY need to read the Magnussen-Moss Act.

The thing with M-M is that you'll spend more on a lawyer than you would on repairing the car.

[satinghostrider]

Originally Posted by MN M3

It is discussions like these that make me absolutely crazy.

Let me see if I have this correct - the OP DELIBERATELY modified the programming on his car's ECU, right? Regardless of what reprogramming was actually done, the fact is that the car has now been tuned. And, as the fates often make occur, the engine went south following this retune. Now, the OP expects BMW to pay for his repairs, and he's upset that they've cancelled his powertrain warranty?

ARE YOU KIDDING ME?!?

The FIRST rule of modding your car is this:

MOD = VOID WARRANTY.

It's that simple. The warranty manual clearly states this fact. Every other manufacturer states the same thing.

Another thing - people in here are woefully misinformed if they think there is some magical way to tune your car then, upon needing warranty work, simply reinstall the original tune without leaving a trace. IT CANNOT BE DONE. I don't care which company sells you this snake oil, it is B.S.

Having owned (and tuned) a large number of high-performance cars (Corvette, Audi, MB, etc.), I can state with 100% absolute certainty that there is no such thing as an undetectable tune or an undetectable restoration to the factory tune. ANY changes leave traces that ANY tech, using proper scan tools, can find. Once found, they are obligated to turn you in to the manufacturer. Period. And, once that fact is recorded on your service record, the powertrain warranty is gone.

What is unclear about this? If you mod, you pay. It's a choice you make, so accept it.

Sorry if the way I sounded was as though I wanted BMW to repair my car FOC. I have admitted that it is my fault nonetheless and will be rebuilding the engine at my cost. What I am pissed is why is the drive train warranty gone as well.

And to make things sweeter, the dealer and BMW Asia dumped the car back to me and told me everything is fine. If everything is fine, why did they have to void the warranty? Obviously its not but they choose to lie to me and then void the warranty. If they have been clean about what is exactly wrong with the car but cant cover the engine warranty, I would not have been this pissed. Imagine if you went in for a normal service with no problems with your car and they just send you a letter telling you that your warranty is void just because you had a tune if they had find out. Sure the scenario is different only because my dealer / BMW Asia lied to me and there is a problem with my car. Now thats why I am pissed. They did not talk to me nor discussed ANYTHING. They portrayed that "Everything is working great but we have to void your warranty. CYA!"

I am aware that this is my doing and I accept the consequences. But when you have been lied blatantly by BOTH the dealer and BMW Asia, something is wrong with the way they are treating the customer. I could not care less right now with the warranty of the engine being void but I do care about my drivetrain warranty. Why? Simple. I dont have any problems with it now at all but if I am gonna have something wrong with it down the road, its gonna be a problem. Moreover, my dealer has fucked the DCT oil by changing the wrong fluid so there might be a possibility of it fucking up along the way. I am MORE worried for this than even the engine. With the engine, I already have made plans to rebuild it with new internals not just fixing it. I want to know this rebuilt engine will be better than what I have now.

[satinghostrider]

Originally Posted by FStop7

The thing with M-M is that you'll spend more on a lawyer than you would on repairing the car.

Unfortunately we do not have that act to fall on here and getting legally involved in this kinda stuff, its hard to prove even 50%. As much as you can be sure it was nothing to do with what you did. So its pretty pointless. Those money spent on lawyers can get me some nice kickass brakes and some serious suspension. I am thinking more of mod parts than lawyer fees right now given the scenario.

[quality_sound]

Originally Posted by FStop7

The thing with M-M is that you'll spend more on a lawyer than you would on repairing the car.

No you won't. I know I've told this story, and maybe even in this thread, but you don't need a lawyer. it's plain English. The DEALER has to PROVE it was the part in question that caused the failure or an otherwise warrantied part. Not 'we thingk it coudl have" or "it might have", but solid proof. Now a dealer might decide to take it to court but if you really are in the right, they'll be paying your lawyer fees too.

Having said that, this is NOT the case here. His chip affected engine output. Enough to cause a valve problem? Maybe, maybe not. Them taking away the tranny warranty is a bit much but I can see their point. More engine power means more stress on the tranny as well.

[satinghostrider]

Originally Posted by quality_sound

No you won't. I know I've told this story, and maybe even in this thread, but you don't need a lawyer. it's plain English. The DEALER has to PROVE it was the part in question that caused the failure or an otherwise warrantied part. Not 'we thingk it coudl have" or "it might have", but solid proof. Now a dealer might decide to take it to court but if you really are in the right, they'll be paying your lawyer fees too.

Having said that, this is NOT the case here. His chip affected engine output. Enough to cause a valve problem? Maybe, maybe not. Them taking away the tranny warranty is a bit much but I can see their point. More engine power means more stress on the tranny as well.

Good point but we dont even have this M-M Act here so as long as the dealer detects there is a tamper, I guess thats enough. They dont need to prove that it caused the problem.

Yes taking away the warranty is definitely over the top even though there is more stress on the tranny but we have 200nm buffer btw engine output and gearbox. No chip tune can even give you enough to break even half of that threshold. TO top that, the dealer has screwed the tranny once due to their negligence and changed the wrong liquid. I found out abt it and declined to accept the car. If I had accepted the car, FOR SURE, a new tranny will be in my car now. So i saved BMW some money too. No reciprocity to at least save the tranny's warranty?

[TLud]

Originally Posted by quality_sound

No you won't. I know I've told this story, and maybe even in this thread, but you don't need a lawyer. it's plain English. The DEALER has to PROVE it was the part in question that caused the failure or an otherwise warrantied part. Not 'we thingk it coudl have" or "it might have", but solid proof. Now a dealer might decide to take it to court but if you really are in the right, they'll be paying your lawyer fees too.

Having said that, this is NOT the case here. His chip affected engine output. Enough to cause a valve problem? Maybe, maybe not. Them taking away the tranny warranty is a bit much but I can see their point. More engine power means more stress on the tranny as well.

I double-dog dare you to quote me the provision that says this in plain English. Everyone's a lawyer on the internet.

And just because the dealer has the burden to prove something doesn't mean you don't have to take them to court (or worse yet, to arbitration), to get them to do it.

[FStop7]

Originally Posted by TLud

I double-dog dare you to quote me the provision that says this in plain English. Everyone's a lawyer on the internet.

And just because the dealer has the burden to prove something doesn't mean you don't have to take them to court (or worse yet, to arbitration), to get them to do it.

Exactly. You can quote it all you want to the dealer, but they'll just tell you to buzz off. You'll end up taking them to court, which means hiring a lawyer. You could also potentially go to arbitration, but the arbitrator isn't required to decide based on M-M, either.

[King Tut]

Man this thread is going to lead to tons of "If I install X do I void my warranty" questions. Can we formulate an offical m3post answer like:

"If you have to ask, you're not prepared to install it"

[quality_sound]

Originally Posted by TLud

I double-dog dare you to quote me the provision that says this in plain English. Everyone's a lawyer on the internet.

This work? I think it's pretty plain.


Title 15 Chapter 50
§ 2304. Federal minimum standards for warranties

(a) Remedies under written warranty; duration of implied warranty; exclusion or limitation on consequential damages for breach of written or implied warranty; election of refund or replacement
In order for a warrantor warranting a consumer product by means of a written warranty to meet the Federal minimum standards for warranty—
(1) such warrantor must as a minimum remedy such consumer product within a reasonable time and without charge, in the case of a defect, malfunction, or failure to conform with such written warranty;
(2) notwithstanding section 2308 (b) of this title, such warrantor may not impose any limitation on the duration of any implied warranty on the product;
(3) such warrantor may not exclude or limit consequential damages for breach of any written or implied warranty on such product, unless such exclusion or limitation conspicuously appears on the face of the warranty; and
(4) if the product (or a component part thereof) contains a defect or malfunction after a reasonable number of attempts by the warrantor to remedy defects or malfunctions in such product, such warrantor must permit the consumer to elect either a refund for, or replacement without charge of, such product or part (as the case may be). The Commission may by rule specify for purposes of this paragraph, what constitutes a reasonable number of attempts to remedy particular kinds of defects or malfunctions under different circumstances. If the warrantor replaces a component part of a consumer product, such replacement shall include installing the part in the product without charge.

(b) Under a limited warranty that provides only for replacement of defective parts and no portion of labor charges.

(c) No warrantor may condition the continued validity of a warranty on the use of only authorized repair service and/or authorized replacement parts for non-warranty service and maintenance nor does it preclude the warrantor from denying liability where the warrantor can demonstrate that the defect or damage was so caused.


See the bolded section. BMW could say that a slight over rev caused the problem. They know exactly how high the engine was revved but as you can see they have to demonstrate that the damage was caused by the non-warranty service/maintenance (the ECU work) and not just say "we think so."

[SenorFunkyPants]

Does altering the parameters of the ECU from standard come under "service and maintenance"?
I would think most certainly not.

[xtremecruiser]

Originally Posted by aussiem3

elmariachi:
Why won't you write to BMW Germany about it and dot point your dealing with your dealership in Singapore as well as BMW Asia. BMW do value customer loyalty and I am sure you will get an answer from them. Also cc in the head of BMW Asia. I am sure he doesn't know what's going on in his own backyard.
Don't rush into any decisions and independantly stripped the engine. Try this first and see what happens.
Good luck!

BMW AG's CEO email is norbert.reithofer@bmw.de

They don't care either though, my emails to germany went unanswered

[foosh]

No warrantor may condition the continued validity of a warranty on the use of only authorized repair service and/or authorized replacement parts for non-warranty service and maintenance nor does it preclude the warrantor from denying liability where the warrantor can demonstrate that the defect or damage was so caused.

This clause is vague, as is most legislative language, which is why we have such an active courts system and why we're still fighting about the meaning of the U.S. Constitution in the Supreme Court.

It does not state that the warrantor must prove beyond all reasonable scientific doubt that an aftermarket ECU reprogram caused a bent valve in YOUR particular engine. That would be impossible. All the manufacturer must demonstrate is that the ECU modification changed the performance parameters of the engine from the stock configuration, and that could have led to more wear, and ultimately a higher likelihood of failure in the type of engine in question. They have more than ample data to show given all their performance testing. In that regard, the tuners help make the case for the manufacturer in their claims of higher HP and torque, and that's all a manufacturer needs to win a case against you under M-M, involving an engine mod.

Moreover, it is against U.S. law to modify engine parameters because of EPA emissions certification regulations, and 99% of judges would bang the gavel and tell you to go home because you illegally modified your engine. M-M was passed into law years ago because certain manufacturers were trying to deny warranty claims for the use of non-factory aftermarket parts such as mufflers and air cleaners. It was designed to prevent manufacturers from having a monopoly on repairs and parts sales.

[TLud]

Originally Posted by quality_sound

No you won't. I know I've told this story, and maybe even in this thread, but you don't need a lawyer. it's plain English. The DEALER has to PROVE it was the part in question that caused the failure or an otherwise warrantied part. Not 'we thingk it coudl have" or "it might have", but solid proof. Now a dealer might decide to take it to court but if you really are in the right, they'll be paying your lawyer fees too.

Having said that, this is NOT the case here. His chip affected engine output. Enough to cause a valve problem? Maybe, maybe not. Them taking away the tranny warranty is a bit much but I can see their point. More engine power means more stress on the tranny as well.

Originally Posted by quality_sound

This work? I think it's pretty plain.


Title 15 Chapter 50
§ 2304. Federal minimum standards for warranties

(a) Remedies under written warranty; duration of implied warranty; exclusion or limitation on consequential damages for breach of written or implied warranty; election of refund or replacement
In order for a warrantor warranting a consumer product by means of a written warranty to meet the Federal minimum standards for warranty—
(1) such warrantor must as a minimum remedy such consumer product within a reasonable time and without charge, in the case of a defect, malfunction, or failure to conform with such written warranty;
(2) notwithstanding section 2308 (b) of this title, such warrantor may not impose any limitation on the duration of any implied warranty on the product;
(3) such warrantor may not exclude or limit consequential damages for breach of any written or implied warranty on such product, unless such exclusion or limitation conspicuously appears on the face of the warranty; and
(4) if the product (or a component part thereof) contains a defect or malfunction after a reasonable number of attempts by the warrantor to remedy defects or malfunctions in such product, such warrantor must permit the consumer to elect either a refund for, or replacement without charge of, such product or part (as the case may be). The Commission may by rule specify for purposes of this paragraph, what constitutes a reasonable number of attempts to remedy particular kinds of defects or malfunctions under different circumstances. If the warrantor replaces a component part of a consumer product, such replacement shall include installing the part in the product without charge.

(b) Under a limited warranty that provides only for replacement of defective parts and no portion of labor charges.

(c) No warrantor may condition the continued validity of a warranty on the use of only authorized repair service and/or authorized replacement parts for non-warranty service and maintenance nor does it preclude the warrantor from denying liability where the warrantor can demonstrate that the defect or damage was so caused.


See the bolded section. BMW could say that a slight over rev caused the problem. They know exactly how high the engine was revved but as you can see they have to demonstrate that the damage was caused by the non-warranty service/maintenance (the ECU work) and not just say "we think so."

1. How does the quoted provision mean that "you don't need a lawyer." If you go to court and the case proceeds for any serious length of time, you'll not only need a lawyer, you'll need experts too.

2. How does the quoted provision mean the dealer, as opposed to the consumer, has to take anything to court? Based on that provision, the dealer has the burden of proof at trial, not when the car is up on the rack in the work bay.

3. How does an ECU tune qualify as service or replacement parts under the quoted provision?

It pisses me off when people spout off about the Magnuson-Moss Act like it's the holy grail of get-out-of-jail-free cards. Anytime someone posts about warranty issues, the knee-jerk one-line M-M responses are inevitable and completely unhelpful.

Is it something that you can remind your dealer of when they're giving you grief about something? Of course. Often the threat of litigation is more powerful than an actual lawsuit. Just hope you never actually have to rely on the M-M act in court.

[quality_sound]

You don't NEED a lawyer. You can get one, but techincally even soneone on trial for murder doesn't need a lawyer.

Who said it HAS to go to court? In another section of the MMA Congress said that anyone that provides a warranty must also provide a means of mediation so not every dispute goes to court.

How doesn't it? You can't replace something unless it's broken?

No one said it was the holy grail of anything and I don't believe it applies in this case. i was saying that dealers blindly disallowing warranty coverage for ANY aftermarket part is wrong.

On another note, did anyone here ever own an E46? Ever notice the sticker in the upper left of the windshield that said using a cell phone in the car without a permanently installed car kit would void the warranty on the entire electrical system? I've been to dealers that wanted to deny warranty coverage on a faulty front wheel bearing because the car didn't have OEm wheels. The wheels were OEM but from the parts catalog and approved by use on that model by the manufacturer but the dealer only knew it wasn't what was on the car when it was sold. That, and protecting companies that make perfectly acceptable aftermarket parts and the people that buy those parts, is the reason the MMA exists.


PG - I would not agree that your engine is covered but things like sensors attached to it, your intake, etc SHOULD still be covered. They codl make an argument about the tranny and cooling system since they're being streesed beyond design though.

[JCtx]

Originally Posted by PencilGeek

Sorry, but that's a post failure. That language clearly specifies the use of replacement parts may not be the grounds for warranty denial. Replacement parts -- by definition -- do not alter the characteristics of the car, motor, ECU, or anything else.

Bingo. You have to be nuts to think a modified ECU qualifies under M-M. And also against the entire powertrain, as if the engine is under more stress, so does the rest of the powertrain. BMW has to prove NOTHING other than the ECU was tampered with (easy by just putting you on the stand under oath , but they can prove it in a heartbeat themselves as well). They're the ones who would not need a lawyer .

Oh, and a related comment for those 'guilty' of the following: deleting the cats is a federal offense in the US, potentially getting both the tuner (for 'tuning' them out) and owner (for removing them) in some extra hot water. Another gamble, and another reason not to go after BMW if that's part of the ECU modification. Good day folks.

[TLud]

Originally Posted by quality_sound

You don't NEED a lawyer. You can get one, but techincally even soneone on trial for murder doesn't need a lawyer.

You can't be serious here? Technically, if my engine goes bad, I could fix it myself. I don't NEED a mechanic, but if I want it done right, I should probably hire a professional. In my career, I've handled a dozen or so cases involving pro se consumer opponents. Not a single one of them ended well for them.

Originally Posted by quality_sound

Who said it HAS to go to court? In another section of the MMA Congress said that anyone that provides a warranty must also provide a means of mediation so not every dispute goes to court.

Believe me, as a consumer, arbitration/mediation clauses are not your friend.

Originally Posted by quality_sound

How doesn't it? You can't replace something unless it's broken?

Who said anything about anything being broken? My point is that a flash doesn't constitute service and it doesn't constitute a replacement part. Regardless, this is just semantics, because you're going to have a hard time proving that altering your DME didn't cause an issue with the drivetrain.

Originally Posted by quality_sound

No one said it was the holy grail of anything and I don't believe it applies in this case. i was saying that dealers blindly disallowing warranty coverage for ANY aftermarket part is wrong.

I do agree with this.

[e36jakeo]

Originally Posted by elp_jc

Something's fishy with that story. Did you buy the car new? Never a tune? Engine does not spin above 8,450 rpm from the factory, period. Besides, rev limit in neutral and with clutch pedal depressed should be 7K rpm. By the way, it's entirely possible you had a bad engine; the 'fishy' part is it having spun to 8,700 rpm without a tune or mechanical overrev.


Are you surprised 8,700 rpm screwed your engine??? I'm not.


I do agree with that. Take care.

I bought the car with 65 or so miles on it. Given the 2 registered overrevs to ~8700 RPM, I was wondering if something had been partially damaged before I got it, and then the circumstances of accelerating to redline in 1st and 2nd gear, then trying for 3rd, hitting neutral, and momentarily revving the engine without load. I have never hit the wrong gear (the only way everyone is contending you COULD overrev) and have raced my E36 M3 (which is known for problematic "money shifts" for 6 years with never hitting the wrong gear.

Thank God I was a loyal customer (bought E36, 335i and E90 M3) otherwise they might have tried to screw me.

I am surprised an 8700 RPM overrev would damage this engine considering it is designed to rev to 8400 RPM. That is momentary 3% higher engine speed - I am sure the engine was tested to that, and multiple chips voluntarily allow it to rev to 8600 RPM.

[MrHarris]

Damn some fucked up shit going on in this thread. I feel scared to even bring my car to the dealer now

[TLud]

Originally Posted by MrHarris

Damn some fucked up shit going on in this thread. I feel scared to even bring my car to the dealer now

Don't be. The whole reason this thread has gotten so much attention is the sheer fact that this almost never happens. Like I said in an earlier post, a whole chain of events has to happen before things ever get to this point.

[KWY91]

Damn performance motors... bloody useless, just wanna suck our money and save up on warranty issues...

[foosh]

Exactly--the only thing to fear if you have flashed your ECM is a serious engine malfunction, which fortunately is rare.

[satinghostrider]

Originally Posted by M3_Kidracer

Damn performance motors... bloody useless, just wanna suck our money and save up on warranty issues...

Nothing new. They lost the M dealership anyway. Probably the only place in the world where BMW and M Cars are sold by 2 different agents. I would most definitely get a PI car or the new agent. What's the difference? More to gain on PI Esp cost savings. Also less risk of PML mechanics racing the cars and crashing them and trying to cover up by giving customers a new car. I am sure you have heard of that case.