I just got off the phone with Valvoline product support. Wow - they were clear as mud ... (I took notes, but the quotes may not be 100% correct because he talked faster than I could write, but I assure you they are as accurate as needed for this conversation to convey the proper intent of the conversation.)
I explained how this got started; how I inquired about the warranty and was told there is none in an email. And then the rep told me "That's right; there is no warranty coverage." I then asked why there was a written Valvoline title'd document available via Napaonline that specifically states "Valvoline Limited Lubricants Warranty"? He said "I don't know. If you have a problem, we'll take a sample of the fluid and if it's bad, we'll cover the cost of the problem, no problem[. But we don't have a warranty." Then we got into debate of his claim there's no warranty, but he is aware of and acknowledges the existence of the "Limited Lubricants Warranty" (which, by the way, covers "all Valvoline lubricants". How can he balance a claim that there's no warranty, but then admit that the document exists, via third party? Then he started to blame Napa, saying it was "probably Napa lawyers wrote that up to sell more of our stuff." Ummmmm - don't ya think that Valvoline might be interested that someone is putting legal words in their mouth and using their official emblem in warranty statements????? Nah - that's no big deal. Then he went on to say that if you have an old car, they won't warrant it either. (didn't say how old is "old", but at this point I was getting tired of his circular talk). He said "We'll fix it if the lube was at fault, but not if it's and old car".
It was surreal ... like being in a time warp where you circle repeatedly about the same point in time but seeing it from all different angles. How in the world he can agree that there is a written limited warranty, but then say they may or may not cover the claim is beyond me. This circular double-talk went on for like 5 minutes.
I inquired why I was not supplied this Valvoline Lubricants Limited Warranty during my email communications, and he didn't know; he has no idea who answers those emails. I suppose, the email person has no idea who answers the phone, either ...
Now, the Limited Lubricants Warranty CLEARLY states the following:
"If Valvoline lubricant is proven to be directly responsible for engine or equipment failure under these conditions, Valvoline will restore the equipment to normal performance." Nothing about how old the equipment is, etc. If the lube is bad (as determined by them), they will fix the equipment.
Soooooo ... two questions:
1) when I sent an email, why couldn't they have just sent the document?
2) why make such circular statements which contradict the written document?
This is what happens when uninformed/untrained folks answer the phone and emails. This is why I wanted to read their warranty in the first place. I actually have more faith in the document than the answers I got from the humans which work for Valvoline.
Now - think about some poor person (low wage job, older car, not familiar with automotive topics) who has a tranny failure, and calls or emails them. What are they going to be told? The first response is "We have no warranty." And that's that; the customer will walk away mad and absorb the cost with no knowledge if Valvoline truly should have covered the problem.