FCA Canada voids transmission warranty for using AMSOIL.

[ShadowsPapa]

Since the book states Mopar oil or equivalent, that equivilant must meed FCA standards. If said parts and service does not meet that standad then they can deny warranty coverage. Since ZF states that they will not allow AMSOIL products to be used, it is because AMSOIL has proven to cause damage and DOES NOT MEET their standard. So legally they can and as in this case deny coverage. Since the damage was evident before the use of AMSOIL, AMSOIL was correct in denying their warranty coverage. Under Magnusson-Moss, it is up to the manufacturer to prove what caused the damage and not the vehicle owner.

All they have to prove is that it wasn't caused by defect or malfunction, not what caused it, but what did not cause it. The former may occur while showing what didn't cause it (proving innocence of one by proving guilt of another) but they don't necessarily have to prove anything other than it wasn't their fault.

(c) Waiver of standards
The performance of the duties under subsection (a) of this
section shall not be required of the warrantor if he can show that
the defect, malfunction, or failure of any warranted consumer
product to conform with a written warranty, was caused by damage
(not resulting from defect or malfunction) while in the possession
of the consumer, or unreasonable use (including failure to provide
reasonable and necessary maintenance).

Actually according to Magnusson-Moss....The service and parts must be provided for FREE for the duration of the warranty, if they say use of ANY other product or service voids the warranty.

Where does it say that? The exact text, section, paragraph, etc.?
In reality, there's a way for the manufacturer to get a waiver - all they have to do is show that using anything else would cause it not to function properly, and it is found to be in the public's best interest. So if I make and sell something, and have it fully patented and there aren't any parts anyone else makes that would allow it to function correctly - I can absolutely state that as long a I have received a waiver.

(c) Prohibition on conditions for written or implied warranty;
waiver by Commission
No warrantor of a consumer product may condition his written or
implied warranty of such product on the consumer's using, in
connection with such product, any article or service (other than
article or service provided without charge under the terms of the
warranty) which is identified by brand, trade, or corporate name;
except that the prohibition of this subsection may be waived by the
Commission if -
(1) the warrantor satisfies the Commission that the warranted
product will function properly only if the article or service so
identified is used in connection with the warranted product, and
(2) the Commission finds that such a waiver is in the public
interest.

Sponsored

 

[Maximus Gladius]

My insurance claim of glycol contamination damage /vandalism on my transmission was approved. It only took 4 months but I’ll take it. New transmission is just north of Calgary in the Chrysler warehouse in Red Deer and will arrive tomorrow. Not sure about the ETA for cooler/heater and hoses.

 

[ShadowsPapa]

Untwist your panties. I work for a high level Fortune 100 company. It is not uncommon in the corporate world to have unrelated divisions take over looking into another corporate divisions dealings to try and have some resemblance of a unbias audit/investigation, especially ones that involve potential legal, ethical and civil liabilities.

Short of third party deposition for a civil suit, it is more of a positive sign than a negative.

sometimes that's like an independent inspector general in a way. It's not his employees and the managers are not over him. He's got a bit more freedom and can report to those who are over all divisions.

 

[ShadowsPapa]

Pursuant to the Magnuson Moss Act, motorists and enthusiasts have the right to use whichever brand of oil they prefer and to practice extended drain intervals without voiding their factory warranties.

Actually, I addressed this earlier. No, AMSOIL is wrong. The customer must meet the requirements. They are not free to choose "any brand" if it doesn't meet the specs.
The M-M act is very clear on that.
AMSOIL actually obviously never READ the act and are mis-quoting it.

If ZF and/or MOPAR have demonstrated that non-spec fluids can cause problems - and many that say "recommended for" or are for "multiple vehicles" can't meet the specs.
Frankly, unless a fluid states that it meets xxx specs, I'd not use it. If it says "recommended for" - be careful - THEY are recommending it, not the transmission maker!
And multiple transmissions from different companies? Hmm, maybe in rare cases.

This is the law - note that a company CAN specify specs. And nowhere does it say you can use "any brand you wish". I could use $1/quart fluid for a 1960 Ford if that was the case as long as it said it was "recommended for...."


(c) Prohibition on conditions for written or implied warranty;
waiver by Commission
No warrantor of a consumer product may condition his written or
implied warranty of such product on the consumer's using, in
connection with such product, any article or service (other than
article or service provided without charge under the terms of the
warranty) which is identified by brand, trade, or corporate name;
except that the prohibition of this subsection may be waived by the
Commission if -
(1) the warrantor satisfies the Commission that the warranted
product will function properly only if the article or service so
identified is used in connection with the warranted product, and
(2) the Commission finds that such a waiver is in the public
interest.


Companies like ZF and MOPAR and Ford and GM have gotten waivers because control of the chemistry or specs is more critical now than ever before. Check the way things are measured today - the clutch pack fill rates and times are actually measured! IF it's off, you have a problem, a code, and viscosity would be a big player - will it be the right chemistry and viscosity for Ford and GM and Jeep all at the same time? Doubtful.
IMO, being a former transmission person myself- it's got to meet that spec, have the number on it, and it's got to NOT be "multi-vehicle" or I walk by it.

 

[ShadowsPapa]

Under the Magnuson–Moss Warranty Act, which Canada doesn't have, the OEM must prove that the aftermarket oil/fluid/filter was the cause of component failure.

Instead of investigating the true cause of failure, FCA and their close partner, ZF, have decided to screw the customer.

Also incorrect as I've posted before. The acts state they only need to prove it wasn't their own fault. They have to prove it wasn't a defect or malfunction that caused the damage.

It's so muddied now they'll bring that up and say - impossible to determine, owner used xxx instead of specs and so on.
The manufacturer only must prove it wasn't a defect or malfunction. They don't have to prove what caused it although in most cases proving they weren't at fault would shed light on the actual cause. Prove yourself innocent by proving another party guilty in a sense.

The act gets quoted a lot - but what I find is that it gets misquoted a lot, too......... the devil is in the details, the exact wording.

............was caused by damage not resulting from defect or malfunction............

(c) Waiver of standards
The performance of the duties under subsection (a) of this
section shall not be required of the warrantor if he can show that
the defect, malfunction, or failure of any warranted consumer
product to conform with a written warranty, was caused by damage
(not resulting from defect or malfunction) while in the possession
of the consumer, or unreasonable use (including failure to provide
reasonable and necessary maintenance).

If you use non-spec fluids, don't follow exact maintenance to the letter while you own it, they have an out.

 

[Jerhemi]

My insurance claim of glycol contamination damage /vandalism on my transmission was approved. It only took 4 months but I’ll take it. New transmission is just north of Calgary in the Chrysler warehouse in Red Deer and will arrive tomorrow. Not sure about the ETA for cooler/heater and hoses.

Cancel the trans. and park the truck in Oshawa overnight....problem solved. jk

Sorry for all the shit you went through on this. I can see doing the same tbh. I am sure you will have made a few of us think harder about decisions like this in the future.

 

[Maximus Gladius]

Cancel the trans. and park the truck in Oshawa overnight....problem solved. jk

Sorry for all the shit you went through on this. I can see doing the same tbh. I am sure you will have made a few of us think harder about decisions like this in the future.

Tempted

 

[ShadowsPapa]

Cancel the trans. and park the truck in Oshawa overnight....problem solved. jk

Sorry for all the shit you went through on this. I can see doing the same tbh. I am sure you will have made a few of us think harder about decisions like this in the future.

I was thinking of inviting him down to park it on the south side of Chicago - but that one is closer.

 

[Maximus Gladius]

Man, all these invites… Feeling famous for that big boot in my ass!

 

[Maximus Gladius]

WOW! AMSOIL legal department just got involved. They want everything I have on my warranty being restricted and the who, what, where, when, how and why!! ….and I was told at the start of this mess they weren’t getting involved. Thanks AMSOIL, never too late I always say.

 

[ShadowsPapa]

WOW! AMSOIL legal department just got involved. They want everything I have on my warranty being restricted and the who, what, where, when, how and why!! ….and I was told at the start of this mess they weren’t getting involved. Thanks AMSOIL, never too late I always say.

Consider that he's been assigned the job of "inspector general" in the company and is looking into it from the outside in a way. He can report his findings with no real prejudice (well, they could can his butt, I guess, but they chose him for a reason and he's most likely not at any risk being blunt and honest either way with what he finds. He may also have big experience in the area - heck, I was a security administrator, but I also knew Compaq and another warranty inside and out because I was given the ability to do hardware repairs under warranty. Maybe that guy came up through another wing of AMSOIL, who knows, he may have a lot of respect in the company. It's their money now - let 'em spend it.
If they sit back and let things fall - then their word isn't worth mad dog poo.
They have publicly said warranties were safe (right or wrong, they said it!) now maybe they are going to back their words that are in writing.

 

[Mr._Bill]

WOW! AMSOIL legal department just got involved. They want everything I have on my warranty being restricted and the who, what, where, when, how and why!! ….and I was told at the start of this mess they weren’t getting involved. Thanks AMSOIL, never too late I always say.

They're getting involved to protect themselves, not to help you. The most likely end result will be a change in the claims about their transmission fluids.

 

[TMGladOverHighAlt]

They're getting involved to protect themselves, not to help you. The most likely end result will be a change in the claims about their transmission fluids.

Wouldn't care why, I'd just be glad they're there now.

 

[ShadowsPapa]

They're getting involved to protect themselves, not to help you. The most likely end result will be a change in the claims about their transmission fluids.

They really really need to change that and their claims on the warranty stuff. They are misleading at the least.
I also believe no company should market as "recommended for" without making it clear that it's their own recommendation and not a claim of compliance with any specifications.

 

[ShadowsPapa]

That danged M-M act gets tossed around like a rat by a pack of dogs but few have actually read it or the interpretations by the FTC and others. Here's the facts from an automotive after-market organization -
AMSOIL is MISLEADING by saying "you can use any brand you want" - well, in a SENSE you can, but IF and ONLY IF that other brand's oil meets the OEM specs for oil/fluids.
So they are telling you a lie of omission in AMSOIL marketing BS - they imply it's ok to use any oil. They leave out the part that says it still must meet specs. By saying you can use any brand oil (or other fluid) and leaving it at that, they are suggesting you can use their fluid even if it doesn't meet specs.
The M-M act only restricts on brands, trade names and so on - it doesn't prevent any manufacturer from requiring certain specs. It only says the maker can't restrict by name.

And AMSOIL is lying through their teeth when they say that you don't have to follow the manufacturer's maintenance interval - AMSOIL says you can extend it out if you wish and the M-M act says so. That's a crock. FTC says you must still follow maintenance intervals.
Jeep says no more than 10,000 miles for oil changes. AMSOILL says you can extend that out, it's your right, and the M-M act gives you that right.

Two lies from AMSOIL - even this organization says you must comply with specs and intervals.

Sponsored