Topic: FTC comments: DIY Maintenance and Repairs, Will it Void the Warranty?

[TomatoSoup]

I know that this has been stated before and is probably not news to anyone here, but an interesting excerpt nonetheless from this month's RockAuto newsletter:

The Automotive Aftermarket Industry Association (AAIA) reported that on August 20, 2010, Honda issued a release to customers that stated “only by purchasing Honda Genuine parts through an authorized U.S. Honda dealer can you be assured of the replacement part’s authenticity, reliability and compatibility.”

In response to that statement, the US Federal Trade Commission issued a FTC Consumer Alert in December. Quotes below are from that FTC Alert titled: “Auto Warranties, Routine Maintenance, and Repairs: Is Using the Dealer a Must?”

"Do I have to use the dealer for repairs and maintenance to keep my warranty in effect?

No. An independent mechanic, a retail chain shop, or even you yourself can do routine maintenance and repairs on your vehicle. In fact, the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act, which is enforced by the FTC, makes it illegal for manufacturers or dealers to claim that your warranty is void or to deny coverage under your warranty simply because someone other than the dealer did the work.”

"Will using "aftermarket" parts void my warranty?

No. An "aftermarket" part is a part made by a company other than the vehicle manufacturer or the original equipment manufacturer. Simply using an aftermarket part does not void your warranty. The Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act makes it illegal for companies to void your warranty or deny coverage under the warranty simply because you used an aftermarket part.”

If a car dealer attempts to mislead you by claiming that repairs or maintenance must be performed at the dealer then be sure to file a complaint with the FTC (https://www.ftccomplaintassistant.gov/FTC_Wizard.aspx?Lang=en).

The AAIA has also created a survey (http://aftermarket.org/Government/ComplianceAssistance/AAIA-FTC-Survey.aspx), primarily aimed at professional mechanics, to “ensure that the U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has a realistic picture of some of the anti-competitive actions taken by franchised new car dealers that are impacting independent repair shops and consumers.”

Tom Taylor,
RockAuto.com

[snaponbob]

Good to see/know. However, don't read TOO much wiggle room into some of the wording. The FTC defined "aftermarket" VERY loosely. I would not assume that THEIR understanding of "aftermarket" is the same as an enthusiast's definition. THEIR aftermarket seems to read non-OEM, where OUR definition might include high performance. Example; A bigger turbo is certainly aftermarket, but probably does not fulfill the intent of the FTC's wording. As for Honda's wording, there may be an implication of warranty issues, but they did NOT say that. 

[JimVonBaden]

Good point Bob. An aftermarket part, by their standard, is a direct replacement for the OEM. Of course if the non-OEM part fails the OEM is not responsible for fixing it, or damage "proven" to be caused by it. It also means that if you use non-OEM style (read performance) parts, that the OEM can refuse warranty repair on other OEM parts effected by the non-OEM part.

What it also means is that just because you have a non-OEM tune, for example, that if your brake master cylinder fails they cannot refuse warranty repair. Same for onther non-relational parts and systems.

Theoretically the burdon of proof that a non-OEM part caused any failure, and subsequent refusal of warranty repair is on the OEM. Though sometimes you will have to fight them over it.

Jim