Public Service Announcement: Modding and Warranty

H3llsp4wn707 · Jan 15, 2020

Its really quite simple- if you modify your car to operate outside of the stock parameters the manufacturer can and most likely will deny your warranty claim. Its very easy for a professional mechanic to tell when parts have been removed, altered, or put back in place.

integra15 · Jan 15, 2020

If there is any question, you can be 99% sure the dealer or Honda wont cover it. Even if you are in the right, unless you are willing to get lawyers involved you are most of the time out of luck.

Jeffers · Jan 15, 2020

The first time I heard about the Magnuson-Moss warranty act, my understanding of it was that dealers were at the time implying that you _needed_ to have all of your maintenance performed by the dealer in order to keep your warranty intact.
And the Magnuson-Moss warranty act put into law that as long as the scheduled maintenance performed, it didn't necessarily have to be performed by the dealer to keep your warranty intact.

H3llsp4wn707 · Jan 17, 2020

Jeffers said:
The first time I heard about the Magnuson-Moss warranty act, my understanding of it was that dealers were at the time implying that you _needed_ to have all of your maintenance performed by the dealer in order to keep your warranty intact.
And the Magnuson-Moss warranty act put into law that as long as the scheduled maintenance performed, it didn't necessarily have to be performed by the dealer to keep your warranty intact.

The law was created to fix problems as a result of manufacturers using disclaimers on warranties in an unfair or misleading manner. I don't have a clue where people got the idea that it has anything to do with modifying a car to run outside the stock parameters, but they couldn't be more wrong.

Phy · Jan 17, 2020

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnuson–Moss_Warranty_Act

Warrantors cannot require that only branded parts be used with the product in order to retain the warranty

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.

Most people interpret this to mean that they can't deny a transmission warranty because you have an aftermarket air intake (or similar unrelated part caused some problem), and that if they want to deny the warranty they need to prove you messed it up.
But, like it's been said, is it worth fighting them in every case?

repeet · Jan 18, 2020

The bottom line is, when is it cheaper to hire a lawyer and pay court costs, then it is to simply fix the car.

JW0914 · Jan 20, 2020

Design said:
I had shared this on another thread but wanted to make a separate one to ensure this got the right kind of attention & focus.

We are seeing some examples of owners coming back reporting that Honda can pick up vehicle PCM history, regardless of whether the ECU is returned to factory state. It should be emphasized that in all cases, Honda ended up doing an in-depth diagnosis to read live data. And I'm not sure exactly what gets stored there beyond over-rev events.

Unless Honda made a change to the electronics for manual transmissions, PCM stores zero transmission data on the Type R, so it's logical they don't on the regular Civics either.

Bottom line: If Honda suspects foul play involved, the burden of proof is going to be on the owner.

This is not only factually inaccurate, but it's also a violation of 15 USC 2302; since violating 15 USC 2302 can lead to anything from massive fines to a revocation of a manufacturer's license to sell warranties by each state's D.o.I [Dept of Insurance, which regulates insurance and warranties], American Honda is not going to expose themselves to that much legal liability due to shareholders alone. Doing so Would likely invite an SEC investigation for damage to shareholders since a company like American Honda violating 15 USC 2302 wouldn't be doing so with just one customer. (The SEC has great latitude in enforcement, as Elon Musk found out, so again, Honda wouldn't open themselves up to such legal and financial liabilities.)

There have been a lot of observations, stories, and testimonials that certain mods cannot be detected (or can). But no one has a scientific, definitive answer as to what data gets captured and where. Always best to assume that Honda knows exactly what you've done to your car and when.

Definitive answers do exist and any consumer is welcome to gather the exact same data from their vehicle that Honda gets from a dealership by purchasing a DST-i and subscription to HDS.

If considering any mod, always ask yourself the following questions:

Could the mod possibly cause something to fail under warranty that I can't afford?

Do I fully understand what the mod is doing to my car?

Do I need to modify my maintenance schedule as a result of operating at a higher level?

Below is yet another example that made the rounds on Reddit (copy/paste the address and remove the spaces):

https://www. reddit. com/r/10thgenaccords/ comments/ bxzby9/ ktunerhondata_vs_honda_warranty_void/]

None of the above voids a warranty. If a mod causes a warrantable component to fail, then only that specific component's warranty would be null until it's been replaced and inspected, at which point the warranty would apply to it. What modifications can never do is void an entire warranty if it turns out to the cause of damage.

People would be wise to rely less on hearsay and more on actually reading their warranties and familiarizing themselves with the Magnusson-Moss Warranty Act of 1975 (15 USC 2302).

This work order screenshot seems to lack credibility at face value due to the massive amount of legal exposure Honda has if this work order is indeed genuine.

Owners need to familiarize themself with the Magnusson-Moss Warranty Act (15 USC 2302), as the burden of proof, by law, is not on the owner but the manufacturer
(this isn't some new thing, it's been law for 44.5yrs)

There's a few issues with the screenshot shown of the customer's work order:

Powertrain warranty in it's entirety cannot be cancelled/voided by law, even if the owner did cause whatever damage occurred... what would happen is the damage would simply not be covered under the warranty, which the FTC has been quite clear on.
If the work order is genuine, the customer needs to do three things:
1. Read their warranty for starters, as what's written doesn't even remotely match what's in the warranty
2. Reach out to HondaCare's customer service, who will verify Honda abides by 15 USC 2302 and modifications to a vehicle do not void the warranty
3. Reach out to Honda's legal dept

It is on YOU to know your legal rights when it comes to warranties.
I recommend anyone with a car to maintain a copy of the above-linked PDF in their glovebox that also either includes a link to it or also includes the printouts of the relevant links in the PDF.

PowerPerLiter said:
Has anyone else wondered why multiple satellites are always pinging our cars even though they don't have navigation?

How would satellites be pinging your vehicle without a GPS antenna? There's some feature you have in your SI that requires GPS, you may wish to start there...

amirza786 · Jan 20, 2020

JW0914 said:
PowerPerLiter said: ↑
Has anyone else wondered why multiple satellites are always pinging our cars even though they don't have navigation?

I'm pretty sure he was exercising sarcasm...

gtman · Jan 20, 2020

A couple of points on Magnusson-Moss.

It originally was intended to protect consumers from dealers who were voiding warranties anytime someone used aftermarket versus OEM replacement parts. The law basically says a dealer has to prove the aftermarket part caused the failure. When it was written, I don't think ecu tunes were even a "thing".

The difference between a tune and any other aftermarket part is that essentially you're completely changing the factory brain of the drivetrain. It's not just a simple change like a short ram or something.

And while Magnusson-Moss on paper sounds like the burden of proof is on the dealer, it doesn't mean it will win you the case in the real world.

Anyone have any stats on the percentage of court cases where the Magnusson-Moss act won the case for the owner?

Andre80 · Jan 20, 2020

I believe that no one can doubt the cancellation of a guarantee for a melody, it is indisputable

But in many cases it can be used to not answer other problems

Let's take an example of another brand

The first TSI engines had a big problem with the chain tensioner, in many cases it sent the valves out of phase, VW also out of warranty changed engines

Let's assume that one of them had the melody, having the guarantee canceled in such a case is really bad

(My sister's ENGINE broke after 1 year after the warranty expired

The dealer wanted to make him pay for the engine

I printed all the discussions and articles where the problem was mentioned, and I threatened to write to all the newspapers and to VW, in 20 days, we had the new engine)

It is right that the brand protects itself, but who protects us from injustice?

Fighting against a multinational doesn't make sense in this case

Do you understand something of what I wrote?

amirza786 · Jan 20, 2020

gtman said:
A couple of points on Magnusson-Moss.

It originally was intended to protect consumers from dealers who were voiding warranties anytime someone used aftermarket versus OEM parts. The law basically says a dealer has to prove the aftermarket part caused the failure. When it was written, I don't think ecu tunes were even a "thing".

The difference between a tune and any other aftermarket part is that essentially you're completely changing the factory brain of the drivetrain. It's not just a simple change like a short ram or something.

And while Magnusson-Moss on paper sounds like the burden of proof is on the dealer, it doesn't mean it will win you the case in the real world.

Anyone have any stats on the percentage of court cases where the Magnusson-Moss act won the case for the owner?

Also to your point, I think it refers to OEM equivalent replacement parts such as oil filters, air filters, water pumps etc. a few years ago the front struts started leaking on my 2013 Toyota Sienna. This was the second pair in 4 years, so my mechanic suggested Monroe struts over the OEM. The OEM only have a two year warranty while Monroe have a lifetime warranty. So far no issues with the Monroe struts, which are OEM equivalent

FC3L15B7 · Jan 20, 2020

JT Si said:
With zero context for that image, there's really no way to tell what's going on or even if it is indeed real. We don't know if they rolled in with Honda hack and tunerview on the head unit or a ktuner sitting in the car at some point in service history, making it obvious they had a tuning module. We don't know if they had ktuner stickers or a dozen hard mods on the car.

In another discussion about what Honda can detect, someone asserted they can tell when certain information has been cleared which would occur with a flash, but also with a reprogramming by the dealer (fuel dilution update) or if the battery died or was disconnected.

This image, even if real, doesn't give us any more information about what Honda can see with the data. It's possible based on service history and other information that they determined the data clearing must have been due to a flash. Maybe they asked the customer if his battery had died, was disconnected, or replaced and he said "no?" Not realizing they were attempting to rationalize the data before jumping to the conclusion it must have been modified.

If we think about it, Honda couldn't know how long ago an event occurred if the ECU contained a simple write counter. Perhaps if ECU writes log more information at the time of flashing. But they could have just as well figured it out by how much data had been collected/recorded since the flash if it really is data being cleared.

I was reading as guest and your comment forced me to login.. lol..

It's clearly a "carbon copy" work order printed with an impact printer so the printed transfers to the copy. No one dug out a dot matrix printer and made fake work order paper..... It's real. lol.

They determined the ECU has been flashed by the flash count. They determined by the flash count that it was flashed back to factory recently, which infers a cover up and they have every right to void the warranty.

There are no secret log events - it was flashed 150 miles prior to the car having been brought in. That's all they need to know and all they need in court if the customer wanted to fight it.

This is not a criminal case. It would be based on the preponderance of evidence and that evidence suggests the customer modified the car, ruined in and tried to cover it up with a flash back to factory. Customer loses by a landslide. Court adjourned.

FC3L15B7 · Jan 20, 2020

amirza786 said:
Yes, context is very important. There could be more to this story. This person may have brought in his car in multiple times for warranty issues which could trigger a deeper look by Honda. I'm pretty sure that Honda would not scrutinize a car so closely unless they suspected abuse, and gear lockouts like the ones listed are a sign of abuse. I had an 86 GTI, and I abused it to the point where I broke an engine mount. That led to gears locking out, starting with reverse, and eventually the car was not driveable. I've read several threads here where people have broken their engine mounts and blamed them for being "weak", when clearly they abused the car

I'm telling you, kids between the ages of 16 and 24 should not drive a car with any kind of power. They should be driving 1990 Toyota Corollas...with AT until they learn responsibility. Although they would somehow try to race that as well. Sorry kiddos, needed to vent

No, there is no need for more to the story. The customer laid down on the ground, curled into a fetal position and put their thumb in their mouth. hehe. They customer conceded to the void warranty as per the work order because it's their fault and they were caught trying to cover up the mod.

FC3L15B7 · Jan 20, 2020

PowerPerLiter said:
Has anyone else wondered why multiple satellites are always pinging our cars even though they don't have navigation?

If it's under lease or finance, they need to know where you might hide it when you don't make your payment. It seems intrusive, but you blame losers who don't pay their bills for that, can't you now - yes.

FC3L15B7 · Jan 20, 2020

RKS17 said:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnuson–Moss_Warranty_Act

Not trying to be pedantic but; the dealer still has to show the modification caused the malfunction.

I have modified my other car(s) and am no longer interested in the black-hole. The only mods that I foresee for my son's Si are yellow laminix fog covers and car seats covers to keep his sweaty smell out.

If the customer brought the car in as-is with the modification active it's possible for them to test and determine it's not responsible for the damage. However, the evidence suggests a cover up and that law does not apply.

Public Service Announcement: Modding and Warranty

H3llsp4wn707

Senior Member

integra15

Senior Member

Jeffers

Senior Member

H3llsp4wn707

Senior Member

Phy

Senior Member

repeet

Senior Member

JW0914

amirza786

Senior Member

gtman

Senior Member

Andre80

Senior Member

amirza786

Senior Member

FC3L15B7

I'm a machine.

FC3L15B7

I'm a machine.

FC3L15B7

I'm a machine.

FC3L15B7

I'm a machine.

Similar threads