Extended warranty claim and N rated tyres
Discussion
But the point still is that fitting non 'N' tyres does not invalidate your warranty, or indeed fitting other non porsche parts unless they are responsible for the failure. That is simply a matter of fact as stated in the terms and conditions of the warranty. End of argument. If you are paranoid about the interpretation of the policy then fine, but I have had two warranty claims settled and no one inspected the brake pads, discs or battery. A refusal for a claim for the engine or transmission because non 'N' tyres were fitted would be laughed out of court and Porsche know it. There has never been such a refusal to my knowledge because in my experience Porsche have always acted within the terms of the warranty. Any factual feedback would be most welcome.
I'm amazed that you can't grasp the meaning of the relevant policy. Any company or insurance company would strictly apply the wording, most including Porsche act reasonably in doing so, if they don't then they know that legal recourse is the probable result. Trying to avoid responsibility as you suggest is absurd, it hasn't happened to my knowledge, I'm still awaiting any evidence. For sure fitting non Porsche parts is a risk if fitted to critical components but even then Porsche must establish that the fault lies with that part. No company can simply decide whether, on a whim, they feel like honouring the contract, they always risk legal action. The same applies to servicing, using a non OPC does not invalidate your warranty unless Porsche can establish that the fault resulted from that service or other work. The independants fully understand this and will only use Porsche parts where critical, for instance, oil filters, and always follow the correct procedures.
Edited by Baz99 on Thursday 25th May 07:56
I have known Porsche cancel a warranty because an owner had fitted Gemballa front & rear spoilers, i've known an OPC insist that an original battery & N rated tyres be fitted to a car before they would honour the warranty claim for an alternator, granted these were not in the UK but yes Porsche and their dealer networks can be that pedantic.
More importantly though why would you buy a Porsche, maintain it within the main dealer network, pay for the warranty and not fit the manufacturer recommended tyres? N rated tyres are rated for a reason, they are designed and tested to work with the car to provide excellent handing characteristics, so why wouldn't you use them, the savings are minor on the scale of things.
I have heard someone quite aptly compare putting cheap tyres on a Porsche as walking around in an Armani Suit with flip flops on.....
More importantly though why would you buy a Porsche, maintain it within the main dealer network, pay for the warranty and not fit the manufacturer recommended tyres? N rated tyres are rated for a reason, they are designed and tested to work with the car to provide excellent handing characteristics, so why wouldn't you use them, the savings are minor on the scale of things.
I have heard someone quite aptly compare putting cheap tyres on a Porsche as walking around in an Armani Suit with flip flops on.....
NAS90 said:
I have known Porsche cancel a warranty because an owner had fitted Gemballa front & rear spoilers, i've known an OPC insist that an original battery & N rated tyres be fitted to a car before they would honour the warranty claim for an alternator, granted these were not in the UK but yes Porsche and their dealer networks can be that pedantic.
More importantly though why would you buy a Porsche, maintain it within the main dealer network, pay for the warranty and not fit the manufacturer recommended tyres? N rated tyres are rated for a reason, they are designed and tested to work with the car to provide excellent handing characteristics, so why wouldn't you use them, the savings are minor on the scale of things.
I have heard someone quite aptly compare putting cheap tyres on a Porsche as walking around in an Armani Suit with flip flops on.....
They cannot legally cancel the warranty for fitting spoilers, they can point out any detrimental effects. Insisting that a Porsche battery and 'N' tyres are fitted before changing an alternator is absurd, they were not, however, refusing to honour the contract, perhaps they were refusing to renew it. I agree with your reasoning for fitting 'N' rated tyres and do so myself, however the point is that not doing so doesn't invalidate your warranty. Porsche have been known to supply new 991's with non 'N' rated tyres.More importantly though why would you buy a Porsche, maintain it within the main dealer network, pay for the warranty and not fit the manufacturer recommended tyres? N rated tyres are rated for a reason, they are designed and tested to work with the car to provide excellent handing characteristics, so why wouldn't you use them, the savings are minor on the scale of things.
I have heard someone quite aptly compare putting cheap tyres on a Porsche as walking around in an Armani Suit with flip flops on.....
Edited by Baz99 on Thursday 25th May 08:27
Baz99 said:
I'm amazed that you can't grasp the meaning of the relevant policy. Any company or insurance company would strictly apply the wording, most including Porsche act reasonably in doing so, if they don't then they know that legal recourse is the probable result. Trying to avoid responsibility as you suggest is absurd, it hasn't happened to my knowledge, I'm still awaiting any evidence. For sure fitting non Porsche parts is a risk if fitted to critical components but even then Porsche must establish that the fault lies with that part.
You're still missing the point - what proof do they have to provide to you that the fault lies with the non-OPC part?Baz99 said:
No company can simply decide whether, on a whim, they feel like honouring the contract, they always risk legal action. The same applies to servicing, using a non OPC does not invalidate your warranty unless Porsche can establish that the fault resulted from that service or other work. The independants fully understand this and will only use Porsche parts where critical, for instance, oil filters, and always follow the correct procedures.
How do you know this?What prof can you provide that the 'correct procedures were followed' in the event of a claim, if Porsche say otherwise?
sidicks said:
How do you know this?
What prof can you provide that the 'correct procedures were followed' in the event of a claim, if Porsche say otherwise?
No, you are missing the point. The question is 'What effect does fitting non approved parts have on your warranty' the answer is none, the warranty is still valid. The arguments here all revolve around how Porsche may view or act upon these parts or procedures in the event of a claim. There is no evidence to show that they behave unreasonably and ultimately, like everything in life, any dispute would have to go to court who would examine the wording of the contract and decide if either party is behaving unreasonably. But this is all beside the point, imagining worst case scenarios is pointless as the evidence shows that Porsche are not unreasonable.What prof can you provide that the 'correct procedures were followed' in the event of a claim, if Porsche say otherwise?
Baz99 said:
No, you are missing the point. The question is 'What effect does fitting non approved parts have on your warranty' the answer is none, the warranty is still valid.
That's somewhat meaningless given that the validity of the warranty will only be determined at the time of a claim.Baz99 said:
The arguments here all revolve around how Porsche may view or act upon these parts or procedures in the event of a claim. There is no evidence to show that they behave unreasonably and ultimately,
Once again, how is the average person on the street to know whether refusing a claim because non-standard parts were fitted was 'reasonable' or not.What onus is on Porsche to prove the cause - 'reasonable belief', 'beyond all reasonable doubt', some other woolly metric?
Regardless of whether you think they will be 'reasonable', that's a highly subjective measure when the outcome - claim is accepted or rejected - is so binary.
Baz99 said:
like everything in life, any dispute would have to go to courtwho would examine the wording of the contract and decide if either party is behaving unreasonably.
Do would you start court proceedings for a £50 claim, £100 claim, £500 claim? Baz99 said:
But this is all beside the point, imagining worst case scenarios is pointless as the evidence shows that Porsche are not unreasonable.
See above (and numerous other posts where cmoose has already explained this).The warranty is valid whilst you comply with it's terms and conditions, they apply to Porsche also. What if you fit N tyres and genuine parts but they still refuse your claim because they say you've over revved it, what do you do then? Ask for independant confirmation, threaten legal action. Ultimately you have to trust. End of.
Baz99 said:
The warranty is valid whilst you comply with it's terms and conditions, they apply to Porsche also. What if you fit N tyres and genuine parts but they still refuse your claim because they say you've over revved it, what do you do then? Ask for independant confirmation, threaten legal action. Ultimately you have to trust. End of.
Ultimately there are some risks worth taking and some which are clearly not - I know my personal approach and would advise others the same. You may choose a different (more risky) option!anonymous said:
[redacted]
I agree with you. It is not dissimilar from people being "creative" with their car insurance policies, by not declaring things that might potentially increase their premium. In those situations those people are basically driving on a policy in name only, which begs the question why bother paying for insurance at all if it has no weight? (beyond not getting spotted by Police/ANPR).The terms of the extended warranty are well known, unambiguous, and it is the customer's choice to be bound by them. If it says no non-N rated tyres, or no fluffy dice in the window, then breaking that contract at the very least runs the risk of a serious claim being avoided. It doesn't matter how illogical or unfair these terms might be, there is no point at all in signing up to be bound by them and then undermining them yourself. You'd have the illusion of being protected by the warranty, and your wallet would be considerably lighter, without anything substantial or reliable to show for it.
For what it's worth my experience of speaking to OPCs about N-rated tyres is that they will basically fall between either telling you outright that it's not allowed, or suggesting they be changed around come inspection (if that's even an option which it might not be in certain breakdown scenarios). I haven't yet come across one that will formally say that they will warranty having non N-rated tyres for the simple reason that they know they can't make that kind of promise when it is a breach of the terms.
Edited by Durzel on Thursday 25th May 18:03
Also regards the whole notion of taking Porsche to court in the event of a car having an invalidated extended warranty - good luck with that.
The policy documentation explicitly specifies no modified parts, and N-rated tyres. it is entirely academic what difference it makes to the car having non-N rated tyres or not, from a safety, reliability, etc point of view. I got absolutely nowhere trying to get Porsche and my local OPC to let me fit MPSS tyres to my car - even though they were demonstrably better in every conceivable test. As has been said above - the only way this kind of contract can work is in absolutes, as soon as you start getting into "sensible mods are ok" then it becomes completely unmanagable and unwarrantable.
You absolutely will not get anywhere in court arguing that you fitting non N-rated tyres shouldn't invalidate your extended warranty. Porsche will simply rock up with the T&Cs and say that "N-rated tyres have been tested and validated for this model of car blah blah" and that will be that. At the end of the day they will have your signature on a piece of paper that says that you agree to be bound by these terms. Their requirement that you use N-rated tyres only is not egregious as terms go, it is not as if they are saying you have to wear corduroy trousers every time you drive the car. As such I can't see any court enforcing a contract with reasonable terms that the customer has chosen to invalidate wilfully.
It comes down to a simple choice really - you can believe you're still covered if you start modding your car, or fitting non N-rated tyres, and there is a chance that on a small claim it might fly under the radar. You can bet though on any substantial claim Porsche would be all over your car with a fine tooth comb, and non N-rated tyres would be enough for them to avoid it completely, irrespective of the proximity of the fault.
With respect Baz99 I think you are confusing the manufacturers warranty (which is "imposed" upon the customer on a new/nearly new car) with the extended warranty, which is essentially an insurance contract. You are right that Porsche would have to prove a mod was due to or likely to be a significant proximate cause of a fault with the manufacturers warranty. They also can't stop you taking the car outside the network for servicing & parts (block exemption rules). For the extended warranty they can pretty much specify whatever terms they want - within reason - and since you choose to sign up for it, it's not something imposed upon you, and therefore it's not unreasonable for you to be bound by those terms.
The policy documentation explicitly specifies no modified parts, and N-rated tyres. it is entirely academic what difference it makes to the car having non-N rated tyres or not, from a safety, reliability, etc point of view. I got absolutely nowhere trying to get Porsche and my local OPC to let me fit MPSS tyres to my car - even though they were demonstrably better in every conceivable test. As has been said above - the only way this kind of contract can work is in absolutes, as soon as you start getting into "sensible mods are ok" then it becomes completely unmanagable and unwarrantable.
You absolutely will not get anywhere in court arguing that you fitting non N-rated tyres shouldn't invalidate your extended warranty. Porsche will simply rock up with the T&Cs and say that "N-rated tyres have been tested and validated for this model of car blah blah" and that will be that. At the end of the day they will have your signature on a piece of paper that says that you agree to be bound by these terms. Their requirement that you use N-rated tyres only is not egregious as terms go, it is not as if they are saying you have to wear corduroy trousers every time you drive the car. As such I can't see any court enforcing a contract with reasonable terms that the customer has chosen to invalidate wilfully.
It comes down to a simple choice really - you can believe you're still covered if you start modding your car, or fitting non N-rated tyres, and there is a chance that on a small claim it might fly under the radar. You can bet though on any substantial claim Porsche would be all over your car with a fine tooth comb, and non N-rated tyres would be enough for them to avoid it completely, irrespective of the proximity of the fault.
With respect Baz99 I think you are confusing the manufacturers warranty (which is "imposed" upon the customer on a new/nearly new car) with the extended warranty, which is essentially an insurance contract. You are right that Porsche would have to prove a mod was due to or likely to be a significant proximate cause of a fault with the manufacturers warranty. They also can't stop you taking the car outside the network for servicing & parts (block exemption rules). For the extended warranty they can pretty much specify whatever terms they want - within reason - and since you choose to sign up for it, it's not something imposed upon you, and therefore it's not unreasonable for you to be bound by those terms.
Edited by Durzel on Thursday 25th May 18:14
Well at least we have established that fitting non 'N' rated tyres or other parts does not invalidate the contract. The argument revolves around whether Porsche would use this as an an excuse to avoid their obligations. The contract quite clearly states that the part or procedure must be responsible for the problem, non 'N' tyres, non genuine discs, pads, batteries, LED cabin lights, intake grills etc etc would have to be established as the cause. Exactly how any of the these could be responsible for any problem beyond their immediate domain is difficult to imagine. Any company could try to avoid their obligations by using specious excuses or reasons, something to be aware of with car insurance, but I do not know of any incident where Porsche have acted in such an unreasonable manner. Ultimately the law is there to judge on any dispute, the test of reasonableness is applied and no company is going to risk action unless they have a solid case, your example of bore scoring caused by a battery would be laughed out of court. In my experience Porsche have always acted in a reasonable and responsible manner, with the two claims that I have had no one has leapt out to inspect the tyres, battery etc to try to avoid responsibility. If they find during the rectification that the problem has been caused by a non genuine or modified part then they have reasonable grounds for refusal, one may argue that your after market exhaust is not responsible for your engine problem but you have placed yourself in a vulnerable position. The warranty is a simple contract, with easy to understand terms and conditions, it is a myth that fitting non Porsche parts invalidates it, they may compromise it but only if it can be established that they are directly responsible for the claim.
Edited by Baz99 on Friday 26th May 07:30
Edited by Baz99 on Friday 26th May 07:52
Edited by Baz99 on Friday 26th May 07:57
Baz99 said:
Well at least we have established that fitting non 'N' rated tyres or other parts does not invalidate the contract. The argument revolves around whether Porsche would use this as an an excuse to avoid their obligations. The contract quite clearly states that the part or procedure must be responsible for the problem, non 'N' tyres, non genuine discs, pads, batteries, LED cabin lights, intake grills etc etc would have to be established as the cause. Exactly how any of the these could be responsible for any problem beyond their immediate domain is difficult to imagine. Any company could try to avoid their obligations by using specious excuses or reasons, something to be aware of with car insurance, but I do not know of any incident where Porsche have acted in such an unreasonable manner. Ultimately the law is there to judge on any dispute, the test of reasonableness is applied and no company is going to risk action unless they have a solid case, your example of bore scoring caused by a battery would be laughed out of court. In my experience Porsche have always acted in a reasonable and responsible manner, with the two claims that I have had no one has leapt out to inspect the tyres, battery etc to try to avoid responsibility. If they find during the rectification that the problem has been caused by a non genuine or modified part then they have reasonable grounds for refusal, one may argue that your after market exhaust is not responsible for your engine problem but you have placed yourself in a vulnerable position. The warranty is a simple contract, with easy to understand terms and conditions, it is a myth that fitting non Porsche parts invalidates it, they may compromise it but only if it can be established that they are directly responsible for the claim.
Key words highlighted.The point is that, in the event of a dispute, the onus would be on the customer to prove the part wasn't responsible for the claim.
And the benefits of non-warranty parts would likely outweigh the potential issues if a rational approach is taken.
Baz99 said:
Fine, so we all accept that fitting non standard parts does not invalidate the warranty.
No we don't, and define "invalidate". By fitting non OEM parts you don't miraculously get a letter from Porsche saying your warranty is null and void. The validity is only tested at the point a claim is made is it not?Baz99 said:
If Porsche refuse to honour any claim it is up to them to justify it
True, and if you disagree what then? As cmoose says you're without the car while you argue the toss.Baz99 said:
Shouldn't be to difficult to exonerate your tyres.
Good luck fighting Porsche if they say your non-spec tyres are the cause of a fault. I reckon their pockets are deeper than yours.Twinfan said:
No we don't, and define "invalidate". By fitting non OEM parts you don't miraculously get a letter from Porsche saying your warranty is null and void. The validity is only tested at the point a claim is made is it not?
A point I made previously.Twinfan said:
Baz99 said:
If Porsche refuse to honour any claim it is up to them to justify it
True, and if you disagree what then? As cmoose says you're without the car while you argue the toss.Gassing Station | Porsche General | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff