Had recent f/n/s coil spring failure; no problem said W/D, get it done.
My Vx garage and Vx themselves, strongly recommend doing both sides [the springs from Vx are only supplied in pairs, perhaps to reinforce this message].
The broken spring had also ruined a 620-mile-old tyre.
W/D said ' we only pay for the failed item ' nor the consequentail damage to the tyre,
Result to me -- £220 bill . . .
Do we have to experience such a situation, before we wise up to the less-than-expected attitude of HJ's highly [and only] recommended warranty company.
Any similar experiences out there?
|
|
If it were me I'd take the WD settlement and pay the extra to replace the other one. After all you don't want another tyre/safety failure. WD position is perfeclty understandable - no commercial operation will cover consequential and potential future failure. Rather than play Russian Roulette do the sensible thing but don't expect WD to do more than they've offered.
|
|
So where would this leave you with a premature cam belt failiure, as it may only be the belt which has failed, but the consequential damage would be hefty....
|
|
I think their attitude is a bit iffy if the springs are only available in pairs - what are you supposed to do, throw one away?
|
|
|
So where would this leave you with a premature cam belt failiure as it may only be the belt which has failed but the consequential damage would be hefty....
Big time out of pocket - as my brother found out a good few years ago with his Alfa that had a Warranty Direct policy in place.
|
|
Actually according to their website WD does cover the case of timing belts failure if within manufacturer limits. Not the same issue as OP case though.
|
|
|
|
|
|
W/D said ' we only pay for the failed item ' nor the consequentail damage to the tyre, >>
Strange policy that they do NOT cover consequential loss caused by an insured item as you claim, if the then DO cover the situation where an uninsured part damages another insured part:
www.warrantydirect.co.uk/loss.html
"Failure caused by non-insured parts
If an uninsured part fails and damages or breaks an insured part, then we will pay the costs attributed to the repair or replacement of the insured part as per any other claim. Other warranty companies refuse to settle such claims. "
Edited by jbif on 28/03/2009 at 11:34
|
|
No, I think it is straightforward:- they pay for the cost of the covered item, not any non-covered item. In the case of the the cam belt failing, the items consequentially damaged are likely to be covered items, hence would be paid for.
|
Its completely straightforward and no argument. They pay for a failed item. The other one hasnt failed so they dont pay for it. With respect for the tyre, a tyre is not a component thats covered by the warranty as its a consumable, so they wont pay for any damage to it by whatever means its caused.
|
|
Don't forget that your W/D is in addition to your statutory rights and does not replace them. So how old is the car and how long ago did you buy it (hopefully) from a dealer? You may have a claim against the seller.
|
|
I'd replace rear springs on their own-but front springs,always in pairs,pay for the other one to be done.Most of the braking and all of the steering is on the front-but it's you and your families' lives.
|
|
|
|
>>They pay for a failed item. The other one hasnt failed so they dont pay for it.
Possibly. Similarly arguably, springs come in pairs. Therefore the failed item is the front springs.
|
Crumbs, MM. Getting tough on warranty companies? Have you cancelled your policy?
;-)
|
|
|
Mapmaker, to be pedantic, the diagnosis is failed spring. Note the singular.
|
Mapmaker to be pedantic the diagnosis is failed spring. Note the singular.
Surely what's important is not the diagnosis, but the cure specified by the manufacturer. I can imagine a number of reasons why the manufacturer might suggest replacing both springs when only one is failed. For example:
a) Blatant profiteering
b) Preventative maintenance - if one's broken it's likely the other might be nearing the end of its life so arguably worth replacing it just before it goes rather than just after
c) A mismatched pair renders the vehicle dangerous or otherwise unroadworthy.
If a applies, I wouldn't expect any warranty company to accept replacing both.
If b applies, I would expect the warranty company choose whether to offer replacing both as part of its product. That would be a purely commercial decision for the warranty company and could go either way.
In case c, I would expect a warranty repair to cover both springs, but only because I would expect the manufacturer not to recognise the concept of replacing only one. The OP says that they only "strongly recommend" replacing both, so it sounds like case c doesn't apply.
|
Surely what's important is not the diagnosis but the cure specified by the manufacturer.
\nope - whats imprtant to a warranty company is taking money, paying out as little as possible and sticking by the leter of the contract.
One spring breaks o espring gets replaced.
|
One spring breaks o espring gets replaced.
Since the manufacturer doesn't mandate replacing both springs when one fails, that's a perfectly reasonable position for the warranty company to take. If replacing both springs was mandated, it would be an untenable position for the warranty company unless the terms made it clear that, in the event of a spring failing the warranty covers half the cost of repairing the vehicle.
My point, probably too implicitly, was that the manufacturer "strongly recommending" is unhelpful at best and blatant profiteering at worst.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exactly so Bonzodg! Having read this thread and being about to renew my policy with WD I telephoned and asked about cambelt failure and consequent engine damage and they said that they would pay for the belt AND the engine dmage too.
|
|
|
|
|
