Brake replacement & Porsche Warranty
Discussion
Hi all,
I think I know the answer to this question already, but want to get it clarified before I press the button......
I have a 2014 MacanS which I bought from an OPC last year, it's under the Porsche 2yr warranty until next Sept. and I will be renewing it when it expires. I was aware it would probably need attention to the rear brake material sometime soon, but it was picked up yesterday in the MOT that they probably had 2k left on the pads. Advice from my Indy was to think about replacing them soon.
I am happy to give him the work and he has promised he will fit official Porsche parts - I'm 99% convinced that if he does so, then the warranty remains intact. But can someone confirm this for me?
TIA
I think I know the answer to this question already, but want to get it clarified before I press the button......
I have a 2014 MacanS which I bought from an OPC last year, it's under the Porsche 2yr warranty until next Sept. and I will be renewing it when it expires. I was aware it would probably need attention to the rear brake material sometime soon, but it was picked up yesterday in the MOT that they probably had 2k left on the pads. Advice from my Indy was to think about replacing them soon.
I am happy to give him the work and he has promised he will fit official Porsche parts - I'm 99% convinced that if he does so, then the warranty remains intact. But can someone confirm this for me?
TIA
Edited by Spuffington on Thursday 19th September 11:57
Yes. Also, as the extended warranty is basically an insurance product, so if your engine fails and you have non-Porsche brake pads they could refuse the claim as the insurance would be null and void due to the use of non-standard parts. I think that's the case, but you'd need to check the exact wording of the extended warranty.
It's not like the initial manufacturers warranty where Porsche have to prove the non-standard part contributed to a failure. The extended warranty is different and what is and isn't covered and the effect of non-standard parts on it is dependent on the exact wording within it.
Certainly you can't renew the extended warranty with non-Porsche parts fitted as the car has to pass a 111-point check at an OPC.
It's not like the initial manufacturers warranty where Porsche have to prove the non-standard part contributed to a failure. The extended warranty is different and what is and isn't covered and the effect of non-standard parts on it is dependent on the exact wording within it.
Certainly you can't renew the extended warranty with non-Porsche parts fitted as the car has to pass a 111-point check at an OPC.
There's often a tendency to exaggerate on the warranty topic.
The wording on the policy (not quoting exactly as I don't have it to hand) says something to the effect that: "claims can be refused TO THE EXTENT that the cause of the failure is due to (a) ignoring the servicing schedule, (b) fitting non-Porsche parts, (c) etc, etc.
The "TO THE EXTENT" phrase is key here. If you have fitted non-OEM brake pads (as in the example above), it will not invalidate your claim relating to the engine having blown up... And so on.
James
The wording on the policy (not quoting exactly as I don't have it to hand) says something to the effect that: "claims can be refused TO THE EXTENT that the cause of the failure is due to (a) ignoring the servicing schedule, (b) fitting non-Porsche parts, (c) etc, etc.
The "TO THE EXTENT" phrase is key here. If you have fitted non-OEM brake pads (as in the example above), it will not invalidate your claim relating to the engine having blown up... And so on.
James
Edited by short-shift on Thursday 19th September 14:44
Twinfan said:
Yep, totally agree. My thoughts have always been "play by the rules or don't play at all"...
Yes but the rules are you can use none Porsche parts...BUT if they CAUSE an issue you aren’t covered. Renewal of warranty is a different issue and any none Porsche parts MAY lead to refusal.
anonymous said:
[redacted]
And incorrect, too. As mentioned above, a caliper colour change may be an issue when you submit to the 111-point inspection but, beyond that, any impact on the remainder of the warranty has to be linked TO THE EXTENT that the colour change caused any other failure. In my experience, attitudes (and understanding of the warranty rules) varies significantly between OPCs - sometimes it pays simply to go down the road to the next dealer...
James
BertBert said:
When did the extended warranty terms change to this version saying to the extent that...?
It didn't always say that.
Bert
Just checked my 'old' renewal documentation from 2017 (Porsche's previous cover provider) and my latest cover documents from 2019 (from Porsche's new cover provider) and the same "to the extent that" clause is included in both. So some time, at least...It didn't always say that.
Bert
James
short-shift said:
Just checked my 'old' renewal documentation from 2017 (Porsche's previous cover provider) and my latest cover documents from 2019 (from Porsche's new cover provider) and the same "to the extent that" clause is included in both. So some time, at least...
James
I have the same policy wording on a Porsche Approved Warranty running to January 2022. Whilst it may be the case that from a legal point of view headings are not to be relied on in interpreting the document, the wording “to the extent that” does appear under the heading of What is not covered?.James
Points 2 c) and d) deal with service by a third party and Non-Genuine Porsche parts. So while common sense suggests that the fitting of a battery other than Moll would have little bearing on a gearbox failure, proving it would be another matter and I guess the onus is on the insured rather than the insurer. The insurer is Real Versicherung AG so does that mean the case would be held under German law?
The question of which legal system and locus for hearings should be in the policy, absent that it would surely be law of England and Wales determined in a court somewhere in the UK. Perhaps a first stage for disputes involving insurance products would be the Financial Ombudsman Service as all insurers are subject to FCA regulations.
The extended warranty agreements are subject to UK law ("laws of England and Wales") as you'd expect for a contract entered to in the UK.
And whilst I don't intend to test any of these clauses, I don't share the view that the onus of proof will necessarily rest with the insured. I'm inclined to the view that the "to the extent" wording is there for the purpose of ensuring a reasonable (common-sense, proportionate) approach and that it mitigates against the insurer taking an unreasonable and unjustifiable attitude. It would certainly assist that interpretation if there was ever a need to "get legal" over a claim.
Blimey - how did we get into all of this?!
James
And whilst I don't intend to test any of these clauses, I don't share the view that the onus of proof will necessarily rest with the insured. I'm inclined to the view that the "to the extent" wording is there for the purpose of ensuring a reasonable (common-sense, proportionate) approach and that it mitigates against the insurer taking an unreasonable and unjustifiable attitude. It would certainly assist that interpretation if there was ever a need to "get legal" over a claim.
Blimey - how did we get into all of this?!
James
Not sure if this will help in any way, but here goes...
I bought my 2010 Cayman S last September, from a BMW dealer. The previous owner bought it as Approved Used Porsche 18 months earlier. So he had a 24 month warranty and the car had full OPC history.
In April, I had the car serviced and MOT’d at my local OPC, and I asked for the 111 point check so I could extend the warranty. I got a call from them saying one of the best Caymans we’ve seen, no MOT issues, but while the wheels were off we’ve noted that it has non OEM brake discs so we haven’t done the 111 point check, as we can’t put a warranty on it with these discs. Cost of new discs and pads just under £2,000. Ouch.
I replied that it was previously sold Approved Used with a warranty, and to my knowledge the discs and pads had not been changed (I’d got in touch with the previous owner). The service advisor said he’d look into it further while I was on my way to pick the car up.
On arrival, he’d found on Porsche’s central database that prior to being sold as Approved Used, the selling dealer had noted that it had non OEM discs...but had sold it with a two year warranty.
My OPC were adamant that they couldn’t put a warranty on the car knowing that, so I spoke to Porsche customer service. They were very helpful, and after a little to’ing and fro’ing, all the discs and pads were replaced at the previous dealer’s cost. Result.
The car then passed the inspection and now has a two year warranty.
Fast forward to this week, the battery died. Spoke to my OPC, and sure enough they said I had to have a Porsche Moll battery to keep the warranty valid. £221, or £386 fitted. That’s right, £165 to undo one bolt, remove a vent pipe, and loosen two battery terminals, then do the reverse.
As others have said, you probably can try and argue that if the gearbox fails, and the car has a Bosch battery, the two aren’t linked, but try and argue with an OPC, Porsche, and the German insurer to prove it.
Sorry for the long post, and not sure if it adds anything other than further confusion.
I bought my 2010 Cayman S last September, from a BMW dealer. The previous owner bought it as Approved Used Porsche 18 months earlier. So he had a 24 month warranty and the car had full OPC history.
In April, I had the car serviced and MOT’d at my local OPC, and I asked for the 111 point check so I could extend the warranty. I got a call from them saying one of the best Caymans we’ve seen, no MOT issues, but while the wheels were off we’ve noted that it has non OEM brake discs so we haven’t done the 111 point check, as we can’t put a warranty on it with these discs. Cost of new discs and pads just under £2,000. Ouch.
I replied that it was previously sold Approved Used with a warranty, and to my knowledge the discs and pads had not been changed (I’d got in touch with the previous owner). The service advisor said he’d look into it further while I was on my way to pick the car up.
On arrival, he’d found on Porsche’s central database that prior to being sold as Approved Used, the selling dealer had noted that it had non OEM discs...but had sold it with a two year warranty.
My OPC were adamant that they couldn’t put a warranty on the car knowing that, so I spoke to Porsche customer service. They were very helpful, and after a little to’ing and fro’ing, all the discs and pads were replaced at the previous dealer’s cost. Result.
The car then passed the inspection and now has a two year warranty.
Fast forward to this week, the battery died. Spoke to my OPC, and sure enough they said I had to have a Porsche Moll battery to keep the warranty valid. £221, or £386 fitted. That’s right, £165 to undo one bolt, remove a vent pipe, and loosen two battery terminals, then do the reverse.
As others have said, you probably can try and argue that if the gearbox fails, and the car has a Bosch battery, the two aren’t linked, but try and argue with an OPC, Porsche, and the German insurer to prove it.
Sorry for the long post, and not sure if it adds anything other than further confusion.
Interesting post and pleased for you with the outcome - and it serves to underline the point made near the top of the thread (by Green1man) that you can't expect to have the 111-point check completed successfully if non-Porsche parts are fitted.
But, thereafter (that is, after the warranty renewal process), as Green1Man said: "you can use non-Porsche parts... BUT if they CAUSE an issue you aren’t covered." Hooks back to the "to the extent" clause.
Everyone has their own attitude to risk, though - and keeping everything 100% Porsche OEM at all times is clearly the safest way to ensure a lack of problem when making a claim. But my original intervention was to point out that there are some common-sense clauses at play in the warranty provisions, and that it's not correct to say that the entire warranty is voided if any non-Porsche parts are fitted.
C'est tout...
James
But, thereafter (that is, after the warranty renewal process), as Green1Man said: "you can use non-Porsche parts... BUT if they CAUSE an issue you aren’t covered." Hooks back to the "to the extent" clause.
Everyone has their own attitude to risk, though - and keeping everything 100% Porsche OEM at all times is clearly the safest way to ensure a lack of problem when making a claim. But my original intervention was to point out that there are some common-sense clauses at play in the warranty provisions, and that it's not correct to say that the entire warranty is voided if any non-Porsche parts are fitted.
C'est tout...
James
I think fitting non-Porsche parts only makes sense if you don't want to renew your extended warranty, but most people seem to want to do that and OPCs may knock off the cost to replace parts from any trade-in (if they spot them that is).
Good to see that the wording isn't as harsh it may have been in the past re. existing warranties
Good to see that the wording isn't as harsh it may have been in the past re. existing warranties
Gassing Station | Porsche General | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff