View Single Post
Old 06-18-2009, 11:59 AM   #629 (permalink)
kannibul
A True Z Fanatic
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Jenks, OK
Posts: 2,281
Drives: 370z Touring/Sport
Rep Power: 267
kannibul has a reputation beyond reputekannibul has a reputation beyond reputekannibul has a reputation beyond reputekannibul has a reputation beyond reputekannibul has a reputation beyond reputekannibul has a reputation beyond reputekannibul has a reputation beyond reputekannibul has a reputation beyond reputekannibul has a reputation beyond reputekannibul has a reputation beyond reputekannibul has a reputation beyond repute
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by theDreamer View Post
I mean, other than going and quoting the Act specifically, every article I have ever read, know about, or seen pertaining to Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act as stated that "Under the Magnuson-Moss Act, a dealer must prove, not just vocalize, that aftermarket equipment caused the need for repairs before it can deny warranty coverage. If the dealer cannot prove such a claim — or it proffers a questionable explanation — it is your legal right to demand compliance with the warranty."

The italicized part is a quote from an article I have, and is the same conclusion from every other article.
Ok, by "legal right" - that means getting, at the very least, a lawyer to write them a letter...

Also take into account what the main point of the Magnuson-Moss Act pertains to....

(the prevention of) dealer/manufacturer Tie-in Sales to maintain warranty.

A specific example...

-----
You change the oil in your car at your regularly scheduled intervals.

You use a Fram oil filter.

Engine blows up with no other modifications and no signs of abuse.

Dealer says they won't cover the claim becasue you didn't use a Nissan Oil Filter.
-----

THERE you have a claim under the Magnuson-Moss Act.
kannibul is offline