HI version is available. Content is displayed in original English for accuracy.
Advertisement
Advertisement
⚡ Community Insights
Discussion Sentiment
29% Positive
Analyzed from 671 words in the discussion.
Trending Topics
#warranty#service#repair#party#car#third#basically#more#shop#don

Discussion (12 Comments)Read Original on HackerNews
https://www.slate.auto/en/certified
E.g: A car has 1 year warranty. But the warranty is extended by one year so long as you service it with manufacturer, not a third party. This doesn't prevent me from servicing with a third party for half the price, but it might not be worth doing that. And I would think twice about buying a car which is only a few years old unless it's serviced completely at first party, due to issues that could arise with warranty claims.
Could legislation be made that says "If you repair at a third party, or even repair yourself, and you know what you are doing/do it according to the recommendation, then the manufacturer has to give the same warranty they would have if you serviced it at them"? Because that feels insane. The warranty is just a kickback for using their expensive service, getting you to the service place/showroom regularly etc.
Why would anyone want to service their call at a stealership? The prices are unfair and the quality of techs is awful. Better to find a small reliable shop.
> Freep’s journalist then jumped in with the same question I would have wanted to ask: “But you don’t want people repairing their own vehicles?”
> Farley’s reply: “No, that’s, that’s fine, not for warranty work, though. These are very complicated cars, and we don’t think that’s safe, for many of the repairs on our vehicles, someone at home like myself could never do it. I have no problem working on a ’73 Bronco, but to work on a brand-new Bronco? I need all sorts of specialty tools. That’s something that, um, you know, we would put people’s lives at risk.”
In other news, try obtaining OEM brakes for a twenty year old mustang. They making them.
These CEOs and industry advocates can spew all the BS they want. It's literally their job to push for what's best for who they represent even at the expense of everything else. Of course they will go as far as they think they can with it. At the end of the day the actual political will to implement and/or tolerate absurdity is provided by all the paternalistic busybodies who will cheer for the destruction of entire industries (and hobbies) to the detriment of the general public if those benefiting from the destruction lie to them and say it'll advance some vague and hard to measure (and therefore easy to manipulate) goal like "safety" (in this case).