wemay
Site Donor 2023
Yup, the extent of what i know is what I posted.
Last edited:
Pics, ONE oil change in 45K miles (2015 Kia Optima 2.4)
- Thread starter wemay
- Start date
- Status
I think the reason it got covered is the ongoing recalls/investigation on these engines. However it's too bad she got away with it. I think it's the same as insurance fraud, just like if someone ran it out of oil to seize the engine up and then refilled it and took it in for an engine. Hopefully anyone that does that has many issues/can caused by the engine replacement.
This is just further proof that Hyundai/Kia are replacing these almost no questions asked so far. At least in the US.
This is just further proof that Hyundai/Kia are replacing these almost no questions asked so far. At least in the US.
Well, this happened:
https://www.autonews.com/article/20...-warns-against-warranty-voiding-policies
Quote
Hyundai Motor America was one of six companies that received warning letters from the Federal Trade Commission, which outline concerns about illegal warranty-voiding practices.
Company statements requiring the consumer to use only approved parts to keep coverage intact, or which insist that coverage will be rendered invalid if the consumer fails to use "specified parts or service providers," are illegal, the FTC warned in a news release this week.
But I suppose this isn't due to Hyundai/KIA not honoring warranties, right?
https://www.autonews.com/article/20...-warns-against-warranty-voiding-policies
Quote
Hyundai Motor America was one of six companies that received warning letters from the Federal Trade Commission, which outline concerns about illegal warranty-voiding practices.
Company statements requiring the consumer to use only approved parts to keep coverage intact, or which insist that coverage will be rendered invalid if the consumer fails to use "specified parts or service providers," are illegal, the FTC warned in a news release this week.
But I suppose this isn't due to Hyundai/KIA not honoring warranties, right?
Originally Posted by Brigadier
Well, this happened:
https://www.autonews.com/article/20...-warns-against-warranty-voiding-policies
Quote
Hyundai Motor America was one of six companies that received warning letters from the Federal Trade Commission, which outline concerns about illegal warranty-voiding practices.
Company statements requiring the consumer to use only approved parts to keep coverage intact, or which insist that coverage will be rendered invalid if the consumer fails to use "specified parts or service providers," are illegal, the FTC warned in a news release this week.
But I suppose this isn't due to Hyundai/KIA not honoring warranties, right?
You don't give up, do you? This was a warning about verbiage in their owner's manual, which they changed.
Article
Notice, this isn't about Hyundai actually not honoring reasonable warranty claims, rather it's about correcting language (that should've been corrected). You have still yet to provide an example of a legitimate warranty claim that was denied, yet you run around on here acting like Hyundai shouldn't even have a warranty because of how often they are able to get out of it... in a thread about Kia honoring a warranty when they clearly don't have to. Give it a rest.
Well, this happened:
https://www.autonews.com/article/20...-warns-against-warranty-voiding-policies
Quote
Hyundai Motor America was one of six companies that received warning letters from the Federal Trade Commission, which outline concerns about illegal warranty-voiding practices.
Company statements requiring the consumer to use only approved parts to keep coverage intact, or which insist that coverage will be rendered invalid if the consumer fails to use "specified parts or service providers," are illegal, the FTC warned in a news release this week.
But I suppose this isn't due to Hyundai/KIA not honoring warranties, right?
You don't give up, do you? This was a warning about verbiage in their owner's manual, which they changed.
Article
Notice, this isn't about Hyundai actually not honoring reasonable warranty claims, rather it's about correcting language (that should've been corrected). You have still yet to provide an example of a legitimate warranty claim that was denied, yet you run around on here acting like Hyundai shouldn't even have a warranty because of how often they are able to get out of it... in a thread about Kia honoring a warranty when they clearly don't have to. Give it a rest.
wemay
Site Donor 2023
JustN89, don't waste your time.
I'm indifferent to this topic, but isn't the maintenance section, as outlined in the owner's manual, the basis for warranty coverage for items that fall under maintenance requirements?
If so, Hyundai must've been using it is some cases, otherwise why would they print it?
Of course each warranty claim is a case-by-case basis and proprietary information, outside small personal or third party experiences. No one can provide information of warranty approvals or denials outside of a Hyundai/Kia department that handles such claims.
If so, Hyundai must've been using it is some cases, otherwise why would they print it?
Of course each warranty claim is a case-by-case basis and proprietary information, outside small personal or third party experiences. No one can provide information of warranty approvals or denials outside of a Hyundai/Kia department that handles such claims.
Last edited:
Originally Posted by edyvw
I am maybe missing point, but should not be easier to change oil than download template for receipts, forge them etc?
It's only easier to have done the actual oil changes if you don't do a quick and bad job of forging the oil change receipts like she did.
Regardless, whether doing actual oil changes, or just committing fraud, the end result is the same: a great-running engine.
I am maybe missing point, but should not be easier to change oil than download template for receipts, forge them etc?
It's only easier to have done the actual oil changes if you don't do a quick and bad job of forging the oil change receipts like she did.
Regardless, whether doing actual oil changes, or just committing fraud, the end result is the same: a great-running engine.
4WD
$50 site donor 2024
Well, if they don't have a good history with this engine even when it gets good PM …
they now had two things to worry about:
1) A neglected vehicle with a questionable engine
2) A woman who would lie again if not rewarded for her lies
All about market share … I'm not impressed by her or KIA in this case …
they now had two things to worry about:
1) A neglected vehicle with a questionable engine
2) A woman who would lie again if not rewarded for her lies
All about market share … I'm not impressed by her or KIA in this case …
Obviously late to this but skimmed most replies, I'll say something or many things don't add up. As written, very lucky fraudster. And I don't take anecdote as a typical result or Kia SOP.
Originally Posted by JustN89
Originally Posted by Brigadier
Well, this happened:
https://www.autonews.com/article/20...-warns-against-warranty-voiding-policies
Quote
Hyundai Motor America was one of six companies that received warning letters from the Federal Trade Commission, which outline concerns about illegal warranty-voiding practices.
Company statements requiring the consumer to use only approved parts to keep coverage intact, or which insist that coverage will be rendered invalid if the consumer fails to use "specified parts or service providers," are illegal, the FTC warned in a news release this week.
But I suppose this isn't due to Hyundai/KIA not honoring warranties, right?
You don't give up, do you? This was a warning about verbiage in their owner's manual, which they changed.
Article
Notice, this isn't about Hyundai actually not honoring reasonable warranty claims, rather it's about correcting language (that should've been corrected). You have still yet to provide an example of a legitimate warranty claim that was denied, yet you run around on here acting like Hyundai shouldn't even have a warranty because of how often they are able to get out of it... in a thread about Kia honoring a warranty when they clearly don't have to. Give it a rest.
You don't read to good. It wasn't based on the verbiage, it was based the practice of denying the warranty. Try reading again....SMH
Originally Posted by Brigadier
Well, this happened:
https://www.autonews.com/article/20...-warns-against-warranty-voiding-policies
Quote
Hyundai Motor America was one of six companies that received warning letters from the Federal Trade Commission, which outline concerns about illegal warranty-voiding practices.
Company statements requiring the consumer to use only approved parts to keep coverage intact, or which insist that coverage will be rendered invalid if the consumer fails to use "specified parts or service providers," are illegal, the FTC warned in a news release this week.
But I suppose this isn't due to Hyundai/KIA not honoring warranties, right?
You don't give up, do you? This was a warning about verbiage in their owner's manual, which they changed.
Article
Notice, this isn't about Hyundai actually not honoring reasonable warranty claims, rather it's about correcting language (that should've been corrected). You have still yet to provide an example of a legitimate warranty claim that was denied, yet you run around on here acting like Hyundai shouldn't even have a warranty because of how often they are able to get out of it... in a thread about Kia honoring a warranty when they clearly don't have to. Give it a rest.
You don't read to good. It wasn't based on the verbiage, it was based the practice of denying the warranty. Try reading again....SMH
Originally Posted by JustN89
Originally Posted by Brigadier
Well, this happened:
https://www.autonews.com/article/20...-warns-against-warranty-voiding-policies
Quote
Hyundai Motor America was one of six companies that received warning letters from the Federal Trade Commission, which outline concerns about illegal warranty-voiding practices.
Company statements requiring the consumer to use only approved parts to keep coverage intact, or which insist that coverage will be rendered invalid if the consumer fails to use "specified parts or service providers," are illegal, the FTC warned in a news release this week.
But I suppose this isn't due to Hyundai/KIA not honoring warranties, right?
You don't give up, do you? This was a warning about verbiage in their owner's manual, which they changed.
Article
Notice, this isn't about Hyundai actually not honoring reasonable warranty claims, rather it's about correcting language (that should've been corrected). You have still yet to provide an example of a legitimate warranty claim that was denied, yet you run around on here acting like Hyundai shouldn't even have a warranty because of how often they are able to get out of it... in a thread about Kia honoring a warranty when they clearly don't have to. Give it a rest.
Where did I say Hyundai shouldn't even have a warranty? Making things up now, are ya? So, I guess that is how you cope with reality. Better get that looked at.
Originally Posted by Brigadier
Well, this happened:
https://www.autonews.com/article/20...-warns-against-warranty-voiding-policies
Quote
Hyundai Motor America was one of six companies that received warning letters from the Federal Trade Commission, which outline concerns about illegal warranty-voiding practices.
Company statements requiring the consumer to use only approved parts to keep coverage intact, or which insist that coverage will be rendered invalid if the consumer fails to use "specified parts or service providers," are illegal, the FTC warned in a news release this week.
But I suppose this isn't due to Hyundai/KIA not honoring warranties, right?
You don't give up, do you? This was a warning about verbiage in their owner's manual, which they changed.
Article
Notice, this isn't about Hyundai actually not honoring reasonable warranty claims, rather it's about correcting language (that should've been corrected). You have still yet to provide an example of a legitimate warranty claim that was denied, yet you run around on here acting like Hyundai shouldn't even have a warranty because of how often they are able to get out of it... in a thread about Kia honoring a warranty when they clearly don't have to. Give it a rest.
Where did I say Hyundai shouldn't even have a warranty? Making things up now, are ya? So, I guess that is how you cope with reality. Better get that looked at.
Originally Posted by JustN89
Originally Posted by Brigadier
Well, this happened:
https://www.autonews.com/article/20...-warns-against-warranty-voiding-policies
Quote
Hyundai Motor America was one of six companies that received warning letters from the Federal Trade Commission, which outline concerns about illegal warranty-voiding practices.
Company statements requiring the consumer to use only approved parts to keep coverage intact, or which insist that coverage will be rendered invalid if the consumer fails to use "specified parts or service providers," are illegal, the FTC warned in a news release this week.
But I suppose this isn't due to Hyundai/KIA not honoring warranties, right?
You don't give up, do you? This was a warning about verbiage in their owner's manual, which they changed.
Article
Notice, this isn't about Hyundai actually not honoring reasonable warranty claims, rather it's about correcting language (that should've been corrected). You have still yet to provide an example of a legitimate warranty claim that was denied, yet you run around on here acting like Hyundai shouldn't even have a warranty because of how often they are able to get out of it... in a thread about Kia honoring a warranty when they clearly don't have to. Give it a rest.
Also given the revised wording you posted, if they wanted to blame an after market oil filter[as an example] for your engine failure, and deny warranty, they could. So, what has changed?
Originally Posted by Brigadier
Well, this happened:
https://www.autonews.com/article/20...-warns-against-warranty-voiding-policies
Quote
Hyundai Motor America was one of six companies that received warning letters from the Federal Trade Commission, which outline concerns about illegal warranty-voiding practices.
Company statements requiring the consumer to use only approved parts to keep coverage intact, or which insist that coverage will be rendered invalid if the consumer fails to use "specified parts or service providers," are illegal, the FTC warned in a news release this week.
But I suppose this isn't due to Hyundai/KIA not honoring warranties, right?
You don't give up, do you? This was a warning about verbiage in their owner's manual, which they changed.
Article
Notice, this isn't about Hyundai actually not honoring reasonable warranty claims, rather it's about correcting language (that should've been corrected). You have still yet to provide an example of a legitimate warranty claim that was denied, yet you run around on here acting like Hyundai shouldn't even have a warranty because of how often they are able to get out of it... in a thread about Kia honoring a warranty when they clearly don't have to. Give it a rest.
Also given the revised wording you posted, if they wanted to blame an after market oil filter[as an example] for your engine failure, and deny warranty, they could. So, what has changed?
Originally Posted by Brigadier
Also given the revised wording you posted, if they wanted to blame an after market oil filter[as an example] for your engine failure, and deny warranty, they could. So, what has changed?
Every auto maker has that policy, and they all very much want you to use OE parts from a dealer because they make a lot more money that way. In the United States, however, the auto maker must prove that an aftermarket part caused a failure in order to legally deny coverage. That would be rather difficult to prove, unless it is something like a leak. Even a collapsed filter could indicate a mechanical issue with the engine.
The possibility of finger between a car maker and aftermarket part supplier does exist, and if that is a concern then it is a good reason to buy OE parts. However I don't really think it is worth worrying about as long as you keep half decent records and there are no obvious signs of neglect. In this case, even obvious neglect wasn't enough to void the warranty.
It is also a good idea to go with companies that offer some kind of warranty for parts, especially critical engine filters. A big company like Fram or Wix is far more likely to take care of you than a random ebay seller reselling discount filters from who knows where.
I'm willing to be that the majority of warranty horror stories are related to individual dealers, or a story that is missing some details. Anyone can claim anything on the Internet, and the happy customers are far less likely to post about an experience than unhappy customers.
Also given the revised wording you posted, if they wanted to blame an after market oil filter[as an example] for your engine failure, and deny warranty, they could. So, what has changed?
Every auto maker has that policy, and they all very much want you to use OE parts from a dealer because they make a lot more money that way. In the United States, however, the auto maker must prove that an aftermarket part caused a failure in order to legally deny coverage. That would be rather difficult to prove, unless it is something like a leak. Even a collapsed filter could indicate a mechanical issue with the engine.
The possibility of finger between a car maker and aftermarket part supplier does exist, and if that is a concern then it is a good reason to buy OE parts. However I don't really think it is worth worrying about as long as you keep half decent records and there are no obvious signs of neglect. In this case, even obvious neglect wasn't enough to void the warranty.
It is also a good idea to go with companies that offer some kind of warranty for parts, especially critical engine filters. A big company like Fram or Wix is far more likely to take care of you than a random ebay seller reselling discount filters from who knows where.
I'm willing to be that the majority of warranty horror stories are related to individual dealers, or a story that is missing some details. Anyone can claim anything on the Internet, and the happy customers are far less likely to post about an experience than unhappy customers.
Originally Posted by Brigadier
[You don't read to good. It wasn't based on the verbiage, it was based the practice of denying the warranty. Try reading again....SMH
Okay, I'm going to make this really simple. Here is what the FTC was concerned about, straight from the article:
Quote
The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) recently reminded Hyundai of this. In a letter dated April 9, which we obtained on May 3 through a Freedom of Information Act request, the FTC placed Hyundai on notice for "certain representations" the company had made about its warranty coverage. In particular, the FTC took issue with this statement it found on Hyundai's website:
"The use of Hyundai Genuine Parts is required to keep your Hyundai manufacturer's warranties and any extended warranties intact."
The FTC added that it "would be concerned" about Hyundai implying that its warranty coverage requires consumers to purchase only Hyundai products, and the agency said it would also be troubled if the automaker denied warranty coverage based on the above statement or any similar language.
This was a warning about how their owners manual was written, nothing more. You've tried to make this about them weaseling out of warranty coverage, yet you have yet to provide one instance where a legitimate warranty claim was denied.
Originally Posted by Brigadier
You don't read to good.
This is rich.
I've learned that you don't admit defeat, no matter how obviously incorrect you might be, so this is my last post in this thread. I've made my point and it is abundantly clear that you have zero evidence to back up your claim, but won't let that change your mind.
[You don't read to good. It wasn't based on the verbiage, it was based the practice of denying the warranty. Try reading again....SMH
Okay, I'm going to make this really simple. Here is what the FTC was concerned about, straight from the article:
Quote
The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) recently reminded Hyundai of this. In a letter dated April 9, which we obtained on May 3 through a Freedom of Information Act request, the FTC placed Hyundai on notice for "certain representations" the company had made about its warranty coverage. In particular, the FTC took issue with this statement it found on Hyundai's website:
"The use of Hyundai Genuine Parts is required to keep your Hyundai manufacturer's warranties and any extended warranties intact."
The FTC added that it "would be concerned" about Hyundai implying that its warranty coverage requires consumers to purchase only Hyundai products, and the agency said it would also be troubled if the automaker denied warranty coverage based on the above statement or any similar language.
This was a warning about how their owners manual was written, nothing more. You've tried to make this about them weaseling out of warranty coverage, yet you have yet to provide one instance where a legitimate warranty claim was denied.
Originally Posted by Brigadier
You don't read to good.
This is rich.
I've learned that you don't admit defeat, no matter how obviously incorrect you might be, so this is my last post in this thread. I've made my point and it is abundantly clear that you have zero evidence to back up your claim, but won't let that change your mind.
Just run old fashioned sae 30w non detergent on 1k mile oci and you'll be golden. When the oil starts to thicken just add bar and chain oil to loosen things back up. Make sure you use fram ultra guard filters.
I wonder if it is possible that the failure was related to the known engine defect and not the lack of oil changes. I've seen internals that look a lot worse than that and continue to run. Them asking for maintenance records may have just been a formality. A secretary of ours had hers seize as she was pulling out of the office parking lot after work. They asked her for the maintenance records, she had her husband write down his best guesses of when it had been done (I'm sure it was within the requirements) and they covered it with no other questions asked.
If I had to guess I'd guess that there was a couple oil changes, just no documentation. Still not enough, but I would imagine a lot more sludge if it went 45k miles. It may have failed even with good maintenance but the lack of it sure wouldn't help.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
