As a newish member here, I've been flipping though many threads and have noticed a few questions about if a particular mod would have warranty implications. Accordingly, I thought that I would provide a bit of information about mods and warranties.
This post is not intended to dissuade anyone from modding their new(ish) car, but is intended to get folks to carefully consider any unintended consequences of a mod.
As far as warranties are concerned, anything that changes the performance characteristics of the vehicle may cause warranty woes. Some mods, like lighting, may not only cause warranty issues but may also cause you to fail inspection. For example, there is NO legal way to modify the headlights on our cars - let me repeat that - all the HID and LED conversions that are sold here are not legal to sell.
Even somewhat innocuous mods like SprintBoosters and suspension can cause issues far beyond the item itself.
About 9 years ago, we started a long discussion on the BMW forum about mods and warranties. While the BMW crowd tended to do more engine/ECU mods than members here, the same basic tenets apply except here it becomes a bit trickier because SEMA vendors frequently mis-quote the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act.
The first to post was Jonathan Spira (the editor of "The Diesel Driver" - now "The Green Car Driver") who said:
"Before we go too far, I wonder, based on the posts I've seen, if anyone besides myself has read Magnuson Moss end to end.
First, the following - which was posted above as being part of the Act, is not part of the Act but someone else's quasi-introductory text which was posted on another Web site.
US Code - Title 15, Chapter 50, Sections 2301-2312
Legally, a vehicle manufacturer cannot void the warranty on a vehicle due to an aftermarket part unless they can prove that the aftermarket part caused or contributed to the failure in the vehicle (per the Magnuson Moss Warranty Act (15 U.S.C. 2302(C)) . For best results, consider working with performance-oriented dealerships with a proven history of working with customers. If your vehicle manufacturer fails to honor emission/warranty claims, contact EPA at (202) 260-2080 or
United States Environmental Protection Agency | US EPA. If federal warranty protection is denied, contact the FTC at (202) 326-3128 or
Federal Trade Commission | Protecting America's Consumers. For additional information, check out the following links:
1. Consumers Bill of Rights
2. What You Can Do If Your Warranty Is Denied
3. Federal Warranty Laws
4. Vehicle Manufacturer Warranty Contact Phone Numbers
So now that we've gotten that out of the way, I'll explain the Act and why the Act itself has nothing to do with the subject of modifications (if you don't believe my statement, other than what I quoted above is the actual text of the act - there is no language contained therein that addresses this).
Magnuson Moss is the federal law that governs consumer warranties.
What seems to confuse 99% of the population is that it covers tie-in sales provisions, specifically not allowing them. Tie-in sales provisions have little in common with mods.
A tie-in sales provision would mean that the seller requires the purchaser of the warranteed product to buy an item used with or for the product FROM the seller or a specified company in order to be eligible to receive a remedy under the terms of the warranty.
If company x sells photocopy machines, and company x requires you to use ONLY company x toner to ensure continuing warranty coverage, that is a tie-in. Such a tie-in is not permissible. Company x cannot restrict your use of toner from third parties. However, if you use the wrong toner and the machine breaks (and this is NOT covered by the Act, this is just common sense), you have no warranty to speak of.
A mfr. can indeed void a warranty if the purchaser modifies whatever it is they have purchased. Not allowing the mfr. to void the warranty would be inane. But in practice it generally has to be shown that the modification in some way precipitated or was connected with the failure. The example someone gave of putting blackline lights on a car that then has an engine failure is a great example of this, but it has nothing to do with the Act.
My father was involved in the development of Magnuson Moss. The warranty from his company (Spiratone) was used as one example of a a good warranty and he gave testimony in open Congressional hearings on the subject."
I further clarified with this:
"Let me try to explain mods and warranties in logical layman's term. I'm sure that some will come up with all sorts of nebulous arguments but they are not real world.
1. The oft misquoted MM act has nothing to do with performance parts. It was enacted to keep manufacturers from requiring the use of a specific brand of replacement part in order to keep the warranty intact.
Accordingly, the use of a "substantially similar" replacement is OK and the manufacturer must show that the "substantially similar" part caused the failure if they refuse warranty service for that failure.
In practical terms, this means that you can substitute a Osram H7 bulb for the Bosch H7 that the car originally came with.
2. Let's look at performance parts for a moment. By definition, performance parts are not "substantially similar" as they are intended to alter the performance characteristics of a system. Based upon this, performance parts fall outside the scope of the MM act.
In order to refuse warranty service for a failure, the manufacturer (legally) merely needs to show that a part that is not "substantially similar" was used and that this part could have caused the failure. At this point, the burden of proof
shifts to the consumer to prove that the part did not cause the failure.
Going back to out lightbulb example, if you have an electrical failure and you've replaced your 55w bulbs with 85w "hyperwhites" or LED's then the dealer is under an obligation to the manufacturer to refuse warranty service on the failure if they believe that the performance bulbs caused the failure.
Simple - right?
Now, let's talk warranty a moment.
3. The term "void the warranty" is often bandied about by both consumers and dealers alike.
Very few things will actually "void the warranty." This was alluded to by other posters but not fully explained. If a car is so badly abused, or modded to the point where virtually every system failure can be traced back to a mod, then the manufacturer can "void the warranty." A flood damaged car or one that was in a severe accident might also be candidates for the manufacturer to void the warranty on the entire car.
Mitsubishi voided the warranty on a bunch of cars that they saw were used at racetracks.
What is commonly referred to as "voiding the warranty" actually refers to a dealer refusing warranty service on a particular service.
Quite simply, if a dealer believes that a modification, chip, performance part, abuse or whatnot caused (or substantially contributed) to a failure, then he has an obligation to the manufacturer to refuse warranty service on that failure.
Accordingly, using our lighting example again, the dealer could refuse warranty service on any electrical failure. This could actually extend to ECUs or the entire electrical system.
Farfetched? Not really. A few years back a guy on VWVortex decided to paint his sidemarker bulbs silver on his brand new Jetta.
The bulb heated up, melted the paint and dripped into the housing. The housing melted and shorted out parts of the wiring loom. Since the Jetta uses a CAN-BUS, the whole thing needed replacement $2500 later the car was on the road again.
4. Why doesn't the dealer give the customer the benefit of the doubt? The manufacturer often asks for parts back to determine the cause of the failure. They are extremely vigilant for failures that often are seen on modded cars.
Fell free to argue until you're blue in the face - but - like it or not, the above is the way it is.
You can always find a lawyer who will argue a different viewpoint, but that doesn't mean it is right.
So, what is the bottom line?
ANY mod may cause warranty woes. Consider ALL the implications of any mod you are contemplating and be mentally and monetarily prepared to pay for the consequences.
Read your owner's manual carefully. It specifically warns against engine (ECU) and suspension mods as examples of mods that will cause problems.
Feel free to mod away, but remember that you might have to pay to play. The other posters who say "just do it" aren't the ones that will have to foot the bill.
As a clarification - there is some heated discussion about the manufacturer's burden of proof regarding the use of "performance parts" but the bottom line remains the same.
In addition, if the manufacturer allows a case to go to court then there is a good bet that he has sufficient evidence to back up their claim."
Again, none of this is intended to keep anyone from modding, but please weigh the upsides against the downsides.