momentum warranties - the wear and tear scam

marlot

photome wrote: »

Why does the type of car and mileage make a difference.

Because they do eventually wear out!

So if the policy has a 'wear and tear' clause and the OP is complaining about the warranty company applying that clause it would be helpful to understand whether the company are being reasonable, or not.

If the vehicle has done 5,000 miles then it would be reasonable to think the turbo would not be worn out. If it has done 200,000 then the turbo bearings are quite probably worn out.

JQ.

marlot wrote: »

If the vehicle has done 5,000 miles then it would be reasonable to think the turbo would not be worn out. If it has done 200,000 then the turbo bearings are quite probably worn out.

What you're saying is that on a 200,000 mile car a warranty is pointless because every mechanical item on the car becomes a wear and tear item. It is for the warranty company to price in the risk accordingly or refuse cover.

If the Warranty Company did not want to offer a warranty on a turbo on a car with 200,000 miles then they should not have provided such a warranty.

Do you think the cost of health insurance for a 20yr old fitness instructor is the same price as a 85yr old smoker - no, because the insurer prices in the risk.

marlot

JQ. wrote: »

What you're saying is that on a 200,000 mile car a warranty is pointless because every mechanical item on the car becomes a wear and tear item...

If the warranty contains a wear and tear exclusion, then for many mechanical items, pretty much yes. ie. those with bearings etc which don't last for ever.

The warranty might still be useful for non-mechanical parts though - ECU failures, electronics, etc.

This is why not all warranties are equal. Buying one which has wear and tear exclusions means that you will often have problems claiming. The very worst have additional clauses for 'betterment' [expecting a further contribution because the car is somehow better than one which has not been repaired] and 'non payment of consequential damage' [so if a water pump bearing fails and the cam belt breaks, they won't pay for the engine repair, just for the water pump].

I have never bought an extended warranty, on any product (car, washing machine, whatever) and never will. I prefer to self insure.

I buy cars new or nearly new, and join the relevant owners group forum on the internet. This means that I can find out about any common faults/in service upgrades and get them done during the manufacturer warranty period. I pay particular attention when the warranty is coming to an end. I normally keep my cars to 10+ years old - partly because I've taken the action when someone else foots the bill.

marlot

PS. To the OP. If you feel you have sufficient evidence to show that you think the repair should have been covered, you could launch a small claims court action to recover the money. This doesn't cost a huge amount and you might actually stand a good chance if you can get some sort of expert opinion that it should have been covered.

fivetide

It will also depend on how the car is driven. Sort hops, cold engine but hitting boost is bad. Spirited driving followed by immediate switch off without some off boost cruising, also bad etc etc.

I do agree the premium should reflect the risk though. That makes complete sense so providing the insurance company know the age and miles of the car they should price cover appropriately. After all, that is how insurance companies work and balance the risk of having to pay out on the policy.

5t.

mkirkby

rxbren wrote: »

fact turbos dont last the life of the engine let alone the life of the car

Bit of a sweeping statement that. I'm guessing most do if treated with respect and serviced correctly.

car history:-

Nissan 200SX. Scrapped at 140,000 miles. Original turbo
Fiat Coupe. Scrapped at 150,000miles. Original turbo
Subaru Impreza. Still going at 95000miles. Original turbo
Citroen Xantia. Still going at 196,000 miles. Original turbo.

How does that happen then? (& yes, the performance cars were/are driven 'enthusiastically')

Any more people with long lived turbos?

marlot

The one on my mondeo failed at 60,500 miles. Led to some negotiation between the lease company and the ford dealer as to who should pay.

I've now opted out of the car schemes, so any failure will be down to my pockets.

forgotmyname

Exactly marlot they can fail at any time. Sometimes its just bad luck.

Sisters car got an engine light on and, Plugged in a laptop based tester, Drove it around the block, Checking the figures. Seems OK hang on your boost is a bit low. Screech noise starts and boost drops to zero. Shaft in the turbo snapped.

Luckily we stopped the engine from ingesting all its own oil and destroying itself.

fivetide

forgotmyname wrote: »

And yes a 100k mile Mondeo and a Mercedes will be different. In my experience the Mondeo will be more reliable.

According to the latest warranty direct figures it seems a 4 year old E-Class is the most reliable car you can buy - by some margin.

http://www.pistonheads.com/news/default.asp?storyId=26404

Also for MrKirby, my old Scooby had over 100k on it despite running 300bhp through the standard turbo. No smoke or turbo issues at all. Car warmed up/down and serviced properly.

5t.

s_b

post 2 sums everything up nicely
unfortunately some people would argue with their own shadow that white is black