Sick over Magnunson-Moss Act vs. Warranties / Guarantees

[knc1us69]

Per a conversation with both the FTC, who chose to not verify anything, and with a representative of the N.C. Attorney General's office today in the consumer protection division, she stated that the vehicle manufacturers can use "any modification" to void a vehicle manufacturer's warranty (either dealer or manufacturer). I specifically was seeking clarification that the Magnunson-Moss Act of 1975 would apply to non-manufacturer warranties or guarantees such as the lifetime power-train guarantee that most if not all Southeast Toyota Dealers provide with a new car purchase which goes in effect after the manufacturers warranty expires. She stressed regardless of what after-market component makers claim, this is a can of worms you do not want to open if you expect your warranty to hold up. Bottom line she advised to not make any modifications to your vehicle and if so make sure its done at the dealership under their guidance. Otherwise plan on your warranty either factory backed or a simple dealer lifetime guarantee being worth a grain of salt should a problem arise if you have modified the vehicle in any way. If you think about it; based on this they could even claim changing a wiper blade as being a modification.

This may prevent me from adding a throttle body spacer and cold air intake which I want badly to help with the Yota lag but now have to decide whether its worth voiding my warranties. She stated even my manufacturers warranty could be in jeopardy if I do this despite what the aftermarket manufacturers claim in providing me a copy of the Magnunson-Moss Act claiming it prevents this from happening.

I have already done some mod's but most are cosmetic at this point and could be reversed immediately but I am concerned about going any further now after hearing this from our Attorney General's office.

I promised to follow up from another thread but felt this warranted its own.

I am very disappointed as I had hoped to hear "yes they act protects you" and I was confident as long as any damage could not be tied to my mod but now I am in shock as for me it sounds as if the act is useless.

She stated the primary use of the act was for instances where dealers claim a vehicle can do something then it can't; such as a dealer saying "sure that vehicle can tow 15,000 lbs no problem" then you burn up the drive-train to find out it couldn't. She stated if you had documentation of being told it would then the ACT would protect and could be used to make them correct the problems.

She was clear that despite what after-market manufacturers claim regarding performance parts not being able to void the warranty or guarantees based on the Magnunson-Moss Act that her office sees the Act help almost zero percent of the time and will require hiring an attorney to fight with the dealership and/or manufacturer.

Thoughts, concerns or anyone put this to the test yet ?

I now feel like this------:toilet:

 

[DC runner]

Correct.

I don't do liability law, but I work in Congress and have a lot of knowledge in legal/legislative issues.

You are not legally entitled to a warranty. You are given a warranty as an incentive to buy the product, as a result, in a free market society; a maker can make as limiting a warranty as they want.

You have the right NOT to purchase their product and buy another... and since something like 90% of all people DO NOT modify their vehicles within the warranty period, the makers see no push to change it.

It is all about supply and demand. There is a difference between a want and a right, and the want to modify your truck without any legal impact is not a right. It is an elective right.

It isn't worth it. Your warranty protects you from potentially expensive costs. it isn't voiding it.

 

[Foques]

i've mentioned this before in another thread.
this is false.. At least it was for the encounters that I had with dealerships and aftermarket. every single car I owned was modified in one or another way.

I had a push back from dealerships more than once, and did have to go to courts.

Magnusson moss act specifically protects your MFG Warranty. If you replaced a clutch, and your trans went - it will not protect you; However if you replaced your annoying long antenna to a stubby, and your motor went, you are covered under the act.

Following what you were told, the act is there to just look pretty.

To add, I was told by Toyota corporate that (their) dealerships have no power of voiding warranty; they can deny service under warranty, but warranty can be void only if a contract (should it mention any limitations) is violated.