|
MNBoxster:
"My point is, Porsche doesn't need all the fine print when they can simply deny the repair and probably have 50% or more claimants leave it at that and shell out for the repair on their own. It's a Dealer's game; they have the deck stacked in their favor."
In postings from new (warrantied) owners that I've read on forums it doesn't look like there are a lot denials of warranty. If anything, I was amazed what claims the dealers actually did service under warranty (console scratches, etc.). Sammy's case had a twist as the claim was made just outside of warranty (for something that the dealer failed to fix in waranty) so perhaps a little "convincing" should have been expected (of course, shouldn't have taken that long!). I haven't read about a case where RMS was not repaired under warranty.
Same as with insurance companies, it is in the interest of the ones who offer the insurance/warranty to service as little claims as they can get away with. The deck is always stacked in the favor of the ones who got your money first with an obligation for a conditional service in the future. That's why rules are important, especially written ones. So if the rules of the contract speciffically prohibit something that I've done, my bargaining power during the claim negotiations will be diminished. That's why I wanted to know for sure if anything like that is written in the rules.
And I agree that how claims are handled ultumately rests on the customer satisfaction policy of each company.
Z.
|
Threaded Mode
