dnewton3
Staff member
I want to express that I'm not trying to start a war of words, nor am I looking for legal advice.
This thread is being started because I believe there is fair value in having the BITOG community aware of a recent conversation I've had with Valvoline product support regarding the Maxlife Multi-Vehicle ATF.
Here is the PI sheet straight from their site:
https://sharena21.springcm.com/Publ...bd3/3fa3136a-09bd-e711-9c12-ac162d889bd1
I quote: "Valvoline stands behind all its products, including Maxlife Multi-Vehicle ATF."
I wrote to them via their contact tool on their website because I wanted to know about their warranty statement. Here is specifically what I asked: (taken from their email reply dated 12-19-19)
(quoting Newton) - "I am wanting to know your specific warranty coverage for your ATF products; specfically the Maxlife ATF. I do not see any written warranty statement anywhere on your website. Can you please direct me to the specific page, or send me an email copy of the warranty."
(quoting Valvoline product support) - "David, thank you for your reply. We do not offer a written or implied warranty for MaxLife ATF."
Sooooooo ..... no warranty whatsoever; not written nor implied. (note that there are two kinds of warranty; implied or express. I believe they mean to state that neither implied or express warranty is offered, because written warranty is indicative of an express warranty).
Seems odd to me that a company which claims it "Stands behind all its products" is saying they will not warrant the product nor the product effects on your vehicle.
And the grand irony is that they are using the very FTC site information to induce you into buying their product (see their inclusive note about tie-in sales on the PI sheet), and yet that very same FTC site clearly states that they have a responsibility to tell us in a conspicuous manner that they offer no warranty.
https://www.ftc.gov/tips-advice/business-center/guidance/businesspersons-guide-federal-warranty-law
"If you do not offer a written warranty, the law in most states allows you to disclaim implied warranties. However, selling without implied warranties may well indicate to potential customers that the product is risky—low quality, damaged, or discontinued—and therefore, should be available at a lower price.
In order to disclaim implied warranties, you must inform consumers in a conspicuous manner, and generally in writing, that you will not be responsible if the product malfunctions or is defective. It must be clear to consumers that the entire product risk falls on them. You must specifically indicate that you do not warrant "merchantability," or you must use a phrase such as "with all faults," or "as is." A few states have special laws on how you must phrase an "as is" disclosure. (For specific information on how your state treats "as is" disclosures, consult your attorney.)"
I see no such claim of a conspicuous nature that they don't offer warranty coverage. The ONLY way I found out was to reach out to them. But they are required by law to tell the consumer in a notable and prominent fashion (hence "conspicuous"); presumably at the point of sale or in their product literature. This lack of any warranty coverage is neither on their product bottle, website, nor the PI sheet. In fact, I would say they are directly misleading in that they claim the product is suitable for use in a vast range of applications, and they say they will "stand behind" the product, but the reality is that they offer zero warranty.
Now, to be clear, there is no claim of Maxlife MV ATF to be licensed by any of the various applications. That's not unique, as many aftermarket lube makers also don't seek out licenses by the OEMs. But to claim they stand behind the product, and yet hide the fact that they will not warrant the product, is to me, totally disingenuous and possibly illegal.
I am not saying that Maxlife MV ATF is unsuitable or a bad product. I am reiterating what they told me; Maxlife Multi-Vehicle ATF has no product warranty; implied or written (express).
Again - I am not seeking any legal advice, nor advocating for any legal actions.
I am only informing the BITOG community that should they chose to use Maxlife Multi-Vehicle ATF, they will have no warranty coverage whatsoever.
If you so decide, you might reach out to Valvoline and seek to validate my claims/statements as being true. Ask them yourself; don't take my word for it.
I believe I've bought my last bottle of any Valvoline product.
Dave.
This thread is being started because I believe there is fair value in having the BITOG community aware of a recent conversation I've had with Valvoline product support regarding the Maxlife Multi-Vehicle ATF.
Here is the PI sheet straight from their site:
https://sharena21.springcm.com/Publ...bd3/3fa3136a-09bd-e711-9c12-ac162d889bd1
I quote: "Valvoline stands behind all its products, including Maxlife Multi-Vehicle ATF."
I wrote to them via their contact tool on their website because I wanted to know about their warranty statement. Here is specifically what I asked: (taken from their email reply dated 12-19-19)
(quoting Newton) - "I am wanting to know your specific warranty coverage for your ATF products; specfically the Maxlife ATF. I do not see any written warranty statement anywhere on your website. Can you please direct me to the specific page, or send me an email copy of the warranty."
(quoting Valvoline product support) - "David, thank you for your reply. We do not offer a written or implied warranty for MaxLife ATF."
Sooooooo ..... no warranty whatsoever; not written nor implied. (note that there are two kinds of warranty; implied or express. I believe they mean to state that neither implied or express warranty is offered, because written warranty is indicative of an express warranty).
Seems odd to me that a company which claims it "Stands behind all its products" is saying they will not warrant the product nor the product effects on your vehicle.
And the grand irony is that they are using the very FTC site information to induce you into buying their product (see their inclusive note about tie-in sales on the PI sheet), and yet that very same FTC site clearly states that they have a responsibility to tell us in a conspicuous manner that they offer no warranty.
https://www.ftc.gov/tips-advice/business-center/guidance/businesspersons-guide-federal-warranty-law
"If you do not offer a written warranty, the law in most states allows you to disclaim implied warranties. However, selling without implied warranties may well indicate to potential customers that the product is risky—low quality, damaged, or discontinued—and therefore, should be available at a lower price.
In order to disclaim implied warranties, you must inform consumers in a conspicuous manner, and generally in writing, that you will not be responsible if the product malfunctions or is defective. It must be clear to consumers that the entire product risk falls on them. You must specifically indicate that you do not warrant "merchantability," or you must use a phrase such as "with all faults," or "as is." A few states have special laws on how you must phrase an "as is" disclosure. (For specific information on how your state treats "as is" disclosures, consult your attorney.)"
I see no such claim of a conspicuous nature that they don't offer warranty coverage. The ONLY way I found out was to reach out to them. But they are required by law to tell the consumer in a notable and prominent fashion (hence "conspicuous"); presumably at the point of sale or in their product literature. This lack of any warranty coverage is neither on their product bottle, website, nor the PI sheet. In fact, I would say they are directly misleading in that they claim the product is suitable for use in a vast range of applications, and they say they will "stand behind" the product, but the reality is that they offer zero warranty.
Now, to be clear, there is no claim of Maxlife MV ATF to be licensed by any of the various applications. That's not unique, as many aftermarket lube makers also don't seek out licenses by the OEMs. But to claim they stand behind the product, and yet hide the fact that they will not warrant the product, is to me, totally disingenuous and possibly illegal.
I am not saying that Maxlife MV ATF is unsuitable or a bad product. I am reiterating what they told me; Maxlife Multi-Vehicle ATF has no product warranty; implied or written (express).
Again - I am not seeking any legal advice, nor advocating for any legal actions.
I am only informing the BITOG community that should they chose to use Maxlife Multi-Vehicle ATF, they will have no warranty coverage whatsoever.
If you so decide, you might reach out to Valvoline and seek to validate my claims/statements as being true. Ask them yourself; don't take my word for it.
I believe I've bought my last bottle of any Valvoline product.
Dave.
Last edited: