GM CATCH CAN Warranty Denial PETITION

[gajagfan]

Originally Posted by motorhead

You can't play buy the rules when the rules are changed to suit the situation. Read the warranty for a 2015 camaro, and then read what GM did to this guy. GM isn't playing by their own rules here. That's why so many that get are pissed. The folks that have blue bowtie glases on will never get it because they can't see past the color. This guy is getting screwed.

What part of the rules are they not playing buy? I have a 2013 and have no idea what changes were made to the 2015 warranty. It obviously states that you are able to modify certain systems and I was unaware of this.

[Tenring]

Originally Posted by motorhead

You can't play buy the rules when the rules are changed to suit the situation. Read the warranty for a 2015 camaro, and then read what GM did to this guy. GM isn't playing by their own rules here. That's why so many that get are pissed. The folks that have blue bowtie glases on will never get it because they can't see past the color. This guy is getting screwed.

Agreed........................It does look like the damage control guys are having to post overtime on this one though.

[motorhead]

Originally Posted by gajagfan

What part of the rules are they not playing buy? I have a 2013 and have no idea what changes were made to the 2015 warranty. It obviously states that you are able to modify certain systems and I was unaware of this.

Read the entire thing as written not as you interpret it. What you just wrote isn't what it says.

[gajagfan]

Originally Posted by motorhead

Read the entire thing as written not as you interpret it. What you just wrote isn't what it says.

I will do it and get back with you!

[Stormcloak]

GM knows perfectly well that a properly installed cc has no impact on an oiling system (a system that historically has had issues in these motors, I might add). They use similar systems themselves on both production and race vehicles. They're simply throwing weight around getting a car owner to cave, which he did in this case. Plain and simple.

[motorhead]

Originally Posted by gajagfan

I will do it and get back with you!

[Moto-Mojo]

Originally Posted by kmarshall2121

so you going to start buying Schwinn? all major car manufacturers carry the exact same stipulation in their warranty. hell, roofing contractors do too. If they warranty the roof they put on your house, and you decide to put in a skylight, and it leaks - that's on you. Im not supporting what they do, but if they are going to put out of their pocket to fix a manufacturer defect, they would expect it to be just that - a manufacturer defect. By all these extra mods that are available, these defects cannot be proven they were, or were not caused by the aftermarket modification.

It's a H U G E leap to point to a catch can being the "cause" when holding a defective oil pump in your hand. If the oil pump was indeed the failure as is presumed. The OP hasn't torn the engine down yet that I know of.

But to use your roof scenario, say you installed a new downspout on the front of the house after a roof install w/warranty and the back part of the roof developed a leak six weeks later. Is the 'aftermarket' downspout part of the roof's water deflection system? Yes. Did it 'cause" the roof to leak somewhere else completely? No. Easy to say it did, it's another to prove it...and treat it honestly and rationally.

[gajagfan]

Originally Posted by motorhead

First off, as I said before, I do not feel the OP's catch can is the cause of the oiling system/oil pump failure. I am also relatively certain that GM does not either. I do feel that they are in their legal rights though to not cover it due to this statement from the 2015 Warranty (found it online) that is part of a list of things that void the warranty:

Alteration, modification,
or tampering to the vehicle,
including, but not limited to the
body, chassis, powertrain,
driveline, software, or other
components after final assembly
by GM

We know very little about this situation, and have only heard one side of the story (OP's). Do I think that engines have been replaced that have had this modification and others on the vehicle? I do. Does GM protect themselves by having verbiage like this in the warranty? They do. Every company protects itself in this way (I know you know this). We also do not know what testing they have done on "catch cans" and what their reasoning is for not using them on certain applications that could be driving why they took this position. I guess I am still not sure why you think they are hiding behind a moving target when it comes to their warranty when with a statement like this, they have nothing to hide behind in my opinion.

[Mr. Stacy]

Originally Posted by gajagfan

First off, as I said before, I do not feel the OP's catch can is the cause of the oiling system/oil pump failure. I am also relatively certain that GM does not either. I do feel that they are in their legal rights though to not cover it due to this statement from the 2015 Warranty (found it online) that is part of a list of things that void the warranty:

Alteration, modification,
or tampering to the vehicle,
including, but not limited to the
body, chassis, powertrain,
driveline, software, or other
components after final assembly
by GM

We know very little about this situation, and have only heard one side of the story (OP's). Do I think that engines have been replaced that have had this modification and others on the vehicle? I do. Does GM protect themselves by having verbiage like this in the warranty? They do. Every company protects itself in this way (I know you know this). We also do not know what testing they have done on "catch cans" and what their reasoning is for not using them on certain applications that could be driving why they took this position. I guess I am still not sure why you think they are hiding behind a moving target when it comes to their warranty when with a statement like this, they have nothing to hide behind in my opinion.

! Quit talking out your ass and clouding the issue. The GM warranty for 2015 says "void" three times. None of them void your warranty for a mod. Only parts affected by the mod.

Original Equipment Alterations
This warranty does not cover any
damage or failure resulting from
modification or alteration to the
vehicle's original equipment as
manufactured or assembled by
General Motors. Examples of the
types of alterations that would not
be covered include cutting, welding,
or disconnecting of the vehicle's
original equipment parts and
components

Additionally, General Motors does
not warranty non-GM parts,
calibrations, and/or software
modifications. The use of parts,
control module calibrations,
software modifications, and/or any
other alterations not issued through
General Motors will void the
warranty coverage for those
components that are damaged or
otherwise affected by the installation
of the non-GM part, control module
calibration, software modification,
and/or other alteration

SHOW ME WHERE IT SAYS YOUR ENTIRE WARRANTY VOID!

You can not, BECAUSE IT DOES NOT EXIST!

Furthermore, it's illegal to void an entire power-train warranty based on installation of an unrelated part.

The FTC says the manufacturer or dealer must show that the aftermarket part caused the need for repairs before denying warranty coverage.

[Mr. Stacy]

Originally Posted by SlingShot

Doesn't apply, automobiles have a Written Limited Warranty that supersedes all others.

Explain this from the FTC on MMA then:

Disclaimer or Modification of Implied Warranties
The Act prohibits anyone who offers a written warranty from disclaiming or modifying implied warranties. This means that no matter how broad or narrow your written warranty is, your customers always will receive the basic protection of the implied warranty of merchantability. This is explained in Understanding Warranties.

[Elite Engineering]

The Magnasun/Moss act clearly states a manufacturer CANNOT write a warranty in such a way as to forbid the use of aftermarket parts or services no matter how the warranty may be written. This applies to everything from vacuum cleaners (they were telling customers they HAD to buy their own bags, belts instead of lower priced aftermarket ones) to automobiles, to homes.

The law also is clear that the manufacturer MUST provide proof the part/service/etc. directly caused the failure in question. We can provide all the technical data needed to win legally of the OP chose to pursue it, and we also provided the OP in the original thread contact to law firms that specialize in these cases.


The problem is so few even know of the law, and most will not fight the "giant". GM knows very well it is impossible for a properly designed and properly installed "catchcan" system to cause ANY damage, much less oil pump failure, but so few actually pursue legal remedy that GM and others count on intimidation causing the customer to not pursue their rights. A simple complaint to the FTC usually is all it takes, and that can be done at no cost.


Also, to address the post that a proper catchcan does little to benefit a port injection engine is false. There are examples all over of excessive oil consumption cases in GM LS engines were improved or cured once the halt of oil and other contaminants are not causing rings and groves to stick from the deposits formed, and also the reduction in Knock Retard due to the oil ingestion. The dual valve Elite systems give evacuation at all operating levels where the OEM PVC only evacuates at idle, cruise, and deceleration and any time the engine is accelerating or at WOT NO evacuation tales place, and the damaging combustion byproducts and other contaminates are allowed to settle and mix with the engine oil causing increased wear from the abrasive compounds.


I oil analysis performed on a engine w/out a Elite dual valve system w/cleanside separator done at the same change interval and then done after the installation of the dual valve system will show a lessor amount of wear causing contaminants as the oil remains cleaner longer. These contaminates most be removed before they have a chance to settle and are still in a suspended state. Once they settle and mix with the engine oil, they are there to stay, and most of the abrasive compound particles are far smaller then the 15 micron size the oil filter is able to trap so they are in the oil circulating accelerating wear.


App. 70% of all internal engine wear is caused by these particles smaller than 15 microns.


So even though a port injection engine has NO intake valve coking issues like all GDI engine do, there are many benefits.

[Mr. Stacy]

Originally Posted by Elite Engineering

.(snip).... We can provide all the technical data needed to win legally of the OP chose to pursue it, and we also provided the OP in the original thread contact to law firms that ..(snip)

This is the key, OP does not wish to pursue it.

But that in NO WAY means that GM can legally VOID a power-train warranty because of a catch can.

Can I "WORD" myself?

[Elite Engineering]

Originally Posted by Mr. Stacy

But that in NO WAY means that GM can legally VOID a power-train warranty because of a catch can.

Can I "WORD" myself?

[Mr. Stacy]

Originally Posted by Tenring

Mr. Stacy - Sir if you make it to Arizonia one day I would like to buy you a beer!

I would very much enjoy that thank you.

Of course "His Dudeness" only drinks White Russians if that's ok?