If you haven't got the jist of the thread.
That dealer if fuill of CRAP and he is lieing to your face. As said, get that in writing and get that to a lawyer. Also, call H-D and tell them what your dealer is feeding you and also let them know you have sent it to your lawyer. You can always bluff the lawyer part, just tell them you have one for now they usually cave when they know that you know your rights as a consumer

 

Murph, check out my earlier post.
Bring a witness. Make certified statements. Get a lawyer. Think "Class Action".

...gene

 

MOCO called me today regarding my 07 Ultra Clatter, saying they have flagged my bikes VIN and warranty (what ever that means)and that they will continue to spot check other owners bikes as wellfor circumventing or changing parts, i.e. exhaust, induction, fuel management systems. In short any changes from OEM configurations will be flagged to the bikesVIN and warranty. Again, that information was told to me byMOCO. So apparently MOCO is going out of the way to void orlesson the warranty on the 07's now. My thoughts are "What Warranty". Their reporting agent is NOT only the area reps but the dealers mayvery wellturn you in also. MOCO said they had pictures of my bike with several after market items added that was contrary to their warranty. So I guess we have spies among us now.

 

They would still have to prove that by you changing an airbox or any aftermarket partwould cause that bearing or any part,to fail. They have nothing to stand on

 

Well, you get "iffy" when the part you add could cause the bike to be non-compliant with EPA standards. Also, the aftermarket part, IF NOT STREET LEGAL may, I said MAY, give them more leverage to squirm out.

With oil there is no question that any oil meeting their minimum std, that is the SAE rating, is fine and cannot be the cause of a denial.

EZ

 

Well I think EPA compliance is a seperate issue. The MoCo could probably bring it up in a legal action but bottom line the Warranty Act says the aftermarket part has to be the "direct cause" of the damage/failure claimed under the warranty.

One nice thing about the Warranty Act is Congress wrote the law specifically so that you can recover your court costs and "resonable" attorney's fees. I think class action is right. I own a small independent shop and I'm an Amsoil dealer, and I would love to get the stealer/MoCo jammed up behind a BS warranty denial. I would definately push for class action status.

See the legal web site below:

www.mlmlaw.com/library/guides/ftc/warranties/undermag.htm

 

fxrp, I was in the auto business as a GM for many years. The Moss Magnusen act is a good thing and I am in agreement with most of what was said here BUT there have been court decisions SINCE the law was passed and all I'm saying is that when you substitute a part that IS NOT COMPLIANT with the EPA regs, chances of a Judge siding with the MOCO are increased significantly. It is also much easier for them to CLAIM that a failure could be caused by an aftermarket device that tampers with, rather than replaces, the stock electrics or alters the air fuel ratio in a very tightly engineered engine. The narrow band , closed loop FI system was started to appease the EPA and altering it COULD place you on shaky ground since it is no longer, technically, STREET LEGAL. Lawyers have a way of giving different meanings to words than the average person would . Think, "That depends on what the meaning of the word IS, is."

I'm not siding with the MOCO here, just telling you that I've seen courts come down on things completely differently than we might believe and , while the MM act would tend to agree with your statements, subsequent rulings may have totally negated parts of it.

EZ

 

I agree with lawyers twisting words, but the failure has to stillbe a direct result of the change/s made to theOEM component. Example; bearing fails in tranny after installing after market pipes, no way related to exhaust changes. I see this in my line of work where manufactures try to weasel out of the warranty, but seldom does their scheme work. The courts now days are wise to these companies and their scamming the customers, that's the very reason the Moss Act was passed. Also, the EPA regs mostly pertain to the manufactures requirements, 90% of all the bikes on the street today have been altered in some way or another from their original oem specs, especially the Harley's. Even the dealers are now altering or offering this bikes with after market exhaust, breathers, fuel management systems etc.right from the show room floor, with full warranty. So what's good for the goose is good for the gander! The thing that MOCO doesn't like is that they want the labor costs for installing the upgrades, which most people install themselves. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to install most of this stuff. Now MOCO and their stealer's are telling the customers they have to use their products, and must be installed by the dealer, or they will void the warranty, which everyone knows is BS! It's just another scam to get money from the customer.

 

Yep, no doubt they don't want to pay warranty claims.

I, OTOH, don't want to turn something I love and use for getting my mind straight and relaxing, to turn into a Federal case. It made sense to me to use devices which could easily be removed when going in for warranty work. Like a PCIII or DFO that is plug and play. I use an SE AC with a K&N filter and put the stock one back on for warranty work. I have kept my catylist exhaust (06 Roadglide) untill my bike is out of warranty next may. I have about 15K on it and do my own maintenance except for tire changes. My dealer has never given me a problem with the small warranty items and I've had no big ones yet.

Next May, I will switch exhausts and reprogram my Fuel Injection but, honestly, for me in stock condition except for intake and richening it up a bit, I have been happy with my bikes performance. I didn't buy it to joust windmills, just to ride and relax. I'll leave the lawsuits to the young, consumer activists.

That said, I have seen warranty claims denied in autos for modifications you might think didn't effect the part that failed. Courts have,in some instances (not oil or filters, etc but performance mods) sided with the manufacturers, especially when the vehicle was rendered "Non compliant" with Federal Regs.

EZ

 

I'm sorry EZ but I just don't see it. I haveworked with lawyers on many issues (mostly property & title) and lately I have been following the warranty issue closely. I'm not aware of any case law that has altered the original intent of the act.

This thread started with a failed inner primary bearing on the trans mainshaft and there is no way oil or pipes& AC has any effect on the bearing. Even performance mods; you are saying that the waranty is void if you put on 100hp/100tq with a Branch or Zipper's setup but its OK for the dealer to do it with SE parts or for the MoCo to do it with a 110" CVO bike? Come on, no court in the country would find that way.

Like RM said; bottom line the part has to be the "direct cause" of the failure.