| Message |
Author |
|
 Posted: Sat Jan 17, 2009 1:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
| I did not know this, I have a toyota, I am really glad that I read this post through. Warranties are something that we never delve into unless something does not go our way, like a fat bill after a repair. More fine print. Thanks for the post guys and gals, it has been educating. |
|
goodnatured
Senior member
Joined: 04 Nov 2007
Posts: 1213
0.07 Dollars($)
|
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 18, 2009 1:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Yes goodnatured it has been really informative. I still remain with the same opinion but there have been a lot of good points made in this post. |
|
fireyone
Senior member
Joined: 07 Jan 2008
Posts: 1993
2.31 Dollars($)
|
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 18, 2009 3:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| It does make sense, you start out with genuine toyota and then end up with a mix of parts that are not what toyota can guarentee, that is like me saying that I will back up or insure your work and I don't even know you. You use cheaper material, less knowledgable people and etc. At least if they keep it genuine toyota they can track the faults if any occur. Doing it just to save money is crap on the insurance company's end. |
|
goodnatured
Senior member
Joined: 04 Nov 2007
Posts: 1213
0.07 Dollars($)
|
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 18, 2009 5:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| To a point GN...it saves you in insurance in so many ways but I am not going this arguement rtoute again...once is enough. |
|
fireyone
Senior member
Joined: 07 Jan 2008
Posts: 1993
2.31 Dollars($)
|
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 19, 2009 3:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | It does make sense, you start out with genuine toyota and then end up with a mix of parts that are not what toyota can guarentee |
You end up with what quality minded repairers refer to as a frankencar.
Policies use to promise to restore your vehicle to pre loss condition by reasonable and necessary means. Now most policies promise only to retore your vehicle's function as reasonably determined by a person who does not repair vehicles.
_________________
If you can't find the time to do it right, how will you ever find the time to do it over. |
|
MikeoftheOzarks
Senior member
Joined: 10 Feb 2008
Posts: 595
Location: in the missouri ozarks
191.27 Dollars($)
|
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 31, 2009 3:43 am Post subject: Aftermarket parts on a new car |
|
|
GEICOS Policy as told directlt to me by the GEICO REP givin a repair estimate on her camery New and still under factory Warranty that GEICO states in their Policy that they will use AM parts to do repairs. When asked where they procure their parts he could not tell me, buthe said he knows they are just as good as the original Toyota parts.
I'm not buying none of it. On a new car this should not happen.
Avia
_________________
Register Now to have your Insurance queries solved. |
|
Charles Banks
Guest
|
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 31, 2009 9:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
Hi,
I've read about a couple of cases online. One of it shared how Geico had intended to send a new honda civic car to their body shop since they wished to place AM body parts in it. They were unwilling to send it to the Honda body shop, while Honda stuck to their deal that if the owner didn't use their authorized body shop then the warranty would be void.
It's like any other insurer trying to get the repairs settled with as 'low' as possible. So, I think it's up to the customer to get into the details of the repairs and then check for himself if he's satisfied with the functions of the repaired parts. PalinRome
_________________
Register Now to have your Insurance queries solved. |
|
#PalinRome
Guest
|
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 31, 2009 9:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
Charles, I think you need to re-read the policy documents to clarify whether or not the insurer is allowed to use the AM parts for repair. At many times the insurers would use the aftermarket parts to repair the vehicles. Also, the state laws regarding the use of AM parts in repairing vehicles would govern this issue as well. And, most state would allow it.
However, if the car is still under the valid warranty, you may prefer to take it to the Toyota dealer. |
|
simon
Senior member
Joined: 28 Sep 2005
Posts: 550
93.55 Dollars($)
|
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 31, 2009 1:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
.
.
| Quote: | | Charles, I think you need to re-read the policy documents to clarify whether or not the insurer is allowed to use the AM parts for repair. At many times the insurers would use the aftermarket parts to repair the vehicles. Also, the state laws regarding the use of AM parts in repairing vehicles would govern this issue as well. And, most state would allow it. |
Well Simon...
The best way to summarize your comment is:
Its amazing what high power Lobbyist backed by the Trillion Dollar insurance industries Wealth & Influence can accomplish through effective legislation...! Yep... keep them Profits a rising. errr I mean, Premiums down.
That's my 2¢ worth for now. ( maybe ± a couple ¢ ) 
FK, |
|
FK
Senior member
Joined: 10 Feb 2008
Posts: 290
Location: Pa.
41.08 Dollars($)
|
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 31, 2009 11:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | I've read about a couple of cases online. One of it shared how Geico had intended to send a new honda civic car to their body shop since they wished to place AM body parts in it. They were unwilling to send it to the Honda body shop, while Honda stuck to their deal that if the owner didn't use their authorized body shop then the warranty would be void. |
Not sure where you read this but your probably paraphrasing it incorrectly. An insurance company cannot make the owner of the vehicle take it to a non-Honda repair shop (also, there is little point since the same amount is paid regardless of where it's repaired). Then can encourage people to take it to their preferred shops, though.
The part that you gloss over is that no manufacture is going to warrenty other peoples parts. The maker of those parts are going to warrenty them. Also, the bumper to bumper warrenty still exists on the vehicle... it's just the AM parts that are not going to be warrantied. |
|
tcope
Forum Expert
Joined: 22 Nov 2006
Posts: 5069
Location: Salt Lake City, UT
272.92 Dollars($)
|
|
| Posted: Wed May 06, 2009 1:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Reported in the Chicago Tribune
| Quote: | The three-judge appellate panel disagreed, however, saying the plaintiffs "presented sufficient evidence for a reasonable juror to conclude that aftermarket parts are not of like kind and quality to (original manufacturer) parts and that American Family breached its contacts with its policyholders when it paid to return the damaged vehicle to pre-loss condition based on the nature and cost of aftermarket parts."
The case has been sent back to the trial court to consider additional relief, attorneys fees and the process for distributing the verdict to plaintiffs. |
Somebody finally gets it! Ain't nothin like the real thing, Baby!
_________________
If you can't find the time to do it right, how will you ever find the time to do it over. |
|
MikeoftheOzarks
Senior member
Joined: 10 Feb 2008
Posts: 595
Location: in the missouri ozarks
191.27 Dollars($)
|
|
| Posted: Wed May 06, 2009 5:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Interesting. I've attempted to read more on this case but cannot find much information on the actual complaint online. The premise of the case is mentioned but not the actual facts.
I suspect that AmFam has already changed the wording of their policy as most other carriers already have in order to allow for the use of AM parts. As Missouri state law allows these parts to be used by insurance companies (this case was really for breach of contract).
It will be interesting to see what AmFam does. State Farm has been successful on appeal in these cases. Also, this does very little in the way of stopping carriers from using AM parts... as, mentioned above, they will simply need to change the wording of their policy. This is not a court ruling stating that AM parts cannot be considered by carriers in the repairs of vehicles. My guess is that they will settle out of court. |
|
tcope
Forum Expert
Joined: 22 Nov 2006
Posts: 5069
Location: Salt Lake City, UT
272.92 Dollars($)
|
|
| Posted: Wed May 06, 2009 9:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I especially liked this part
| Quote: | | The three-judge appellate panel disagreed, however, saying the plaintiffs "presented sufficient evidence for a reasonable juror to conclude that aftermarket parts are not of like kind and quality to (original manufacturer) parts |
There is a full discussion and report over at dubya dubya dubya Insurance Journal dot com.
_________________
If you can't find the time to do it right, how will you ever find the time to do it over. |
|
MikeoftheOzarks
Senior member
Joined: 10 Feb 2008
Posts: 595
Location: in the missouri ozarks
191.27 Dollars($)
|
|
| Posted: Wed May 06, 2009 9:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Thanks. I was able to find links to the Complaint. But the complaint is _not_ that AM parts should not be used or that they were not "Like, Kind and Quality" (a vague and broad reaching definition at best) but rather that there was a breach of contract. The breach was that AmFam's policy states it will put the vehicle back into the same condition it was prior to the accident. USAA, Nationwide and a host of other carriers went through this same thing many years ago. The courts ruled that the use of AM parts in place of OEM did not meet the terms of the contract to put the vehicle back in the "same" condition (I'm assuming this is what the AmFam policy states). Are the parts the same? Probably not. Are they just as good? I've venture to say on 95% or so of the time, yes.
But I just wanted to make it clear that Missouri is not ruling as to if insurance companies can allow for AM parts or not, it's already a fact that they can. |
|
tcope
Forum Expert
Joined: 22 Nov 2006
Posts: 5069
Location: Salt Lake City, UT
272.92 Dollars($)
|
|
| Posted: Thu May 07, 2009 12:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | But I just wanted to make it clear that Missouri is not ruling as to if insurance companies can allow for AM parts or not, it's already a fact that they can. |
You are correct, that is if they meet the criteria established in the state statutes that they are like, kind, and quality. The court ruled that a/m parts did not meet that definition. Just because an insurance backed certifying entity claims they are does not make them so. If that were true, the two certified headlamp mounting panels that are to be picked up by the aftermarket vendor because neither fit should have fit because someone certified them. Who ceritfies the certifyers?
Two simple panels made of fibreglass sheet moulding that they can't even duplicate. One day rental expense added to the cost of the repair and I'll get a credit from the company that claims they should fit for three installations of the same part. Twice with their certified parts and once with the oem part. The owner refused to drive down the road with the composite headlites bouncing and dancing because the a/m manufacturer can't even get a hole diameter and thickness accurate in plastic, and we trust them with sheet metal? The difference in the a/m part and the original was less than forty dollars.
_________________
If you can't find the time to do it right, how will you ever find the time to do it over. |
|
MikeoftheOzarks
Senior member
Joined: 10 Feb 2008
Posts: 595
Location: in the missouri ozarks
191.27 Dollars($)
|
|
Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 Next 
