Does a CAI void any warrantee?
Thread Starter
Senior Member
Joined: 08-12-08
Posts: 748
Likes: 0
From: Gilbert, AZ
Does a CAI void any warrantee?
I am looking to install a F5 FUJITA Air Intake and am wondering if it will void any warrantee? Also, side note, how does it sound if anyone has one. Thanks guys
no part will void your warrenty unless they can prove that it caused the failure. for example, gm cant deny you warenty for a blown strut because of your intake. however, if you lower your car, they will deny you warrenty on a blown strut.
Banned
Joined: 12-18-05
Posts: 17,838
Likes: 1
From: North Jersey
do you live with your parents? do they pay for the car at all, or do they have their name on the title?
if you answered yes to any of these, think of what happens in this situation. your rear brakes go out. the car goes to the dealer. the dealer tells your parents that they won't fix it under warranty because of the parts you put on.
if you don't live with your parents, they don't pay for the car, etc, read up on your rights and then get the intake.
if you answered yes to any of these, think of what happens in this situation. your rear brakes go out. the car goes to the dealer. the dealer tells your parents that they won't fix it under warranty because of the parts you put on.
if you don't live with your parents, they don't pay for the car, etc, read up on your rights and then get the intake.
Thread Starter
Senior Member
Joined: 08-12-08
Posts: 748
Likes: 0
From: Gilbert, AZ
do you live with your parents? do they pay for the car at all, or do they have their name on the title?
if you answered yes to any of these, think of what happens in this situation. your rear brakes go out. the car goes to the dealer. the dealer tells your parents that they won't fix it under warranty because of the parts you put on.
if you don't live with your parents, they don't pay for the car, etc, read up on your rights and then get the intake.
if you answered yes to any of these, think of what happens in this situation. your rear brakes go out. the car goes to the dealer. the dealer tells your parents that they won't fix it under warranty because of the parts you put on.
if you don't live with your parents, they don't pay for the car, etc, read up on your rights and then get the intake.
its just air. I mean, it just modifies the air intake, not altering anything else. Again, not really getting what your saying here either.
Last edited by cjlee07; Oct 15, 2008 at 01:43 AM. Reason: Automerged Doublepost
Senior Member
Joined: 08-10-08
Posts: 869
Likes: 0
From: Washington
He means your parents are going to be pissed when something breaks and warranty wont fix it because some Stupid ****(parents will think this) that you did. If you have a co signer or live with parents or guardians best to keep it stock. So no one can get pissed when your car breaks except you.
Thread Starter
Senior Member
Joined: 08-12-08
Posts: 748
Likes: 0
From: Gilbert, AZ
He means your parents are going to be pissed when something breaks and warranty wont fix it because some Stupid ****(parents will think this) that you did. If you have a co signer or live with parents or guardians best to keep it stock. So no one can get pissed when your car breaks except you.
So, back to the basic question, Will a CAI void any warrantee and if so, how serious of a void is that? Like how likely is that item to break/how easy or cheap to fix. Thanks
Thread Starter
Senior Member
Joined: 08-12-08
Posts: 748
Likes: 0
From: Gilbert, AZ
Thread Starter
Senior Member
Joined: 08-12-08
Posts: 748
Likes: 0
From: Gilbert, AZ
After all that rambling, my point is I agree. ha
read up on the modification laws. Magnuson-Moss act. Basically, they have to prove that the CAI is what broke the engine...
IF they ever took it to court, id just say "you guys sell a warrantied intake for the car, and i bought an intake...whats the difference between the two that makes mine void the warranty but yours not void the warranty.
IF they ever took it to court, id just say "you guys sell a warrantied intake for the car, and i bought an intake...whats the difference between the two that makes mine void the warranty but yours not void the warranty.
Thread Starter
Senior Member
Joined: 08-12-08
Posts: 748
Likes: 0
From: Gilbert, AZ
read up on the modification laws. Magnuson-Moss act. Basically, they have to prove that the CAI is what broke the engine...
IF they ever took it to court, id just say "you guys sell a warrantied intake for the car, and i bought an intake...whats the difference between the two that makes mine void the warranty but yours not void the warranty.
IF they ever took it to court, id just say "you guys sell a warrantied intake for the car, and i bought an intake...whats the difference between the two that makes mine void the warranty but yours not void the warranty.
^^ basically yes. this doesnt however mean that a dealership wont try and refuse a warranty claim...but you gotta argue it with them...it helps to bring up the name of the act...and if they STILL wont, its usually easier to just go to a different dealer than make a small claims lawsuit...obviously
Thread Starter
Senior Member
Joined: 08-12-08
Posts: 748
Likes: 0
From: Gilbert, AZ
^^ basically yes. this doesnt however mean that a dealership wont try and refuse a warranty claim...but you gotta argue it with them...it helps to bring up the name of the act...and if they STILL wont, its usually easier to just go to a different dealer than make a small claims lawsuit...obviously
the name of the act, as in a legal act... the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnuson-Moss_Warranty_Act
your argument would have to be that an intake does not cause unreasonable added stresses to an engine, and these same stresses can be found by driving in colder weather...and should thus be covered under warranty
turbocharging your car would therefore be argued (quite well) to be an unreasonabe use of your product (engine) and is way outside the design tolerances and specifications of the product
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnuson-Moss_Warranty_Act
Under the terms of the Act, ambiguous statements in a warranty are construed against the drafter of the warranty.
Under a full warranty, in the case of a defect, malfunction, or failure to conform with the written warranty, the warrantor:
must, as a minimum, remedy the consumer product within a reasonable time and without charge;
may not impose any limitation on the duration of any implied warranty on the product;
may not exclude or limit consequential damages for a breach of any written or implied warranty on the product, unless the exclusion or limitation conspicuously appears on the face of the warranty; and
if the product, or a component part, contains a defect or malfunction, must permit the consumer to elect either a refund or replacement without charge, after a reasonable number of repair attempts
must, as a minimum, remedy the consumer product within a reasonable time and without charge;
may not impose any limitation on the duration of any implied warranty on the product;
may not exclude or limit consequential damages for a breach of any written or implied warranty on the product, unless the exclusion or limitation conspicuously appears on the face of the warranty; and
if the product, or a component part, contains a defect or malfunction, must permit the consumer to elect either a refund or replacement without charge, after a reasonable number of repair attempts
The federal minimum standards for full warranties are waived if the warrantor can show that the problem associated with a warranted consumer product was caused by damage while in the possession of the consumer, or by unreasonable use, including a failure to provide reasonable and necessary maintenance.
turbocharging your car would therefore be argued (quite well) to be an unreasonabe use of your product (engine) and is way outside the design tolerances and specifications of the product