I asked you for information on the system you're claiming is applicable in Alabama. I can't find any information online supporting your claim that there is state-mandated binding arbitration, but binding only against the manufacturer.

What you're now talking about is different. Parties can contract binding arbitration, but they only agree to that if they think it's in their best interest, or they have no choice. In this case, given that the manufacturers draft the contracts (the warranties), I think it is fair to conclude they think it will benefit them. Whether it benefits the consumer isn't their concern. The consumer has no choice but to accept that provision if they want to buy the car.

 

For those that are interested, 4Piston Cylinder Head received their CTR. They mentioned "EVO-like acceleration without the surge and fall up top..." They should be putting up some dyno numbers and more info soon. This is all on their Facebook page.

https://www.facebook.com/4Piston/

 

You have very carefully tempered your "requests" from demanding "proof" to asking for "information on." IDC what you can't find. I explained what it is and what it does and you want to drag this into semantic terminology to cover your tracks and I am not fooled and am not interested. Whatever conclusion you come up with is irrelevant and of little interest to me, all I have ever been talking about is agreeing to binding arbitration if you buy a car in this state and any disputes that arise be it against the dealer or the manufacturer or even the lender is covered by it. If you don't sign it, you can't buy it.

It is no shocker that some junior grade knowitall baby lawyer wants to jump in with a bunch of legal terms to cloud the issue to make himself look smart like he was "right" all along.

 

The classic "you've lost the argument because I said you've lost the argument".

This wasn't an argument. The fact you have characterized it as one shows the kind of person you are - you came in here just to **** about while adding very little.

I asked you to provide some sort of evidence, information, whatever, on this unusual system you have said is in place in Alabama. Evidently you feel that is an unreasonable request, and we should all simply take you at your word, even if the system you have proposed doesn't make a lot of sense.



"Somebody challenged me and asked me to provide proof. Quickly, toss out personal insults and dismiss their comments as if I was an accepted expert on all things!"

 

From years of driving a Miata I got used to feathering the throttle to stay on the edge of traction around corners. I was doing something like that while merging into traffic on the interstate. I accelerated hard, lifted partially, and BLAM. It felt like my Evo got rear ended as the engine choked.

 

Gents

We can do w/out the insults. Please stay on topic

 

Misuse of the vehicle: This term can be interpreted in broad ways, and often includes racing/competition of any type, overloading the vehicle or off-roading. Potentially, anything outside of normal operation of the vehicle can be considered misuse. Some automakers will void your entire warranty for these infractions, and this decision is typically left to the discretion of the warranty administrator. Even if there is no proof but just signs of abuse, your warranty claim may be denied. https://www.edmunds.com/auto-warrant...-warranty.html

 

An autopsy of the engine, as well as an oil analysis are pretty good starting points for determining failure. Often times, these aren't even needed because some dumb soccer mom didn't change the oil for 30k miles, so what comes out the drain plug is more look a sooty goop than oil, and there isn't much of it at that.

 

Again, may be denied is not the same as saying the denial is legitimate.

A cop may abuse your civil rights, that doesn't make it right.

A shop may refuse to refund you your money for a defective product, that doesn't make it right.

You're proposing a hypothetical, while seemingly trying to argue that the possibility of that hypothetical somehow negates your legal rights or the manufacturer's obligations.

 

So modern cars do not use any sort of engine monitoring software that can be back checked? It seems like it would be useful for manufacturers in troubleshooting problems.

Why do dealerships even have specialized, and very expensive, computer diagnostic equipment?

 

Again, you're asking questions about a topic that is critical to your conclusion. This is a pretty big hint that you came up with your theory without any evidence to support it.

 

Ok Mr. Lawyer, if a client came to you and said 'the dealership has denied my warranty claim because they say my car shows signs of abuse'. And this client says 'I never race my car'. What would you advise them to do?

If you take it to trial, the manufacturer will like put a 20+ year certified master technician on the stand to provide expert testimony about how the car showed signs of excess wear that, in his opinion, are the result of high speed use most associated with racing/competition, as such wear would not be found with normal street use.

How do you plan on winning the case?

 

Like I said, every case turns on the facts.

Here, I'll assume for the purposes of your hypothetical, that the client is telling the truth - the car was never raced, never saw the race track.

First, I'd go through the warranty denial letter. Realistically, it will set out the reason for the denial. If that's insufficient, I would write to the dealership/manufacturer and request details.

Assuming that didn't resolve it, I'd file suit. From there, I'd ask for further particulars within the constraints of the pleadings if the dealership/manufacturer simply filed a generic defense.

The trial scenario you're suggesting is, first off, unlikely, and second, comes down to a battle of credibility.

You're basically trying to propose a narrow hypothetical that supports your position. You can't see the forest for the trees, man.

 

I can't see the Type R discussion for all this BS!

 

Can you two please take this to PM??

​​​​​​