GM CATCH CAN Warranty Denial PETITION

[SlingShot]

Originally Posted by Mr. Stacy

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.

The Implied warranty is a minimum standard warranty all products have. It is at the lowest in the pecking order of warranties. A written warranty can also limit the time an Implied warranty is good for. Also an Implied warranty is not upheld by the MMA, it upheld by the State the product is sold in. An Implied warranty in a nutshell guaranties that the product you buy does what the manufacture claims. And if it doesn't, the consumer has the right to complain about it to get it resolved.

Once there is a written warranty issued on the product, it can and in this case Limit the details of the warranty to cover specific parts and systems.

To the folks that sell parts, the MMA only affects OEM spec replacement parts (aftermarket) and not performance parts or addons ...

[Chevy Fanatic]

I frequently attend local car shows, some have upwards of a couple hundred cars. I am thinking of printing up flyers of this issue and placing in the seat of all cars at the shows so folks can read how GM screwed over this consumer. Even if it makes a single person think twice about a new GM purchase it will be worth the effort.

GM drew the line according to the OP. Are they to deny warranty coverage for gas trunk struts because the extra weight of an aftermarket chrome plated brass license plate frame stressed the gas struts that hold up the trunk when open? What is the next line GM draws?

[Silver14]

Originally Posted by Mr. Stacy

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

Why not? If it's as simple as everyone is making it out to be, then pursuing it should be a sure thing?

Or perhaps we don't have all the details between OP and GM, and we should put the pitchforks down if OP is dropping it?

[Retro69]

Hell... is it possible that GM told the OP that he will be taken care of if he would just "read this prepared statement"? We just don't know.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

[Mr. Stacy]

Originally Posted by Silver14

Why not? If it's as simple as everyone is making it out to be, then pursuing it should be a sure thing?

Or perhaps we don't have all the details between OP and GM, and we should put the pitchforks down if OP is dropping it?

Not everybody has the time (or funds) to take on the (perceived) GM monster. I would guess a very small fraction of warranty abuse on GM's part ever gets addressed. GM banks on this.

However in this case, a simple letter (or complaint form) to the Texas Attorney General might fix everything! Well.... maybe... with a little luck.

https://texasattorneygeneral.gov/cpd...umer-complaint

[Mr. Stacy]

Originally Posted by SlingShot

The Implied warranty is a minimum standard warranty all products have. It is at the lowest in the pecking order of warranties. A written warranty can also limit the time an Implied warranty is good for. Also an Implied warranty is not upheld by the MMA, it upheld by the State the product is sold in. An Implied warranty in a nutshell guaranties that the product you buy does what the manufacture claims. And if it doesn't, the consumer has the right to complain about it to get it resolved.

Once there is a written warranty issued on the product, it can and in this case Limit the details of the warranty to cover specific parts and systems.

To the folks that sell parts, the MMA only affects OEM spec replacement parts (aftermarket) and not performance parts or addons ...

But still, I don't see in the written warranty where any mod can VOID your entire power-train warranty. And one thing MMA does do is require that warranties are easy to read and understand. Please explain...

[gajagfan]

Originally Posted by 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.

I am asking this for clarification, not to start a fight. I agree with your definition of The Magnasun/Moss Act in regards to use of aftermarket parts in a replacement situation for OEM parts. That is not the situation with the OP. The use of your catch can on any GEN 5 Camaro is not as a replacement. There is no dirty side catch can on any Gen 5 model that I am aware of. How do you see The Magnasun/Moss Act applying when there is no mention of (that I am aware of) covering the modification of a system and / or the use of additional parts in a system? I am on board with this problem not being the result of a catch can, but the members of the site need to understand the risk they are or are not taking by making modifications to their car. The Magnasun/Moss Act gets brought up like a saving blanket, and I am not so sure it means what many think it means. Thanks again for always being upfront and helpful.

[SlingShot]

Originally Posted by Mr. Stacy

But still, I don't see in the written warranty where any mod can VOID your entire power-train warranty. And one thing MMA does do is require that warranties are easy to read and understand. Please explain...

You won't like the answer, but it is broken down into several warranties. You have the driveline that goes from water pump to differential including axles. Then you have the body rust warranty and the bumper to bumper that is written out, excluding all wear items.

The catch can was an addon modification to the driveline system warranty, therefore they are able to void the whole system warranty as a single unit.

As far as easy to read and understand, guess that's rather objective

[Mr. Stacy]

Originally Posted by SlingShot

You won't like the answer, but it is broken down into several warranties. You have the driveline that goes from water pump to differential including axles. Then you have the body rust warranty and the bumper to bumper that is written out, excluding all wear items.

The catch can was an addon modification to the driveline system warranty, therefore they are able to void the whole system warranty as a single unit.

As far as easy to read and understand, guess that's rather objective

Yup, you are right. I don't like that.

I just see, in several areas, including the aftermarket parts and mods area they are mentioning "components" that fail etc... I believe that any reasonable person (juror) would not consider the entire power-train a "component". If that is what GM is hinging all their denials on, I would think there would be a very strong argument that the wording is misleading and confusing.

But what do I know?

[Moto-Mojo]

I mentioned a 'gag order' from GM a while back. How do we know the OP isn't tooling down the pike with a new engine by now? Or on the same ol good one? But in a way, it's too late for users of this forum. The GM good will seems to have been sullied by now.

Or...the OP is a Ford or Dodge paid plant to turn the tide on the Camaro5/6 forum. Stranger things have happened.

[Superman09]

The fight is not over. I know I said that in my last post, but that post was written at a time when I felt very much defeated. I was really hoping that once I reached some higher-ups things would get resolved and I would get my car fixed. When that didn't happen I really did not want to do anything but get my car back on the road. After some phone calls, and conversations with people who are far more versed in this type of situation than I, I have decided on a route to take. I don't really want to say yet what that route is. The gofundme is still closed, and will remain closed until I feel that I need assistance. I don't want to take people's hard earned money and then end up with a resolution that doesn't cost me anything. If I take people's money I want to make sure that I can show where the money is going and that I am not just using it as a fund to build my car. I appreciate people's generosity and willingness to help me with this, and if it gets to that I will let y'all know. For now keep the faith and be patient this may take awhile to get solved.

[Retro69]

Yes!

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

[Moto-Mojo]

Originally Posted by Superman09

The fight is not over. I know I said that in my last post, but that post was written at a time when I felt very much defeated. I was really hoping that once I reached some higher-ups things would get resolved and I would get my car fixed. When that didn't happen I really did not want to do anything but get my car back on the road. After some phone calls, and conversations with people who are far more versed in this type of situation than I, I have decided on a route to take. I don't really want to say yet what that route is. The gofundme is still closed, and will remain closed until I feel that I need assistance. I don't want to take people's hard earned money and then end up with a resolution that doesn't cost me anything. If I take people's money I want to make sure that I can show where the money is going and that I am not just using it as a fund to build my car. I appreciate people's generosity and willingness to help me with this, and if it gets to that I will let y'all know. For now keep the faith and be patient this may take awhile to get solved.

I had second thoughts after I wrote it. I think I too was just throwing my hands up. I apologize. The "paid plant" was really more tongue and cheek. The whole thing stinks, really. Hope your new route is a better one.

[Superman09]

Originally Posted by Moto-Mojo

I had second thoughts after I wrote it. I think I too was just throwing my hands up. I apologize. The "paid plant" was really more tongue and cheek. The whole thing stinks, really. Hope your new route is a better one.

No worries buddy, I posted that previous post in the other thread, and should have posted it in here too.