Ford used car warrenty

[Hammy]

The problem is, for the warranty people the "pull" must be to do enough to get the car out of warrenty to save money rather than a proper job-e.g head gasket goes, just change it never mind about the warped head, it will last a few months.  If this is not the case why not warrant the repair for 12months, shouldn't be a problem if work is done properly??

No evdience for this of course, but if I was handling a claim it would at least pass through my mind.. there must be an incentive not to pay out ??

Warranty people need to be more up front with this ! -  not complicated just doesn't align with my sense of fair play. Have a look at a few warranty pages, see if you can spot it !

I have two other insurance related examples ( same thing warranty=insurance)- radiator burst (rusted through in centre) after 3 weeks in brand new house, ruining carpets in the flood - loss adjuster for central heater contractor claimed faulty part nothing to do with them as an installer, and I should not have lifted carpet until they came out, so can't asssess the loss and therefore won't pay (despite me demonstarting the heating system was gassing up with H2-an inidication of never having been flushed after the install or a bad design). Builder replaced as good will gesture after neighbour with same problem put a sign up in his garden. Central heating co turned up a while later  changed all rads and the bolier, drained and flushed system ( I expect under pressure from the builder) .  

Broken window in conservatory - rang up  insurance (AA) how did it break ? me- don't know it was broken when I got home. If it broke by itself you are not covered only if it was by accident. Have to warn you sir at this point we are recording this conversation.... so I paid for that myself..

I could go on.. don't get me onto Electricians and test certs....oh ok then...( new house cert had wrong number of lights and sockets listed, 10 years later found upstairs lighting earth never made off at consumer units -wires just hanging).  Test made in new Kitchen last year - tested sockets only as he didn't want to take the cooker out to test (sockets had not been touched during re-fit)

[Man On The Clapham Omnibus]

It would appear from speedy jon's post re fitting a revised crank pulley being a 'MUST' that the fault repair was not carried out properly (i.e. fully) in the first place. The warranty is to fix 'faults' not replace specific parts and the fault was not fixed. IANAL - just excercising logic.

[Hammy]

Almost Mr  O' Bus.. apparently ( according to the garage) the pulley was after a certain revision,  it doesn't "automatically" need replacing - although I would question it needed doing anyway, warranty would only authorise the replacement of the tensioner, I even had to pay for the belt...

hence my earlier comments.....

[adamnreeves]

Well if it was me then I question if the crank pulley was changed or not. This is the cause of the failure in the first place and surely should have been replaced under warranty. The belt I guess is classed as consumable normally unless it failed NOT due to fair wear and tare. Logically if they made you pay for the belt that they classed it as fair wear and tare and therefore not caused by an out of balance crank pulley and therefore would not have replaced the pulley. I would be questioned whether they analysed the fault correctly at the time. The negative side of me, in light of there being a Ford memo pointing out the problem is thinking one of two things, 1) Bad communication within the company and/or 2) Trying to cut costs to the detriment of customer service.

[Hammy]

This is the cause of the failure in the first place and surely should have been replaced under warranty.

unless you just want to authorise enough spend to get it out of the warranty...

I agree it *should* have been done, there *must* have been an underlying cause and in the end this is why I've accepted a deal to get it all done at reduced cost (£170 for pulley, tensioner , belt and labour 12months warranty on job) - and smile about it - rather than try and get redress any other way.  

Real annoyance is that parts etc not covered outside of the warranty, which i think is a fiddle and suspicion of cutting corners by Ford sure.  ( crank pulley made after revison date, therefore TSB doesn't count only authorise replacement tensioner, wash hands when it falls off little while later)

live and learn as they say

[pistonbroke]

I work in the warranty business, although nothing to do with cars.

The first replacement part was covered under the cars warranty and only received the balance of the cars warranty.  If however, you had paid to have the part changed out with the cars warranty, you should receive the 12 month warranty attached to the spare part.

It’s not too complicated, but a salesman is never going to tell you that.

thats what my nephew was told, if he had paid for the repair it would have been covered but as was warrenty it wasnt  

So who pays for the warranty in the first inst