Voided warranty?

[dave1251]

Originally Posted by buddylpal
I think many people are missing the point here. The Magnuson-Moss warranty act doesn't mean the consumer can go out and purchase aftermarket (non OEM) parts and expect warranty to cover issues if said aftermarket part fails. All it says is the consumer can use aftermarket parts and still have the manufactures warranty, and in the event of a failure, the dealer/manufacturer has to prove the aftermarket part was at fault.

I hate to say it, but if Ford were to question the ATF used, they are in every right to deny your warranty. Maxlife is not approved by Ford so they can and will blame the failure on the wrong fluid being used. General Motors considers ANYTHING besides approved DexronVI in a transmission to be a contaminate. I'm sure Ford says something very similar. All they have to say is "Sorry, you used a non OEM approved fluid and non OEM fluids are a contaminate to Ford transmissions. They have not been tested for compatibility and durability standards with our transmissions".

I'm not sure if Ford will do a fluid sample. They may diagnose it like they would on a car that is brand new and just replace it no questions asked, or they may put a lot of pressure on you since you're so close to surpassing the warranty.



No Ford can not simply deny the warranty and state Valvoline ATF caused failure because it isn't approved. Why does this practical application is difficult to follow is beyond me.

Ford has to take an identical transmission with Maxlife ATF test it in near identical conditions as the OP's car subject it to a similar environment with the same maintenance procedures and schedules then it would have to fail before the warranty period. Then Ford has to repeat this again and then Valvoline gets to present the data in the favor of it's product and how it's product meets the performance requirements outlined by the MERCON LV spec thus it is not root cause of the failure.

None of this makes any business sense for Ford to consider this as an option.

 

[doitmyself]

This, and Dnewton's concurrent Valvoline warranty discussion is both interesting and excellent. Looking beyond the arguments, it really identifies two divergent personality types here at BITOG:

- Those who are only comfortable using mfg. approved maintenance and repair materials for their vehicle. They use nearly everything OEM: oil, filters, plugs, struts, brake fluid, etc..

- Those who are comfortable and trust aftermarket mfg. to make products that will work as well or better than OEM and don't fear warranty concerns. Oil filters and universal coolants come to mind.

There are probably a lot of us that are in between the two extremes. We think it is o.k. to use some non approved aftermarket parts (i.e., oil filters) but would not think twice about using only OEM materials in other cases (i.e., difficult to service timing belt).

Just being Captain Obvious here. I doubt that we will change many minds, especially the ones on the extreme boundaries of the two types.

 

[discountdon]

6 pages...

Any news OP?

OP?

 

[BMWTurboDzl]

Originally Posted by dave1251
Originally Posted by buddylpal
I think many people are missing the point here. The Magnuson-Moss warranty act doesn't mean the consumer can go out and purchase aftermarket (non OEM) parts and expect warranty to cover issues if said aftermarket part fails. All it says is the consumer can use aftermarket parts and still have the manufactures warranty, and in the event of a failure, the dealer/manufacturer has to prove the aftermarket part was at fault.

I hate to say it, but if Ford were to question the ATF used, they are in every right to deny your warranty. Maxlife is not approved by Ford so they can and will blame the failure on the wrong fluid being used. General Motors considers ANYTHING besides approved DexronVI in a transmission to be a contaminate. I'm sure Ford says something very similar. All they have to say is "Sorry, you used a non OEM approved fluid and non OEM fluids are a contaminate to Ford transmissions. They have not been tested for compatibility and durability standards with our transmissions".

I'm not sure if Ford will do a fluid sample. They may diagnose it like they would on a car that is brand new and just replace it no questions asked, or they may put a lot of pressure on you since you're so close to surpassing the warranty.



No Ford can not simply deny the warranty and state Valvoline ATF caused failure because it isn't approved. Why does this practical application is difficult to follow is beyond me.

Ford has to take an identical transmission with Maxlife ATF test it in near identical conditions as the OP's car subject it to a similar environment with the same maintenance procedures and schedules then it would have to fail before the warranty period. Then Ford has to repeat this again and then Valvoline gets to present the data in the favor of it's product and how it's product meets the performance requirements outlined by the MERCON LV spec thus it is not root cause of the failure.

None of this makes any business sense for Ford to consider this as an option.



As I understand an automaker can deny a warranty claim if the fluid wasn't marketed as a replacement for the OE fluid. Licensing (aka "approved") isn't a requirement in itself.

 

[Rw30707]

Not been able to get it in till 28th. I am sure being that close to warranty expiration they will do all they can to get out of it.

 

[gathermewool]

Originally Posted by Rw30707
Not been able to get it in till 28th. I am sure being that close to warranty expiration they will do all they can to get out of it.


Don't lose hope!

Also, just to put it out there to those who may be able to answer: does a whining transmission need to be replaced right away?

How long, roughly, can a whining tranny last?

I ask because I recall hearing vehicles whine all the time, and then seeing and hearing them way later on...still whining.

 

[wdn]

Originally Posted by MolaKule
Originally Posted by wdn


MaxLife multi-vehicle ATF does not meet the Ford MERCON LV spec. Valvoline does not leave it to the imagination or stay mute on it — they come out and say it is not certified or evaluated by any OEM.



What is your information source that the chemistry of Valvoline MaxLife does not meet the Mercon LV specification?


I already posted that information in this thread and it has nothing to do with chemistry. It is Valvoline's own statement that MaxLife Multi-Vehicle is not licensed by any OEM nor is it evaluated or endorsed by any OEM. HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH CHEMISTRY. They freely admit they are not licensed and that they sell other ATF products that are licensed and approved by Ford as MERCON spec.

 

[wdn]

Originally Posted by dogememe
Originally Posted by Rw30707
When i changed transmission fluid i was told by the guy at the auto parts store that max life was a recomended mercon lv transmision fluid. I should have went motorcraft. This could potentially cost me a few thousand dollars. It is my fault but i really didn't know the product had to be licensed or aproved by ford. The car shifts good but its got a bad whining noise comeing from the pump or torque coverter, i guess i will take it in to ford and if they deny the claim i will pay for it out of my pocket. Thanks for all of the feedback.


The auto parts store was correct. Maxlife is recommended for use in Mercon LV applications by Valvoline, but it's not Ford OEM approved. As far as I know Valvoline does not even make a Ford licensed ATF. Neither Maxlife or Valvoline Mercon V (for older Fords) is Ford approved.

However, that doesn't mean it isn't a suitable product. And, again, if Ford can prove the failure was the fluid, contact Valvoline. They'll probably stand behind their product, as you can see by the statement on the last page of this document linked above: https://sharena21.springcm.com/Publ...bd3/3fa3136a-09bd-e711-9c12-ac162d889bd1


You seem to have it backwards. The burden of proof is not on Ford Motor Company to prove that the unlicensed Valvoline ATF is unsuitable. The burden is on OP the car owner, to prove that the unlicensed, unapproved, unevaluated Valvoline ATF meets Ford engineering spec MERCON LV. Since Valvoline themselves freely admit it does not, customer loses on the warranty claim if use of Valvoline MaxLife multi-vehicle ATF is revealed.

 

[Rw30707]

So is it common practice for them to test the atf?

 

[exranger06]

Originally Posted by wdn
You seem to have it backwards. The burden of proof is not on Ford Motor Company to prove that the unlicensed Valvoline ATF is unsuitable. The burden is on OP the car owner, to prove that the unlicensed, unapproved, unevaluated Valvoline ATF meets Ford engineering spec MERCON LV. Since Valvoline themselves freely admit it does not, customer loses on the warranty claim if use of Valvoline MaxLife multi-vehicle ATF is revealed.

With all due respect, you're the one who has it backwards. The burden of proof is on Ford. Simply using an aftermarket fluid or part that Ford did/does not officially approve of does not automatically void any and all warranties. I refer you to my previous two posts:

Originally Posted by exranger06
An automaker CAN void the warranty if the aftermarket/not approved part CAUSED the failure. And when I say "void the warranty," I'm not saying that ALL warranty is permanently erased from the vehicle. What I mean, and maybe you meant the same thing, is they can deny certain warranty repairs. For example, if you put an aftermarket turbocharger on your engine, and then the engine blows up, the dealer will likely find that the turbocharger CAUSED the engine to blow up. Since it's an aftermarket part that the automaker did not design or ever approve of, they will not pay for a warranty repair. Now, even if they deny that particular repair, that doesn't mean you no longer have ANY warranty. Let's say you get your car fixed at your own expense, you keep driving it, and let's say something on the suspension breaks. The suspension has nothing to do with the engine or the turbocharger, so they can't say the turbo caused the suspension failure. So you can bring the car back to the dealer, with the turbocharger still installed, and they will fix the suspension for free under warranty. It doesn't matter that you had some other warranty claim denied in the past.

Now, as for Maxlife, if Ford finds that the fluid CAUSED the transmission to fail, AND they find out it's not an approved fluid, then YES, they will deny that warranty claim. If they find that the transmission would've failed regardless of the fluid used, then they cannot deny warranty coverage.

Originally Posted by exranger06
Since there seems to be some confusion over whether Ford has "the right" to deny a warranty claim, hopefully this clears some things up. Let's compare this to engine oil. Let's say you have a car that, according to the automaker, requires 5w30 oil. Let's say it's a basic economy car engine that doesn't have any special requirements or specifications the oil has to meet, aside from the latest API spec. (think: oil requirements for a 1998 Ford Escort). Now, the automaker isn't going to say, "You MUST use Brand X oil, or the warranty will be void," and they probably don't even care which brand oil you use. Just make sure it's 5w30, and you're good to go. Now let's say that, for whatever reason, you decide to use straight 60 weight oil instead, and on a cold winter morning, the super thick oil doesn't flow adequately and the engine seizes as a result. If the automaker finds out the wrong oil viscosity is in there, AND they determine that the engine failed BECAUSE you used the wrong oil, THEN they'll deny warranty coverage.

Now let's say that even though you're using the wrong oil, the engine still runs fine. But one day the water pump starts leaking. You could tell the dealer you use straight 60 weight oil, and that will NOT void the warranty. Because the water pump leaking has nothing to do with oil viscosity; it would've leaked even if you used the correct oil. Again, even if you use parts or fluids not approved, you can only be denied warranty coverage if those parts/fluids CAUSED the failure.

So, getting back to the transmission: Think of Mercon LV as 5w30 oil. The engine in the above analogy can use ANY brand of oil, as long as it's 5w30. This transmission can use ANY brand of ATF, as long as it's a Mercon LV fluid. Ford does NOT care which BRAND of fluid you use. You do NOT have to use Motorcraft brand. But you DO still have to use a Mercon LV fluid* (*see note below). If you put ATF +4, or Toyota WS, or a CVT fluid, or some other wrong fluid, AND Ford determines that the transmission failed BECAUSE you used the wrong fluid, THEN they'll deny warranty coverage. If it failed for some other reason, (in other words, it would've failed no matter what kind of fluid used, correct fluid or not), then they cannot deny warranty coverage.

**Note: When I say you must still use a Mercon LV fluid, I mean (more specifically), you have to use an officially licensed Mercon LV fluid. That's because Mercon LV is a spec that was made up by Ford. Ford is the one who decides what is and isn't Mercon LV, since they're the ones who invented it. An oil company cannot mix up their own batch of fluid using whatever ingredients they want and claim it's a Mercon LV fluid, *cough* Valvoline *cough* Maxlife ah-hem *clears throat* and expect Ford to just accept it, especially when Ford is the one paying for warranty repairs. But if it's officially licensed, then that means Ford actually tested it themselves, saw that it meets their specs, and approved it. Again, this is not the same thing as saying, "You must use Brand X." You can use any brand fluid you want, as long as it's an officially licensed Mercon LV fluid.

Maxlife, as we all know, is not an officially licensed fluid. Now that doesn't mean it's a bad or poor quality fluid. It simply means Ford hasn't tested it or officially approved of its use in their transmissions. That's it! If Valvoline wanted to, they could ask Ford to test it and license it at any time. And for all we know, if that happened, maybe it would pass all of Ford's tests with flying colors and exceed their specs more than any fluid before. Or maybe it would fail miserably. Nobody will know until it actually happens. And that's why IF the fluid was the cause of failure, or could've contributed to the failure, Ford wants to know if it was the proper (approved) fluid. It doesn't matter how many people have used it without problems. It doesn't matter if Valvoline "recommends" it for Mercon LV applications. I could pee in a bottle and I could "recommend" that you use it in your transmission and sell it to you for $6/qt. The only thing that matters is that Ford officially approves of its use in their transmissions.


Now granted, if Ford finds out he used a fluid not officially licensed, they may automatically say the fluid caused the failure just so they can weasel their way out of paying for the repair, even if the fluid is not at fault. OP needs to do his due diligence and really make Ford prove the fluid caused the failure if Ford puts up a fight about it. It may require hiring a lawyer. But who knows, maybe it'll get fixed under warranty with no questions asked.

 

[Rw30707]

So what is the likely hood of them discovering the maxlife fluid at all. If i tell them it is the original factory fill. Service of the fluid is scheduled at 150000 in the service manual.

 

[gathermewool]

The arguments on either side of who bears the burden of proof are convincing. It's known that the warranter typically bears this burden, but I'm not so sure that it's always so simple.

Example: we here at BITOG would immediately side with the manufacturer over a blown-engine claim if the OP had been running an unsuitable engine oil, such as one that might be evaluated as bad by PQIA, right? What's the difference? The difference is that we trust Valvoline over these no-name brands, even if, like the bottle of unsuitable oil, each gives indications that it doesn't actually meet any specification, whether explicit or implicit. Well, that and Valvoline hasn't had any of their products black-listed by PQIA... Let's hold that thought, for the moment, though.

Some of the junk oils that should never see the inside of a crankcase come in clearly bogus bottles, but maybe not all of them and not to the uninitiated. Why would reputable chain of gas stations sell me bad oil, for crying out loud? Isn't this stuff regulated by....somebody? To most people, I can imagine what they think to themselves when they consider an expensive quart of oil and a cheaper quart: "This bottle of Texas Tar is for 'Classic Cars Only;' I drive a '99, so that checks!" :glug glug glug: --> "This bottle of ATF says it's recommended for my Ford; I drive a Ford, so that checks!" :glug glug glug:

Again, what's the difference? Those of use on here know, but what about the rest of the people out there?

What about me? I had a worsening of issues in my '08 Civic after switching to Maxlife. Those issues were mostly resolved when I switched back to DW-1. Based on this one personal experience I know that I'll never go with anything but OEM fluid...FOR AN AT. In fact, this thread would be cut in half and most of the posts simply wishing the OP well in his request for a new tranny, were he to have used spec'd fluid. So, arguments aside: is it worth the $10 savings in fluids, as one previous poster asked? There are many on this forum, including me, who don't think so.

 

[gathermewool]

Originally Posted by Rw30707
So what is the likely hood of them discovering the maxlife fluid at all. If i tell them it is the original factory fill. Service of the fluid is scheduled at 150000 in the service manual.


Likelihood = near-zero.

 

[wdn]

"Ford does not assume or authorize anyone to assume for it any other obligation or liability in connection with your vehicle or these warranties."

Valvoline does not get to decide anything regarding a Ford warranty. They don't get to reinterpret much less alter, any warranty terms between FMC and a customer. They are not a party in this. They even say in writing, if you really care about meeting a spec, to buy one of their other, OEM approved ATF products.

Does Valvoline have any warranty on its own ATF? No they offer no warranty at all. Much less are they going to go to bat for you against a car maker. If the car maker denies your warranty claim, Valvoline gives a telephone number to call. Maybe offer some advice. Maybe just say you that's between you and Ford.

Ford sets the engineering spec called MERCON LV. Ford decides what meets the spec. YOU have to use ATF that meets MERCON LV spec. Is it possible to buy a non-Ford/Motorcraft product aftermarket fluid that is approved? Sure. You could find maybe a dozen non-Ford products that do.

 

[wdn]

Originally Posted by Rw30707
So what is the likely hood of them discovering the maxlife fluid at all. If i tell them it is the original factory fill. Service of the fluid is scheduled at 150000 in the service manual.


You have other options than to do what you are proposing. Keeping quiet has been proposed by others. Maybe you will get away with it, maybe not, but if not, no worse off than you are today. But let me ask you this: How would you, the buyer of a used car, know it was the factory fill. That might sound fishy if you started talking about trans fluid and how you never changed it and how it must be factory fill. How about just ask them to take a test drive because the car is driving funny.

If they do any inspection at all with suspicion raised can the service manager and his mechanic tell the difference between 93,000 original fluid and fresh, 10K fluid. Sure if they were looking for that. Would they care?

 

[bdcardinal]

Originally Posted by Rw30707
So is it common practice for them to test the atf?


I think I have seen it once or twice in the 13 years I have worked with Ford. Seriously the OP isn't even at the recommended mileage to service the transmission.

 

[MolaKule]

Originally Posted by wdn
Originally Posted by MolaKule
Originally Posted by wdn


MaxLife multi-vehicle ATF does not meet the Ford MERCON LV spec. Valvoline does not leave it to the imagination or stay mute on it — they come out and say it is not certified or evaluated by any OEM.



What is your information source that the chemistry of Valvoline MaxLife does not meet the Mercon LV specification?


I already posted that information in this thread and it has nothing to do with chemistry. It is Valvoline's own statement that MaxLife Multi-Vehicle is not licensed by any OEM nor is it evaluated or endorsed by any OEM. HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH CHEMISTRY. They freely admit they are not licensed and that they sell other ATF products that are licensed and approved by Ford as MERCON spec.


I would like to know how you know that it doesn't.

With all due respect yes it does as the ATF chemistry has everything to do with a fluid's performance and whether or not it can properly function in a covered transmission.

 

[buddylpal]

To the OP, I really do hope your transmission is covered under warranty. Several people have commented that your model has known issues or trouble points. I would just take it to the dealer, explain to them noise it's making, and let them diagnose it. Transmission issues are not fun!

 

[SubieRubyRoo]

Originally Posted by MolaKule
What is your information source that the chemistry of Valvoline MaxLife does not meet the Mercon LV specification?


What a shock! All of the formerly loquacious "experts" about how Maxlife has ruined a transmission and a warranty have disappeared and/or ignored the one person on the board who formulates transmission fluids for a living, and who also just happened to have analyzed MaxLife ATF previously, including sharing the information about the fluid and his interpretation about its makeup and usability, a DW-1 impostor, and genuine Honda DW-1. And not just one inquiry from MolaKule, but TWO! Color me unsurprised. Here's looking at you, wdn...

Dispute with MolaKule on the facts... please

 

[SubieRubyRoo]

Originally Posted by wdn
Does Valvoline have any warranty on its own ATF? No they offer no warranty at all. Much less are they going to go to bat for you against a car maker. If the car maker denies your warranty claim, Valvoline gives a telephone number to call. Maybe offer some advice. Maybe just say you that's between you and Ford.


Maybe I've gone full retard, but page 2 sure looks like a written warranty to me, even if it is "implied":
The Infamous, Bigfoot Edition of Valvoline's Written Warranty