Warranty question

[tim0409]

I wonder if anybody has experience with warranty claims with higher mileage cars, and how warranty companies interpret wear and tear? At present I have a diesel BMW with 90k with a comprehensive BMW (Mondial) warranty and I am trying to budget ahead for the next two years (to work out if I should keep/sell it). The thought suddenly occurred to me that if something like the turbo lets go as the mileage increases over 100k, they may use wear and tear to get out of paying for the claim. Any thoughts on what is a "reasonable" life span for major components?

[Ozzie Osmond]

Have you tried reading the warranty??

[tim0409]

Ozzie Osmond said:

Have you tried reading the warranty??

Thanks for your very helpful response. Of course I have read the warranty and it states they will consider wear and tear when assessing a claim - I am asking for contributions from people who have had experiences of making a claim on a higher mileage car.

[anonymous-user]

I expect it uses terms like 'reasonable' and 'wear and tear' without defining those terms specifically hence the OP's question.

[All that jazz]

tim0409 said:

Thanks for your very helpful response. Of course I have read the warranty and it states they will consider wear and tear when assessing a claim - I am asking for contributions from people who have had experiences of making a claim on a higher mileage car.

If they can get out of paying they will, and you can be 100% sure the 'reasonable wear and tear' clause will be firmly applied when you tell them you want a new turbo on your 100k motor.

[Ozzie Osmond]

tim0409 said:

Thanks for your very helpful response. Of course I have read the warranty and it states they will consider wear and tear when assessing a claim - I am asking for contributions from people who have had experiences of making a claim on a higher mileage car.

Maybe, but the warranty will contain a description of what is covered and what is not covered. It is impossible for anyone to give any useful guidance based on "reasonable wear and tear" alone.

One thing is absolutely certain, there is no warranty which will cover every mechanical failure on a car that age. Usually older car warranties (in my experience) are limited to unexpected failure of major items. If it's "normal" for a turbo to need replacment at some point around your age/mileage then it's very unlikely you will be able to claim.

At the end of the day it's a warranty, not a maintenance contract, and the small print needs to be read very carefully.

[Ozzie Osmond]

Just did a click on BMW - which warranty do you have?

http://www.bmw-warranty.co.uk/Pages/Home.aspx

[tim0409]

Ozzie Osmond said:

tim0409 said:

Thanks for your very helpful response. Of course I have read the warranty and it states they will consider wear and tear when assessing a claim - I am asking for contributions from people who have had experiences of making a claim on a higher mileage car.

Maybe, but the warranty will contain a description of what is covered and what is not covered. It is impossible for anyone to give any useful guidance based on "reasonable wear and tear" alone.

One thing is absolutely certain, there is no warranty which will cover every mechanical failure on a car that age. Usually older car warranties (in my experience) are limited to unexpected failure of major items. If it's "normal" for a turbo to need replacment at some point around your age/mileage then it's very unlikely you will be able to claim.

At the end of the day it's a warranty, not a maintenance contract, and the small print needs to be read very carefully.

Thanks for this. I have a comprehensive warranty and because I pay monthly I am covered over 100k. The policy states -

Wear and tear exclusions - As the insured vehicle’s age and mileage increases, more components will reach the end of their serviceable life due to normal wear and tear. These components will require replacement at your cost and will not
be reimbursed under this policy.

If you take a turbo replacement at say 110k - what would be deemed a reasonable "serviceable life"? You are correct though, my previous mindset was that they would cover most things based on the excellent experience with previous claims, but obviously this will change as the mileage increases, hence the post. The main reason I have the warranty is to cover timing chain failure, which is not uncommon on this year of N47 engine.

[All that jazz]

tim0409 said:

The policy states -

Wear and tear exclusions - As the insured vehicle’s age and mileage increases, more components will reach the end of their serviceable life due to normal wear and tear. These components will require replacement at your cost and will not
be reimbursed under this policy.

If you take a turbo replacement at say 110k - what would be deemed a reasonable "serviceable life"?

What do you think?

[the stigs dad]

Save your cash and have a fighting fund. Extended Warranties are a waste of time IMO

[tim0409]

All that jazz said:

tim0409 said:

The policy states -

Wear and tear exclusions - As the insured vehicle’s age and mileage increases, more components will reach the end of their serviceable life due to normal wear and tear. These components will require replacement at your cost and will not
be reimbursed under this policy.

If you take a turbo replacement at say 110k - what would be deemed a reasonable "serviceable life"?

What do you think?

Why the roll eyes, or are you just rude? Having never replaced a turbo I have no idea how they view reasonable "service life", hence the question.

[N Dentressangle]

I thought you'd decided to sell it?

http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a...

Anyway, I doubt BMW would foot the entire cost of a turbo on a 100k mile 118d. The part will be about £1200, plus £3-400 labour to fit. They would want you to bear some or all of that cost, frequently the cost of the part.

If it's worrying you - and it obviously is - buy a car with cheaper running costs.. I wouldn't want to pay £600pa for a warranty either.

Put your BMW on Ebay as a classified ad. Plenty of nice photos and a good description will sell it. Be realistic about its value: look at completed listings for similar cars to find what people actually paid.

[tim0409]

N Dentressangle said:

I thought you'd decided to sell it?

http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a...

Anyway, I doubt BMW would foot the entire cost of a turbo on a 100k mile 118d. The part will be about £1200, plus £3-400 labour to fit. They would want you to bear some or all of that cost, frequently the cost of the part.

If it's worrying you - and it obviously is - buy a car with cheaper running costs.. I wouldn't want to pay £600pa for a warranty either.

Put your BMW on Ebay as a classified ad. Plenty of nice photos and a good description will sell it. Be realistic about its value: look at completed listings for similar cars to find what people actually paid.

Still trying to decide whether or not to sell it, although I have stuck an advert on ebay to see if I get any interest in the meantime.

[All that jazz]

tim0409 said:

Why the roll eyes, or are you just rude? Having never replaced a turbo I have no idea how they view reasonable "service life", hence the question.

Well I'd have thought it was pretty obvious to anyone possessing some common sense. Warranties are insurance policies and like all insurance companies they will do their utmost to get out of paying wherever they can. I will bet my house that if you put in a claim for a new blower on a 100k motor with that clause about "general wear and tear" they'll laugh in your face and show you the door. Unless you want to spend a small fortune arguing the toss with them in court over what "general wear and tear" means then stop shelling out for pointless warranties that aren't worth the paper they're written on and put the money aside in a separate emergency fund account instead.

[Engineer1]

At a good guess if there is a perception or a load of chatter that that specific engine has x fail at y miles and yours fails at y then it was a service life failure, if yours fails at half the normal amount then it is likely to be claimable.

[Little Lofty]

I would guess at 100,000 miles they would argue any failure would be down to wear and tear.Ive just put a warranty on my car which is 5 years old but only has 25000 miles on the clock, I think in my case, it would be reasonable to expect that most failures would be covered due to the low mileage , I simply wouldn't bother if it had done close to 100,000 miles.