heres the problem. Going on this board is consensual. No one is making anyone come on here, and further, no one is making anyone reveal personal information on here.

 

I think this is a good idea. I'm moving this thread to the Suggestions forum.

 

alex_alex you make a very good point about the membership here and posting being a voluntary act.

Another post or two mentions the anonymity of posts; first we shouldn't have to hide, second with enough work it could be possible to piece together who someone is by what they post. Granted it may be impossible or at least difficult to ID someone, but it's just not something someone should worry about here.

The problem I have with all this is that nothing we do here is against any law. This (EVOM) is more or less a private club that Mitsu has infiltrated for their own benefit. Some of problems with EVO's or any car for that matter, are of course caused by abuse/mods/bad luck, take your pick. The item that prompted me to make this post originally was for a poor guy who has the PO300 problem. This particular issue is widespread and it is very unlikely he caused the problem on his own.

Put stage 4 equipment on your car and of course your warranty is gone. But stuff like an exhaust/intake, or even a mildly tuned piggyback should not put you in the crapper. They (Mitsu) are the ones who gave numbers for 0-60mph in their ads and put out additional materials stating this was a car capable of high permormance. If they bragged about getting 55 mpg with the car that would be different.

It is apparent to me anyway the the US version on the EVO has some problems and IMO Mitsu should fix them, fix their own corporate attitude, fix their dealerships' attitudes and start trying to get back on track before they end up in bigger trouble than they are already in. And a non-transferable 10 year warranty ain't gonna cut it, it's a meager start but thats about it.

I still think a user-agreement is a good idea, make it as severe as you think is needed. Word it so that it's stated to benifit the "end-user or owner" of the cars. And maybe make it necessary to register to even browse the forum. This is a privately run entity, so what if it takes a bit a work to realize the benefit of being a TRUE member.

Thanks, Jerry...I mean JOHN SMITH.

 

kk i have this type of agreement on the "dc evo club" terms when you signup. ect

BY USING, LOGGING ON, REGISTERING, VIEWING, BROWSING, REPLYING, PRIVATE MESSAGING, OR EMAILING, ANY USER OR CONTENT CONTAINED ON DCEVOCLUB.COM OR ITS FORUMS, NAMELY "forums.dcevoclub.com", ITS GALLERY, OR ANY OTHER CONTENT ON THIS WEBSITE AND SUB-SITES, YOU AGREE NOT TO SHARE THIS INFORMATION, TO PREVENT ANY MEMBER OR USER, LOSE OR DENY WARRANTABLE REPAIR. YOU MAY NOT SHARE THIS INFORMATION WITH MITSUBISHI, ITS AGENTS, AFFILIATES, EMPLOYEES, MANAGERS, OR ANYONE AFFILIATED WITH MITSUBISHI, OR ANY OTHER PARTY IN ANY WAY SHAPE OR FORM. NO INFORMATION MAY BE SHARED WITHOUT THE EXPRESS WRITTEN PERMISSION OF OWNER OF THIS SITE.

 

I think I'll work with some of the mods to see what text we can come up with for the terms. If anyone knows of any other sites using some text, please post in here so we can review that as well.

Mark

 

IT is true, that what we do on here is not against the law, but what they are doing is not against the law as well. IT is perfectly ok to use something that is NOT against the law to corrborate something that IS against the law or WOULD violate warranty policy.

That being said, this is, also, for myself, very a frustrating situation. i dont mean to sound like i am on the other side, b/c i am not, and i would certainly like to see more warranty obligations fulfilled, but i think the advantage legally is on their side.

 

Looks good!

Mark

 

But here's the problem with such a disclaimer. It would only work if people HAD to register in order to read the boards. Otherwise, as someone before had mentioned, MMNA could just troll through the posts without ever having to register, and thus, never hanving to agree to the consent clause in the disclaimer. The consent clause here would be only for those that wish to post on the boards, not for those that with to read the boards.

But this puts evom in a hard situation b/c one of the good things about the site is that it is open to everyone, including those that are not registered. One can browse the site without having to go through that simple buy annoying process of registering.

Evom would have to balance the benefit and increased traffic they get from not requiring registration to read the posts against the benefit of forcing everyone to register and thus to agree to the disclaimer. The downside to the latter approach is obviously that the members are NOT protected per se from warranty invalidation risks, but the downside to the latter is the potential loss of traffic to the site, which may affect advertising rates, etc.

 

well see on our board to access good stuff you have to register without registering on our site, you can only view areas like general meets ect.

its also listed at the bottom of the page as "terms/acceptable use policy" on the main page

 

I like the idea, but I don't see how any of this could be used in court against members. There is no solid evidence that it's even the person or car in question. Just because I race a Lancer doesn't mean it's the same Lancer I drive daily. Or even whether I am the same person who is at the dealership in person. I just don't see how anything on these boards proves anything. Like WestSideBilly once said, "If you see it on the internet, it must be true"

 

Ludikraut, MJ - this thread isn't about warranty coverage, it's about MMNA and affiliates using this board to deny very legitimate warranty claims even after they have already aknowledged the problem as a model-wide issue. Let's not get off track.

That having been said, I am pleased to see the direction this thread is taking. Any proactive approach we can take as a group to limit the ability for any party to utilize this information in any way harmful is a solid step in the right direction.

urbanknight, fwiw I agree 100% however this will give them something else to think about and give US some verbal ammo if we need it when we're told our warranties are void because of posts and claims made on the internet (specifically forums like these).

Stockfornow... thanks for making this thread!

 

Wasn't trying to hijack the thread, although warranty coverage and warranty claims are somewhat related IMHO...

I still don't see what can be done to limit MMNA trolling this and other forums for info. Denying anonymous browsing and changing the ULA might discourage them, then again I have a hard time believing that MMNA voiding a warranty claim based on information gleaned off the internet would stand up in court. Their scare tactics will only work if we allow them to (ie. we don't take 'em to court). Furthermore a ULA like the one posted by NASTEA is also unlikely to hold up in court, since it's a little bit too all encompassing.

Lastly, what model-wide issues have been acknowledged by MMNA? I've read a lot of posts on this and other forums, and haven't really come across any. There are certainly a few design compromises that were made, but I haven't heard of any true show stoppers. I'd certainly be concerned with any model-wide issues, so if anyone can enlighten me on that I'd be grateful.

l8r)

 

I'm not an attorney, (although I have paid enough of them) I don't see how any "Condition of Viewing or Posting" is enforceable when it requires the viewer (Mitsubishi in this case) to relinquish their rights relative to warranty work. How it was discovered would not be of interest.

Consider John Smith who has his car towed to a dealership (Mr. Goodwrench) with the transmission in a box in the trunk. Mr. Smith says nothing, however, the dealership is alerted to Internet posts detailing the 11.6 sec 1/4 mile passes and 7,000 rpm clutch drops. Mr. Smith is informed that his mods and racing have voided his warranty.

Mr. Smith says, “How did you know”. Mr. Good wrench says ... “we read about you on Evom”. Mr. Smith says, "Although it is true, you cannot use that information because the ULA prohibits it". Mr. Goodwrench says, "What are you smoking"? You (Evom) cannot require that we (Mitsubishi) relinquish our rights as a condition of access. Our rights to warranty coverage trump your condition of use.

Of course I could be wrong. But it may cost you more than the price of a new transmission, plus car, plus 10 years worth of gas to litigate it.


Speedlimit..

 

Well put Speedlimit as to your last post. But how about this, and like most of you I am not an attorney but...

Would violating an agreement such as this, what ever end form it takes, allow someone on "our side" at least counter sue or maybe use it as a bit of leverage when we otherwise may have none at all??? It wouldn't prevent them from opposing warranty work, but in court, if it got that far, they MAY be prevented from using information gained here on the EVOM.

AND

If nothing else maybe their friggin trolls will see this and wake up. Maybe EVOM will get some publicity for this act of protest to this kind of treatment.

This would make a good story in any of the car mags- "Mitsu lurks on message boards to spy on their customers". That would be a great headline for some mag.

Thanks, Ralph Cramden

 

As mentioned above, you do not have to register to read the posts here. So if you are not registered, you have not had the opportunity to read the user agreement. As a result, you can't be legally held to anything it says.

But we could put a simple statement at the footer of each page......on the DoubleK Media line that says something like:

"Evolutionm.net forums are to be used for entertainment purposes only. Any other uses, including but not limited to denial of service or denial of new car warranty coverages is strictly prohibited."

Put it in 6 or 8 pt font, and it should fit on one line.