Update on my ls

W

whatsupadrian

Dedicated LVC Member
Joined
Jan 11, 2005
Messages
701
Reaction score
1
Location
California
Well you all may remember I blew my motor somehow, the cause of the blow is still unknown. The warranty company denied my warranty due to Modification and lack of Lubrication. The dealer said they they didnt believe that the modifications caused the motor to blow and they said the lack of lubrication is due to holes in both sides of the motor. Here is the workorder comments...

1. 12-10-05 7:15 SPOKE TO THOMAS AT EXTENDED WARRANTY CO. ADVISED OF
2. SEEZED ENGINE REQUESTED TO GET CUSTOMER AUTHORIZATION FOR ENGINE
3. TEAR DOWN
4. 12-10-05 7:20 SPOKE TO ROBERT AND RECOMMENDED ENGINE TEAR DOWN
5. FOR EXTENDED WARRANTY CO INSPECTION AUTHORIZED TEAR DOWN
6. 562 943-****
7. 12-12-05 6:42 SPOKE TO BUSTER AT EXTENDED WARRANTY READY FOR
8. INSPECTION
9. 12-13-05 11:35 INSPECTOR SHOWED UP AND INSPECTED VEHICLE WITH
10. TECHNICIAN
11. 12-13-05 2:15 SPOKE TO TOM AT SUPERIOR AUTO CARE BASED ON
12. INSPECTION DENYING CLAIM DUE TO MODIFICATIONS RECOMMENDED
13. CUSTOMER TO AUUTHORIZE TEAR DOWN FOR REINSPECTION
14. 12-13-05 2:20 SPOKE TO CUSTOMER ADVISED OF ABOVE INFO AND
15. AUTHORIZED TO TEAR DOWN
16. 12-20-05 8:20 REVIEVED MESSAGE FROM THOMAS AT EXTENDED WARRANTY
17. REQUESTED CAUSE OF OIL PRESSURE LOSS
18. 12-20-05 9:19 CALLED EXTENDED WARRANTY SPOKE TO KEITH REQUESTED
19. DEFINITE CAUSE OF PART FAILURE
20. 12-20-05 9:56 MIKE LANG SPOKE TO PAUL AND ADVISED HIM WE
21. CANNOT DETERMIN LOSS OF OIL PRESSURE IF INFACT IT LOST OIL
22. PRESSURE FIRST OR CONNECTING ROD BROKE FIRST ADVISED BY
23. PAUL WILL GIVE CASE TO SUPERVISOR FOR REVIEW
24. 12-20-05 12:20 RECEIVED MESSAGE FROM PETE FROM EXTENDED
25. WARRANTY “CLAIM DENIED DUE TO LACK OF LUBE AND MODIFICATION”
26. AS DETERMINED BY INSPECTOR AND EXTENDED WARRANTY COMPANY
27. 12-20-05 2:07 MIKE LANG LEFT MESSAGE FOR CUSTOMER ADVISED
28. CLAIM HAS BEEN DECLINED. ESTIMATE FOR REPAIRS PARTS $4349.02
29. LABOR $2142.00 TAX $358.79 PLUS CORE CHARGE $2000.00 TOTAL $8849.81
30. NEED $6500.00 DOWN PAYMENT BEFORE PARTS CAN BE ORDERED
31.
32. IT WAS NOT THE OPINION OF CERRITOS LINCOLN THAT THE ENGINE
33. SHOULD BE TORN DOWN AS THE BLOCK HAS TWO LARGE HOLES IN IT
34. AS REQUESTED BY CUSTOMER’S SERVICE CONTRACT CO ENGINE WAS REMOVED
35. AND DISASSEMBLED FOR INSPECTION AT THE CUSTOMER’S EXPENSE
36. THE INSPECTOR INSPECTED ENGINE ONCE PRIOR TO REMOVAL AND ONCE
37. AFTER TEAR DOWN. THE SERVICE CONTRACT COMPANY AT CERRITOS LINCOLN
38. MERCURY TO IDENTIFY CAUSE OF CONNECTING ROD FAILURE
39. THERE IS NOT ANY SIGNS OF OIL PUMP DAMAGE
40. #3 AND #7 CONNECTING RODS ARE BROKEN
41. #1 AND #4 BEARINGS APPEAR TO BE GOOD OTHER THEN SLIGHT
42. SCORING DUE LOSS OF OIL PRESSURE AFTER FAILURE
43. OIL LEVEL WAS LOW DUE TO HOLE IN BLOCK
44. IT IS THE OPINION OF CERRITOS LINCOLN THAT THIS TYPE OF FAILURE
45. IS NOT CAUSED BY LACK OF LUBRICATION
46. THE EXHAUST SYSTEM HAS BEEN MODIFIED WITH CUTOUTS.
47. IT IS OUR OPINION A STRETCH THAT THIS MODIFICATION COULD CAUSE
48. CONNECTING ROD FAILURE
49.
50. CUSTOMER ADVISED
Click to expand...
 
44. IT IS THE OPINION OF CERRITOS LINCOLN THAT THIS TYPE OF FAILURE
45. IS NOT CAUSED BY LACK OF LUBRICATION
46. THE EXHAUST SYSTEM HAS BEEN MODIFIED WITH CUTOUTS.
47. IT IS OUR OPINION A STRETCH THAT THIS MODIFICATION COULD CAUSE
48. CONNECTING ROD FAILURE
49.
50. CUSTOMER ADVISED
Click to expand...
What? What did you modify with "cutouts"? I don't understand this. How the hell does an exhaust system cause connecting rod failure? I mean if you were on a drag strip burning tires for 30 minutes at a high RPM rate then I can see why the engine failed. However, I just don't find the connecting piece tying them together. In my opinion, one has nothing to do with the other directly. Oil and a connecting rod...yes...they are directly connected!

I don't know what to advise you on here but I think I'd be wanting some answers to that quote I posted. Good luck!
 
I know what to advise: Talk to a lawyer. Inform the warranty company that you are contacting a lawyer. Your "modification" in no way could have caused two connecting rods to break. The warranty company is denying and using that weak excuse because of the size of the claim. They simply don't want to pay that out.

Kick a** seabass.
 
You are getting the run around big time. The notes claim that the shop does not believe their reasoning for denying the claim. The warranty company is just using tactics to reduce their amount of exposure. I'm betting when it's said and done, they will offer you a reduced settlement value.

If you have something like Magnaflow exhaust on the car, I would email them that post immediately. I'm betting they would be willing to jump on the wagon with you. Regardless, with the notes you have posted, it would be a cold day in hell before I would lay down and accept that decision. You may very well have to pay for the repairs out of your pocket to get your car back, but you should be re-imbursed. You really should. These aftermarket warranty companies are nothing but a joke and a rip off. This is common with them. Go get 'em!!
 
2001LS8Sport said:
Regardless, with the notes you have posted, it would be a cold day in hell before I would lay down and accept that decision. You may very well have to pay for the repairs out of your pocket to get your car back, but you should be re-imbursed. You really should. These aftermarket warranty companies are nothing but a joke and a rip off. This is common with them. Go get 'em!!
Click to expand...
You got that right!
 
Get a lawyer and fight them B!tches to the end They are gonna pay!!!! YOU PAID SO WHY CANT THEY SON'S A B!TCHES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 
GrayGhost1 said:
What? What did you modify with "cutouts"? I don't understand this. How the hell does an exhaust system cause connecting rod failure? I mean if you were on a drag strip burning tires for 30 minutes at a high RPM rate then I can see why the engine failed. However, I just don't find the connecting piece tying them together. In my opinion, one has nothing to do with the other directly. Oil and a connecting rod...yes...they are directly connected!
Click to expand...
The quote looks like the dealership is siding with Adrian, and they've recorded it in their system that they think it's a stretch to believe that the modifications could have caused the failure.

A lot of the SEMA steps really only apply to the manufacturer's warranty; it won't do any good to try to get Lincoln involved, because they aren't. The dealer has given what should be more than enough ammunition to fight this; if the warranty company won't make this right, it's time to bring in a lawyer to force them to make it right. Like SilverLS said, they accepted money to cover this sort of thing, now it's time for them to cover it.
 
Extended warranties are a joke.........

My brother had an extended warranty on one of his vehicles that he purchased when he got the car. When he took the car back to the dealer to get it fixed, they charged him the deductable and told him that the car was fixed. Two weeks later same issue. All in all he took the car back six times in 8 months for the same issue. I advised him to take the car to the dealership where the car originally was purchased and not where he purchased it from. As soon as the car pulled into the service bay the service manager came over and said he recognized the car. Seems that the dealer where my brother purchased the car was taking the car to the manufacturers dealership for warranty work. As in the car was still under the manufacturers warranty and the plave where he bought the car was ripping him off by charging him the deductable each and every time. The service manager informed us that the other dealership was known for this tactic, and they had recieved many complaints. We took the issue to the Attorney General of Pennsylvania and my brother recieved a full refund of all monies. The manufacturers dealership fixed my brothers car correctly and he drove it trouble for 2 more years.
 
Ken, doesn't that Magnuson-Moss Act apply here? If that's how you spell it lol.
 
GrayGhost1 said:
You got that right!
Click to expand...

Ok my warranty is about to expire, what extened warranty program do you guys suggest to prevent this? How about the Ford ESP?
 
I have the ford esp. I haven't had any problems with it. I feel it was worth the money.
 
KD00LS said:
Ken, doesn't that Magnuson-Moss Act apply here? If that's how you spell it lol.
Click to expand...
Yes it would as long as it was the manufacturer's warranty. However, if he had gotten the Ford ESP extended warranty then it may apply as well. It looks like he got an aftermarket extended warranty.
 
SoonerLS said:
The quote looks like the dealership is siding with Adrian, and they've recorded it in their system that they think it's a stretch to believe that the modifications could have caused the failure.

A lot of the SEMA steps really only apply to the manufacturer's warranty; it won't do any good to try to get Lincoln involved, because they aren't. The dealer has given what should be more than enough ammunition to fight this; if the warranty company won't make this right, it's time to bring in a lawyer to force them to make it right. Like SilverLS said, they accepted money to cover this sort of thing, now it's time for them to cover it.
Click to expand...
You're exactly right. This isn't Lincoln's problem but the company that carries the warranty. This may not have been an issue with a Ford ESP warranty. Also, the dealer has given him some ammo but the last couple of lines in that report doesn't seem to support that.
 
GrayGhost1 said:
You're exactly right. This isn't Lincoln's problem but the company that carries the warranty. This may not have been an issue with a Ford ESP warranty. Also, the dealer has given him some ammo but the last couple of lines in that report doesn't seem to support that.
Click to expand...
It looks like the dealership is stating that the failure was caused neither by "loss of lubrication" nor by "modification." Their stated opinion is that the loss of lubrication occurred as a result of the broken con rod punching holes in the block, and that it's a "stretch" to believe that the modifications could cause con rod failure.

At least, that's how I read it...
 
Exhaust cutouts are usually installed in front of any mufflers or just behind the tranny. They operate with a cable or can be electric. Goes from stock quiet to open manifold loud. There are like the one's advertised in JC Whitney.
 
SoonerLS said:
It looks like the dealership is stating that the failure was caused neither by "loss of lubrication" nor by "modification." Their stated opinion is that the loss of lubrication occurred as a result of the broken con rod punching holes in the block, and that it's a "stretch" to believe that the modifications could cause con rod failure.

At least, that's how I read it...
Click to expand...
Well, they are not very sure but has left it open to interpretation:

THE EXHAUST SYSTEM HAS BEEN MODIFIED WITH CUTOUTS. IT IS OUR OPINION A STRETCH THAT THIS MODIFICATION COULD CAUSE CONNECTING ROD FAILURE
Click to expand...
All I can say is bullsh!t! Even open headers wouldn't cause "lack of lubrication" so why even suggest that the cutouts will?
 
I had a pickup that blew an engine - pissed oil and coolant out of a hole near the oil pressure sensor. Had an aftermarket warrenty, they fixed it after my deductable. Not all warrenty companies are the same I guess.

Get a lawyer and pay him to first write a letter (for not much fee). I'll bet you get a response right away with a settlement of ~75% of the dealer cost. And if you do, consider taking it and either negotiating the price with the dealer or taking it somewhere's else that will do it for the settlement price.
 
OK whats going on is this. Warranty denied me due to modification of exhaust, they they arent even saying anything about my intake.

44. IT IS THE OPINION OF CERRITOS LINCOLN THAT THIS TYPE OF FAILURE
45. IS NOT CAUSED BY LACK OF LUBRICATION
46. THE EXHAUST SYSTEM HAS BEEN MODIFIED WITH CUTOUTS.
47. IT IS OUR OPINION A STRETCH THAT THIS MODIFICATION COULD CAUSE
48. CONNECTING ROD FAILURE
49.
50. CUSTOMER ADVISED

What this means is that CERRITOS LINCOLN's opinion that my exhaust cutouts and magnaflow mufflers can't cause connecting rod failure. I have a lawyer and i gave him all my maintanence records and he will talk to the legal department of my warranty and try to settle it, if its not settled there will be a trial. Cerritos Lincoln is on my side, the warranty company tried to get the mechanic at cerritos lincoln to say the motor blew because of the modifications. But the mechanic knew that cutouts cant cause that problem. Also if i really did have lack of lubrication at the time my engine blew the sides of the piston walls would be scorched blue from friction, this is not the case. That actual cause is still unknown.

I will have to pay upfront to get my car back, lincoln wants my car out of their shop bc its takin up a lot of room; and my blown motor that's in 30 pieces. im going to have to bring my 'evidence' home soon.

I requested the dealership write me a letter specifing that they dont believe exhaust cut-outs can cause a connecting rod failure. They agreed so that will be some big ammo for this case. Thanks for all your input.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Members online

No members online now.
Total: 118 (members: 0, guests: 118)
Back
Top