[6SPEED]

OK, my 2010 warranty is just about to expire and I went to my selling dealer for replacement of my drivers floor mat that is badly worn. They turned me down flat! ("normal wear" they say!)

I bitched to Subaru who said they would give me a 50% credit on a new one or go to another dealer. That's what I did. Dealer #2 gave me no trouble and ordered me a set of new mats. Obviously, I'm never going back to my original dealer now!

My question is why the discrepancy? Do dealers get charged for warranty issues? I would seem odd that dealer #1, where I have an established history including regular maintenance gave me grief and dealer #2 who doesn't know me from a bag of apples gave me no trouble whatsoever!

Any thoughts?

 

[subiesailor]

I have NEVER EVER heard of normal wear items like floor mats - seats which are heavily abused from rough use - or even brake pads being covered by warranty.

This expectation is exactly why dealers charge $100 to change out a burnt bulb vs the $20 it really is costing them in parts and labor time.

If you drive your car through Alaska and get all sorts of road rash on the front end and then go to the dealer asking for warranty claim to replace or fix the damage - it is no different than tromping mud and ice and such into the car wearing work boots etc and wrecking the floor mats which are there to prevent damaging the actual carpet in the car - if the floor mats are damaged and worn out - they did their intended JOB! Why would this be acceptable warranty claim? The logic you have is a prime example of why warranty's have pages and pages of writing listing all the things they do and do not cover.

 

[rasterman]

A free set of floor mats is a pretty cheap price for them to pay for all your future business, and they know it. You might want to locate a 3rd dealer for next time around.

 

[subiesailor]

A free set of floor mats is a pretty cheap price for them to pay for all your future business, and they know it. You might want to locate a 3rd dealer for next time around.

Actually even the very good dealer I worked at would never do this. Here is why a person who logically thinks that an item like floor mats being used possibly not being cleaned - and heavily used ie exposed to lots of grit is something that should be covered under warranty will soon be asking for other obsurd stuff. A smart dealer will simply shut down the logic from the get go.

The Warranty is to cover flawed parts not worn out wear items that are heavily used. If the dealer can't prove the mats were flawed - the cost of the replacement comes out of the dealers pocket. In the case of floor mats if they are simply worn out - that is not a flaw.

 

[vr4Legacy]

A free set of floor mats is a pretty cheap price for them to pay for all your future business, and they know it. You might want to locate a 3rd dealer for next time around.

^+1

 

[6SPEED]

I have NEVER EVER heard of normal wear items like floor mats - seats which are heavily abused from rough use - or even brake pads being covered by warranty.

This expectation is exactly why dealers charge $100 to change out a burnt bulb vs the $20 it really is costing them in parts and labor time.

If you drive your car through Alaska and get all sorts of road rash on the front end and then go to the dealer asking for warranty claim to replace or fix the damage - it is no different than tromping mud and ice and such into the car wearing work boots etc and wrecking the floor mats which are there to prevent damaging the actual carpet in the car - if the floor mats are damaged and worn out - they did their intended JOB! Why would this be acceptable warranty claim? The logic you have is a prime example of why warranty's have pages and pages of writing listing all the things they do and do not cover.

I'm not quite sure what your rant is about. My question was "why the discrepancy?"

Dealer #2 could have easily told me no but they didn't.

Subaru does cover brake pads and wiper blade inserts-wear items so that cost is built into the price of the car.

FYI- the car has 33K miles on it and I use all weather mats in the winter-(they are holding up)-

"Normal wear' was the excuse dealer #1 used to deny the claim despite the fact there were indicators of premature failure! The Service Manager made the determination without even a cursory inspection.

FYI #2- just as a comparison I also own a Chevy Impala with 47K and those mats are holding up fine!

You seem to have made a lot of assumptions based on your own biases. Perhaps you should go back and reread my original post carefully.

 

[iainb]

I have NEVER EVER heard of normal wear items like floor mats - seats which are heavily abused from rough use - or even brake pads being covered by warranty.

This expectation is exactly why dealers charge $100 to change out a burnt bulb vs the $20 it really is costing them in parts and labor time.

You should really read your warranty...

Wear Item Limited Warranty
WEAR ITEM COVERAGE is 3 years or 36,000 miles, whichever comes first. Items covered are brake pad/shoe linings, clutch linings, and wiper blades.

https://www.subaru.com/my-subaru/warranties-2012.html

Posters here have also mentioned that their dealers have replaced light bulbs for free as well.

 

[iainb]

I'm not quite sure what your rant is about. My question was "why the discrepancy?"

Why the discrepancy? Because the two dealerships are owned by two companies who have two different philosophies about customer service.

Just because they say Subaru on the front door doesn't mean you are going to be treated the same way- they are not owned by the same corporate entities.

 

[subiesailor]

You should really read your warranty...



https://www.subaru.com/my-subaru/warranties-2012.html

Posters here have also mentioned that their dealers have replaced light bulbs for free as well.

I have - guess what you will be hard pressed to find a car used in a normal manner that needs new brakes - clutch etc before 37,000 miles. And it many cases the claim can easily be denied given extensive abuse or improper use can be listed as a reason why such items would not be covered if the dealer see's obvious indications of such etc.

A warranty with these listed items doesn't mean that such items are expected to be replaced at 36K - it simply means if there is a FLAW which causes premature wear or failure it will be covered.

 

[dark]

Rasterman,

Well said!