Not insane... Illegal...Quote:
Originally Posted by rick130
Only reason they could argue would be if they were long travel versions resulting in prop shaft damage due to over extension.
Otherwise, illegal to void on those grounds...
Printable View
Not insane... Illegal...Quote:
Originally Posted by rick130
Only reason they could argue would be if they were long travel versions resulting in prop shaft damage due to over extension.
Otherwise, illegal to void on those grounds...
I would've thought that Mike, it would be the same as voiding warranty on the engine if you didn't buy your oil from LR even though it met the Ford spec.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tombie
I perform warranty work for a few companies and a couple are unbelievably tight and will do all sots of things to deny a warranty claim.
As one State tech manager said to me, his job was to deny as many claims as possible to save the company as much as he could.
I said, what about goodwill and PR ?
He said eff it, that wasn't his remit.
Mind boggling stuff.
LR claimed changing the shock absorbers to non genuine altered the suspension and ride hight, (some how??). Anyway, I wasn't too worried as I had already traded the car in. (Would have made transferring warranty fun for them).
My point is, whatever you do to your car, it is up to you to prove the modification, or use of non-genuine parts, hasn't resulted in another part failing. Not impossible, but not free either.
Cheers,
Tim
I'm sure you're sorted by now, but just for reference as well...
Front Air Locker should be a RD128, and rear is a RD138.
I'd love them to try that on me. I'm currently in the position as national warranty manager for my company, I'd eat them alive on a stunt like that.Quote:
Originally Posted by TimNZ