GL1800Riders Forums banner

Honda Warranty

2K views 24 replies 10 participants last post by  rmcapozzi 
#1 ·
Have any of you Darksiders,,,had and problem with getting extended warranty items corrected after changing to CT? Had a dealership refuse to repair noise in differential (says it is a bad bearing in ring and pinion) and is caused by the tire! :evil::cry:Thanks
 
#2 ·
I think your dealer in a cheapskate! You must not have got a trike take off to put your C/T on so you could put the M/T back on for warranty work.
 
#3 ·
I have not had any issues, but then again I have not had any drive line issues under warranty. Many on here keep a spare wheel with moto tire mounted for such occasions where an issue crops up that involves the drive train.

Personally, I think that particular dealer is full of stuffings. I have pulled a number of wheelies (and also run the snot out of the bike) with the CT and I have never had any drive line issues. But then again, when you are a dealer looking for an excuse, I guess one excuse is as good as another.

Your signature says your bike is a 2003. You have an '03 that is still under warranty? How does that work. Buy a final drive from a trike take-off and put it on.
 
#4 ·
Any modification made that is not OEM equivalent or not street legal or not done by an authorized service tech in an authorized dealer service area MAY cause a warranty claim to be rejected.
That's as simple as it can be explained.
Some dealers would take a car tire as an unauthorized modification, just as they would trailer hitches and heel/toe shifters along w/trike conversions and rake kits.
Also, different dealers have different ideas of what's OK and what's not:shrug:
 
#6 ·
Any modification made that is not OEM equivalent or not street legal or not done by an authorized service tech in an authorized dealer service area MAY cause a warranty claim to be rejected.
That's as simple as it can be explained.
Some dealers would take a car tire as an unauthorized modification, just as they would trailer hitches and heel/toe shifters along w/trike conversions and rake kits.
Also, different dealers have different ideas of what's OK and what's not:shrug:
Yeah this what the dealership is quoting me ,,,, the bike has a hitch,,, didn't say anything about it,,, it has the extended warrany,,, the bike is an 06 with 225,000 miles,,, I think they just don't want to do the work and using any excuse to get around it!
 
#7 ·
I have not had any issues, but then again I have not had any drive line issues under warranty. Many on here keep a spare wheel with moto tire mounted for such occasions where an issue crops up that involves the drive train.

Personally, I think that particular dealer is full of stuffings. I have pulled a number of wheelies (and also run the snot out of the bike) with the CT and I have never had any drive line issues. But then again, when you are a dealer looking for an excuse, I guess one excuse is as good as another.

Your signature says your bike is a 2003. You have an '03 that is still under warranty? How does that work. Buy a final drive from a trike take-off and put it on.
,,, Yes I do have on 03 showing on this page,,, The bike in Question happens to be an 06 with 225k miles on it,,, that makes it a different bike than in the picture,,,Hard to put that many miles on a bike set here and change pictures every day,,, sorry for the confusion:cry::confused:
 
#9 ·
Rear ends are very cheap having been removed for trike conversions.
Watch here and E-bay. Check w/any installers in your area.
You'll be surprised how cheap you can get one for.
Thanks Dawg,,,, problem is we have 2 of these complete units, under the bench in Arkansas, but the bike is broke in Ohio,,, and the bike has an unlimited millage extended warranty,,,bought the extra warranty for when something like this happens.... Honda doesn't care,,, and just repeats the warranty quote,,,,
 
#11 ·
Any modification made that is not OEM equivalent or not street legal or not done by an authorized service tech in an authorized dealer service area MAY cause a warranty claim to be rejected.
That's as simple as it can be explained.
Some dealers would take a car tire as an unauthorized modification, just as they would trailer hitches and heel/toe shifters along w/trike conversions and rake kits.
Also, different dealers have different ideas of what's OK and what's not:shrug:
Yes but I would take it to a different dealer, maybe with a motorcycle tire on the bike, but the Dealership cannot refuse warranty work........the next level up is Honda, and the final call lies somewhere in the court system........ you may or may not want to look at the Magnuson-Moss Act as it is the Federal Law that pertains to warantes...

BTW, a car tire is NOT a direct replacement but a modification to the vehicle......


According to the Act, they (the manufacturers) have to prove that the failure was the direct result of the installed aftermarket part, which is cost prohibitive.... meaning it would cost Honda more to void your warranty than to give you a brand new bike free and clear and to pay off your current bike.......

To read the text of the act you will have to find it a the Government Printing Office website... I think the text is HERE but I have not read it.... Interpretations are HERE
 
#12 ·
MT

Thanks Dawg,,,, problem is we have 2 of these complete units, under the bench in Arkansas, but the bike is broke in Ohio,,, and the bike has an unlimited millage extended warranty,,,bought the extra warranty for when something like this happens.... Honda doesn't care,,, and just repeats the warranty quote,,,,

This isn't right, so sorry that your having this problem after Paying good money for a warranty, But you are gonna need to find a Indy shop to mount a MT on there, then go to another Honda shop, hopefully the unit will hold up till then . FB :shrug:
 
#13 ·
Yes but I would take it to a different dealer, maybe with a motorcycle tire on the bike, but the Dealership cannot refuse warranty work........the next level up is Honda, and the final call lies somewhere in the court system........ you may or may not want to look at the Magnuson-Moss Act as it is the Federal Law that pertains to warantes...

BTW, a car tire is NOT a direct replacement but a modification to the vehicle......


According to the Act, they (the manufacturers) have to prove that the failure was the direct result of the installed aftermarket part, which is cost prohibitive.... meaning it would cost Honda more to void your warranty than to give you a brand new bike free and clear and to pay off your current bike.......

To read the text of the act you will have to find it a the Government Printing Office website... I think the text is HERE but I have not read it.... Interpretations are HERE
I knew this would come up! While several people believe what is posted above, it is not quite accurate!
A dealer can refuse a warranty claim and they do not have to prove the failure was due to an aftermarket part. Aftermarket replacement parts do not have to be covered by OEM warranty.
Adding items as previous mentioned can Void your warranty and it's up to you to prove those items didn't cause failures.
The MM act does not cover non-OEM add on or add "in" parts/modifications made to any warranted vehicle.
Please read the MM act in it's entirety and you shall learn.
To the extreme-what you say would mean one could highly modify the motor/add NO2 and then when you blow it up expect Honda to pay for a new motor. NOT!
 
#14 ·
The MM act does not cover non-OEM add on or add "in" parts/modifications made to any warranted vehicle.

dawg, not doubting you but would like some explanation. If not mistaken, one of the reasons for the MM was to keep vehicle mfgs from voiding your warranty because you used non-OEM product. For example, oil filters, oil, fluids, etc. In other words, if GM was to say your warranty is void because you used Mobil motor oil instead of GM brand motor oil, GM would have to prove this. Or, let's say you put a eye-level, aftermarket brake light on your car and the mfg wouldn't honor the warranty for a tranny failure.

What am I missing?
 
#15 ·
You are correct in that an equivalent item, such as filters as a good example, have been approved as replacement parts unless that item caused the failure.
As you noted, you are not going to have a warranty claim on a broken muffler clamp because you have a Fram air filter for example.
What I'm trying to tell you is if you or anyone else installs an after market item that is not approved by the manufacturer of the vehicle such as trailer hitch, heel/toe shifter and you have a tranny failure, you stand a very good chance of having a warranty claim denied for an unauthorized modification. In a case such as this the MM law is not invokable. You're on your own.
HD even has a warning printed in the SE section of their catalog stating in part, "Use of non-street legal parts or modifications not done by an factory tech at an authorized dealer will void your warranty." Even if the tech is the one that installs the unauthorized part sold by a HD dealer your warranty could be toast.
On another board a gentleman was really upset because he and his father had installed HD SE Cams in the fathers bike. Engine problem occurred and the dealership blamed it on improper install of the cams. No warranty.
 
#16 ·
...What I'm trying to tell you is if you or anyone else installs an after market item that is not approved by the manufacturer of the vehicle such as trailer hitch, heel/toe shifter and you have a tranny failure, you stand a very good chance of having a warranty claim denied for an unauthorized modification.
Thanks for responding. So in the paragraph above any aftermarket part, not approved by honda, may be used as an excuse to void the warranty or refuse a repair?
 
#19 ·
Thanks for responding. So in the paragraph above any aftermarket part, not approved by honda, may be used as an excuse to void the warranty or refuse a repair?
No not any aftermarket part. Specific replacement parts that can be involved in the failure, such as the wrong kind of oil filter that doesn't allow proper oil flow causing engine failure.
The Baker Air Wings remark is a good example of after market parts that would never be construed as causing a trunk lid hinge to break.
I think I've explained this enough.
Add a hitch, add a heel/toe shifter, add a car tire, change mufflers, cams, on and on, don't be surprised with a refusal of a warranty claim if the mod can be part of the failure.
It is truly unfortunate to still have a warranty and have a claim denied on a bearing in the rear because of having a CT but, that's the way it is for that dealer. The other problem is, most likely, your bike has now been flagged in the warranty system by this dealer. Putting on a MT and going to another dealer may not be an option!
 
#20 ·
I knew this would come up! While several people believe what is posted above, it is not quite accurate!
A dealer can refuse a warranty claim and they do not have to prove the failure was due to an aftermarket part. Aftermarket replacement parts do not have to be covered by OEM warranty.
Adding items as previous mentioned can Void your warranty and it's up to you to prove those items didn't cause failures.
The MM act does not cover non-OEM add on or add "in" parts/modifications made to any warranted vehicle.
Please read the MM act in it's entirety and you shall learn.
To the extreme-what you say would mean one could highly modify the motor/add NO2 and then when you blow it up expect Honda to pay for a new motor. NOT!

Actually...

(c) No warrantor may condition the continued validity of a warranty on the use of only authorized repair service and/or authorized replacement parts for non-warranty service and maintenance. For example, provisions such as, ``This warranty is void if service is performed by anyone other than an authorized `ABC' dealer and all replacement parts must be genuine `ABC' parts,'' and the like, are prohibited where the service or parts are not covered by the warranty. These provisions violate the Act in two ways. First, they [[Page 631]] violate the section 102 (c) ban against tying arrangements. Second, such provisions are deceptive under section 110 of the Act, because a warrantor cannot, as a matter of law, avoid liability under a written warranty where a defect is unrelated to the use by a consumer of ``unauthorized'' articles or service. This does not preclude a warrantor from expressly excluding liability for defects or damage caused by such ``unauthorized'' articles or service; nor does it preclude the warrantor from denying liability where the warrantor can demonstrate that the defect or damage was so caused.
While I understand your reasoning behind the NOS argument, it seems to me that if we take your argument in it's entirety, then a paint job would violate the warranty.

Basically, anything not done by the dealer would violate the warranty, and for that matter anything done by the dealer not involving OEM parts would violate the warranty.

Now, I'm not a lawyer, but it seems to me that there are three things in effect here.

1. For the NOS argument to work on a CT, you would have to prove that the CT would damage the bike. Not might damage it, but would without a doubt. NOS by it's nature causes damage to engines. I'm not a mechanic, but I've been told this is due to increased compression, increased revs, and increased heat. Anyone of which should be easy to verify and prove causes damage to the engine. A car tire is a bit more vauge at best. People assume that it is more dangerous, but is it more damaging to the bike? I've never seen anything that states so, and my problems started before I put the car tire on.

2. If we accept that a car tire violates the warranty, then we are looking at a situation where any tire, excepthe OEM tire violates the warranty. So you couldn't switch from a Dunlop to a Metzler. And that specifically violates the law.

3. If the tire failed, then the damage to it and from it would not be covered by the warranty. That's obvious. But if your tire does not fail, they do not have an out.

Their only real hope is to outwait you, and hope you don't make a stink.

But since I'm an *******, my first stop after being denied would be to the trunk where I have the relevant laws in hard copy, and if they continue to deny, I will make a stink like an unserviced portapot on the forth of july!
 
#21 ·
I knew this would come up! While several people believe what is posted above, it is not quite accurate!
A dealer can refuse a warranty claim and they do not have to prove the failure was due to an aftermarket part.
ONLY if the aftermarket part does not meet the oem spec. I can put a whamadyne alternator on my Honda, as long as it is functionally the same as the OEM part.

Aftermarket replacement parts do not have to be covered by OEM warranty. Adding items as previous mentioned can Void your warranty and it's up to you to prove those items didn't cause failures.
Not true, if you reas the federal laws above that were writeen due to the Magsun-Moss Act they cleary state that it is up to the manufacturer to prove where the failures came from.


The MM act does not cover non-OEM add on or add "in" parts/modifications made to any warranted vehicle.
Please read the MM act in it's entirety and you shall learn.
To the extreme-what you say would mean one could highly modify the motor/add NO2 and then when you blow it up expect Honda to pay for a new motor. NOT!
I agree, if they are Modification items, not direct repacemnet parts, that is why I put hte NO2 system on my 1985 Corvette the day after the warantee expired. True story.



The Dealer can clam he can turn down the wararntee, but the warantee was issued by the manufacutrer not the dealer, so if a dealer were to deny a claim I had, I would go to the manufacturer.... then here in Virgaina, the State coperatinon comission, then the consumer prodcut safty comission... etc.

I try NOT to take NO for an answer.....
 
#22 ·
ONLY if the aftermarket part does not meet the oem spec. I can put a whamadyne alternator on my Honda, as long as it is functionally the same as the OEM part.
Not disagreeing, just telling you what the real world is. Part must be proven to be an equivalent of OEM and that's not up to the dealer nor the manufacturer of the vehicle to do.


Not true, if you reas the federal laws above that were writeen due to the Magsun-Moss Act they cleary state that it is up to the manufacturer to prove where the failures came from.
Not disagreeing, just telling you what the real world is



I agree, if they are Modification items, not direct replacement parts, that is why I put hte NO2 system on my 1985 Corvette the day after the warantee expired. True story.



The Dealer can clam he can turn down the wararntee, but the warantee was issued by the manufacturer not the dealer, so if a dealer were to deny a claim I had, I would go to the manufacturer.... then here in Virgaina, the State coperatinon comission, then the consumer prodcut safty comission... etc.
In this case you are partially correct. However, an authorized dealer is an agent for the manufacturer and has the duty to reject warranty claims for various reasons, such as explained before and a biggy is abuse of the vehicle.

I try NOT to take NO for an answer.....
Anyway while the argument is going on as to whom is correct, your vehicle sets, piling up storage fees!
All such regulations are dreamed up by those whom have little actual knowledge of the very item(s) they are writing rules for.
All are open to interpretation which the enactors brother attn's. make millions in court trying.
 
#23 ·
I wonder....the so called "Extended Warranty" really isn't a manufacturer warranty. It is actually called a "protection plan" by Honda. I think it is more of an insurance/service contract than a warranty. So would the Magsun-Moss Act even apply? :shrug:

I'm thinking no.
 
#24 ·
I wonder....the so called "Extended Warranty" really isn't a manufacturer warranty. It is actually called a "protection plan" by Honda. I think it is more of an insurance/service contract than a warranty. So would the Magsun-Moss Act even apply? :shrug:

I'm thinking no.
"Honda Protection Plan" is Honda's copyrighted name for the extended warranty, available only while the initial 3yr(on Wings)warranty is still in affect.
Whether or not the above is a correct statement-I'm inclined to think, as far as invoking the MM act, the plan would be considered a warranty, no matter what Honda names the coverage.
Just not invokable for some things people think it would be for!
 
#25 ·
"Honda Protection Plan" is Honda's copyrighted name for the extended warranty, available only while the initial 3yr(on Wings)warranty is still in affect.
Whether or not the above is a correct statement-I'm inclined to think, as far as invoking the MM act, the plan would be considered a warranty, no matter what Honda names the coverage.
Just not invokable for some things people think it would be for!
Perhaps. It just makes me wonder why Honda would go through the trouble to not call their extended coverage a warranty if some legal difference didn't exist. :shrug:
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top