NEW WARRANTY

[okellyt]

ORIGINAL: DSM

ORIGINAL: okellyt To give some balance - so far (and I hasten to add so far) I have had three new Porsches and all three had warranty work needed - these have all been done without quibble and with good grace by my Essex OPC, who to date have always provided excellent care for my car sand have been very reasonable in response to issues/queries. Even knowing i was thinking of doing work to my 997 and therefore likely to fall outside the OPC's reach they spotted and fixed a minor RMS trickle as a full RMS issue under warranty. Before any one points to all three cars and says look reliability issues - my first two cars I did nearly 90k miles in between them - the 986 Boxster S presenting the known Intermediate shaft failure - no quibbles, new shaft and new engine. The second cars 987S issues were due to it being hit twice by rather careless drivers once with me in it from behind at 50mph while I was stationary. otherwise no problems in nearly 30k motoring. No issues with the 997 so far other than RMS (fingers crossed)

Tom, looking at your profile, there is no way your car can be legitimately accepted by your OPC for the new Warranty. If it was and a major claim was investigated, it would be rejected and you would not even get your Warranty fee back. I would suggest that your past history is not relevant, because the structure for, and terms of, the new Warranty are completely different from the old.

Good point well made. I am now outside of the OPC warranty fort he reasons you gave. Looking for something more local maybe with Parr or Machtech if they do one. All I was highlighting was that the normal assumption is it is the OPC's that are the Parriah. Here I dont think it is - which leaves either PGB or the underwritters, or that generic phrase for all conspiracy theorists, "them"[] - in this case the accountants. Who ever it was has, it appears, mis judged the market and is loosing a fair number of people who would otherwise still service, buy a more flexible warranty and because they were in the OPC buy new cars through the official network. Nothing sells the idea of a new car like seeing that lovely GT3/Turbo/Carerra PDK sat there at the garage, all lonely, looking for you to take it home.[] But first they have to get us coming back to the garages in a good frame of mind eg for a normal service. I would have re-newed the warranty if it a) was a sensible price and b) there was a senisble poilicy aorund whats excluded based on work done. All my work was done by a Prosche approved specialist, who have been using these parts and servicing the cars for years without a significant kick up in relaibaility issues. The farce here is that Revo get help from Porsche GMBH to design their parameter settings but the remap is seen as non porsche[]

 

[Rodney Naghar]

I agree with Oliver, what a document says in black and White is not necessarily how an OPC will apply it. Sometimes you win, sometimes you lose. I've been on the winning end in the past. While it would be nice to know where you stand there is more often than not an element of discretion. OPCs aren't out to reject all claims, it's not in their best interests to do so.

 

[snarf]

My concern would be that OPCs are acting as agents and are not the underwriter. There are numerous examples of individuals being sold insurance that was inappropriate for their circumstances; I'm thinking of employment and payment protection policies in particular here, only to find in the event of a claim that all they are entitled to is a refund of their premium.

 

[DSM]

ORIGINAL: Rodney Naghar I agree with Oliver, what a document says in black and White is not necessarily how an OPC will apply it. Sometimes you win, sometimes you lose. I've been on the winning end in the past. While it would be nice to know where you stand there is more often than not an element of discretion. OPCs aren't out to reject all claims, it's not in their best interests to do so.

I can't really make this any more clear: It isn't up to the OPC to apply it any more. Unless you can get your OPC to put in writing any variations from the written terms of the Warranty Document, which would then presumably make them legally responsible, any claim for a car with ANY non Porsche or non Porsche fitted Porsche item, or a car that has been worked on by a non OPC, will not be valid and if investigated will be rejected. There is a 911 with blown engine standing at Reading, I understand, which has had its claim rejected because it has a non Porsche tracker fitted. Everyone accepts that this bears no relevance to the problem but there it is. Finally, you cannot rely on experience under the old Warranty scheme as an indication to how the new one will be operated. The terms are completely different and why would that be if they were going to be operated in the same way?

 

[Hasan]

ORIGINAL: DSM There is a 911 with blown engine standing at Reading, I understand, which has had its claim rejected because it has a non Porsche tracker fitted. Everyone accepts that this bears no relevance to the problem but there it is.

There are many 997's for sale in the OPC network that have Tracker's fitted to them, and they all have the 12 month warranty that is part of an OPC approved used car sale. The OPC's surely wouldn't remove all the trackers from those vehicles before sale....they just wouldn't do that. So there must be some common sense prevailing here. If that happened to me, this is what I would argue. Do senior PCGB members ever contact Porsche Cars GB on issues such as this for clarification?

 

[DSM]

ORIGINAL: Hasan

ORIGINAL: DSM There is a 911 with blown engine standing at Reading, I understand, which has had its claim rejected because it has a non Porsche tracker fitted. Everyone accepts that this bears no relevance to the problem but there it is.

There are many 997's for sale in the OPC network that have Tracker's fitted to them, and they all have the 12 month warranty that is part of an OPC approved used car sale. The OPC's surely wouldn't remove all the trackers from those vehicles before sale....they just wouldn't do that. So there must be some common sense prevailing here. If that happened to me, this is what I would argue. Do senior PCBG members ever contact Porsche Cars GB on issues such as this for clarification?

OK. I give up. You must be right. By the way maybe you could help the guy posting on PH under then name of Phib, who has been refused a new warranty on his 06 997 because it had a non Porsche tracker fitted? In his case the only Porsche approved tracker won't fit his car so he has had to pay more for an insurer to cover it without, so that he can re apply for the warranty.

 

[MarcBC]

ORIGINAL: DSM By the way maybe you could help the guy posting on PH under then name of Phib, who has been refused a new warranty on his 06 997 because it had a non Porsche tracker fitted? In his case the only Porsche approved tracker won't fit his car so he has had to pay more for an insurer to cover it without, so that he can re apply for the warranty.

Apologies for crashing the party, but what has he done to his car that stops the Cobra (that is the Porsche unit) unit fitting? It can be (and is) fitted in many different places; the box is only about the size of a 5cm thick A5 book, plus flexible aerial. I know this because I had to have my car stripped down almost completely to locate the tracker due to a broken aerial connection.

 

[snarf]

Extract from the warranty document: c) Service, repair or maintenance has previouslybeen performed on the Vehicle by You or by athird party who is not an authorised PorscheCentre/ Authorised Porsche Service Centre If true I guess that rules out all those cars taken to an independent to have suspension geometry adjusted then.

 

[Hasan]

Hi DSM, Thanks for pointing me in the direction of that thread. It's very illuminating. I've just finished reading it (Took me a while!) One question then.....are all warranty claims submited to XL by OPC's checked or investigated? This would be very interesting to know.

 

[DSM]

ORIGINAL: MarcBC

ORIGINAL: DSM By the way maybe you could help the guy posting on PH under then name of Phib, who has been refused a new warranty on his 06 997 because it had a non Porsche tracker fitted? In his case the only Porsche approved tracker won't fit his car so he has had to pay more for an insurer to cover it without, so that he can re apply for the warranty.

Apologies for crashing the party, but what has he done to his car that stops the Cobra (that is the Porsche unit) unit fitting? It can be (and is) fitted in many different places; the box is only about the size of a 5cm thick A5 book, plus flexible aerial. I know this because I had to have my car stripped down almost completely to locate the tracker due to a broken aerial connection.

Welcome to the party!! I see where you are going but this is what Phib was told: Porsche "can" fit the VTS to 05 / 06 cars, however it doesn't work when fitted ( due to having to splice it in to the wiring loom). Basically cobra ( VTS) cant see that the alarm is going off only if it is moved does it work. Therefore the insurers are not happy and porsche cannot claim that it works in line with class 5 guidelines. No point fitting that then though others, including other Cobra models, will work but then they are not approved. The VTS is the only system that is approved by PCarsGB and the wiring was not standard in the 997 until late 06. OPCs fitted others including Cobra varients and Traffic MasterTrackstar and these all preclude the new Warranty. I stand to be corrected, if anyone knows better?

 

[DSM]

ORIGINAL: Hasan Hi DSM, Thanks for pointing me in the direction of that thread. It's very illuminating. I've just finished reading it (Took me a while!) One question then.....are all warranty claims submited to XL by OPC's checked or investigated? This would be very interesting to know.

I am sure they are not Hasan, and that is a good point but to pay possibly £2.5k for a 2 year warranty hoping any claim you make is not investigated takes quite a leap of faith. And the question of why the warranty is so worded, if there is no intention of using the rights conferred, remains.

 

[yan]

ORIGINAL: DSM I can't really make this any more clear: It isn't up to the OPC to apply it any more. Unless you can get your OPC to put in writing any variations from the written terms of the Warranty Document, which would then presumably make them legally responsible, any claim for a car with ANY non Porsche or non Porsche fitted Porsche item, or a car that has been worked on by a non OPC, will not be valid and if investigated will be rejected. There is a 911 with blown engine standing at Reading, I understand, which has had its claim rejected because it has a non Porsche tracker fitted. Everyone accepts that this bears no relevance to the problem but there it is. Finally, you cannot rely on experience under the old Warranty scheme as an indication to how the new one will be operated. The terms are completely different and why would that be if they were going to be operated in the same way?

DSM - if you are not comfortable with this warranty product, then take a look at the non-Porsche warranty options would be my line of thinking. That the product is insurance it has to be sold by an FSA-approved body, in this case the OPC. I don't know about insurance products, for which the rules are quite possibly less strict although arguably shouldn't be, but if it was an investment product then the onus would be on the seller to make sure that the buyer understood the contract and therefore the risk involved (such an onus has become far more complicated/drawn-out since 2008). In the case of purchasing such a warranty, for example, a buyer might assume that the 111-pt check performed by the OPC was in itself a validity check, the onus being on the OPC to explain that the tracker invalidates the warranty criteria and therefore that the buyer should not purchase the warranty unless they change or remove the tracker. A claim refused because of a non-approved tracker, i.e. which was not brought to his/her attention when purchasing the warranty could have cause for complaint to the FSA => mis-selling or something along these lines. In selling the warranty it sounds like some OPCs may be taking the strict approach and others are not from what I have read here, and in other threads. All of the above is speculatory on my part : I am not an expert on the insurance front, I am merely suggesting a possible line of enquiry.

 

[jonathanw]

I have already mentioned on this thread about having a protective film applied pre-delivery at my OPC which might invalidate the new warranty. Would a non Porsche Approved bodywork ding invalidate a warranty claim on an engine failure for example ? Not that I have yet acquired any dings yet!!

 

[garyw]

The what if question could go on forever.... Its hoped that we can get some clarification from talks with Porsche cars at the next few events, including the modern cars day.. Its open to all those interested in asking questions and discussing this further.... garyw

 

[chrismouzou]

both my last porsches had rac trackstar plus trackers fitted no warranty problems on my 996 cab out of warranty by 3 months-had part engine failure repaired by east london opc no charge chris

 

[spyderman]

Just been told I won't be able to get an extended Porsche warranty on my 2004 Boxster due to the presence of a tracker fitted before I bought it. Has been confirmed by Porsche GB in Reading too. Will probably switch to Tesco warranty instead, providing they will allow work to be done by an OPC.

 

[DSM]

ORIGINAL: chrismouzou both my last porsches had rac trackstar plus trackers fitted no warranty problems on my 996 cab out of warranty by 3 months-had part engine failure repaired by east london opc no charge chris

Of course, the goodwill repair bears no relevance to Warranty and for the other issue, I would refer you to spyderman's post above. Porsche are making themselves look so bad with this issue.

 

[Delbox]

I wonder what happens if Autoglass (or the like) fit a non-OEM windscreen to replace a cracked one? Firstly, it won't be an approved Porsche product - and the installer will not be approved by Porsche! And as for that PCGB sticker on the windscreen!! Del

 

[DSM]

ORIGINAL: Delbox I wonder what happens if Autoglass (or the like) fit a non-OEM windscreen to replace a cracked one? Firstly, it won't be an approved Porsche product - and the installer will not be approved by Porsche! And as for that PCGB sticker on the windscreen!! Del

Then, as it stands, the Warranty would be invalid.

 

[Delbox]

That's what I thought - and I wonder how many people who have otherwise standard cars with a full OPC service history are going to be disappointed when the new warranty is denied to them? And, of course, we all go to an OPC to have our tyres changed - don't we? Therefore, again, the fitter will not be Porsche approved - so bang goes your warranty! and, although you will fit N-rated (Porsche approved) tyres - are those replacement valves those nice ones from the Tequipment catalogue - or just the standard Kwik Fit products? Is Tesco petrol approved - and what about Halfords windscreen washer fluid? What about replacing the OPC affixed road fund licence holder with a nice aluminimum one from the Club? The list just goes on and on......and on and on.............. Del