Home · FAQ · New Posts · My Posts · PMs · Search · Members · Members Map · Calendar · Profile · Donate · Register · Log In |
Home > General > Power Upgrade Warning |
|
|
ghawk2005 Member Since: 15 Sep 2013 Location: Plymouth Posts: 172 |
they can't prove its the remap that caused the damage! thousands of un-modified faults happen anyway!!
|
||
12th Feb 2014 10:28 pm |
|
The Doctor Member Since: 09 Jul 2010 Location: Gallifrey Posts: 4615 |
Just picking up on the 'z' in authorised, this could be from an American site or someone has used incorrect spelling. Not that it makes the point less valid.
|
||
12th Feb 2014 10:33 pm |
|
npinks Member Since: 28 Jun 2007 Location: Ls25 Posts: 20090 |
They can't prove but they CAN refuse to fix the car and I think JLR will have bigger and better legal team |
||
12th Feb 2014 10:35 pm |
|
The Doctor Member Since: 09 Jul 2010 Location: Gallifrey Posts: 4615 |
They can refuse to fix but without valid grounds to do so, you can look to breach of contract or your rights under SOGA. Believe me, so called bigger and better legal teams drop some clangers sometimes. I see it all the time in my work.
|
||
12th Feb 2014 10:40 pm |
|
ad210358 Member Since: 12 Oct 2008 Location: Here and There Posts: 7464 |
Doc, good spot on the Z I've been warned over a chip false allegations could cause problems later on. |
||
12th Feb 2014 10:41 pm |
|
EYorkshire Member Since: 18 Nov 2010 Location: (!) Posts: 4392 |
Exactly, they have to prove nothing, they are big enough to dismiss a warranty claim and have enough technical know how to back it up. |
||
12th Feb 2014 10:41 pm |
|
npinks Member Since: 28 Jun 2007 Location: Ls25 Posts: 20090 |
Well I believe it to be the UK version, after all when on topix earlier there was this in the stuff that came up for my car, could not open it without paying subs so left it |
||
12th Feb 2014 10:44 pm |
|
The Doctor Member Since: 09 Jul 2010 Location: Gallifrey Posts: 4615 |
I agree on that EY. The burden is balance of probabilities so I think they would have no trouble proving that in all probability, the add on caused the fault.
|
||
12th Feb 2014 10:45 pm |
|
DG Member Since: 24 May 2006 Location: The Gaff Posts: 67 |
I posted the alert up on D4 Existential Phenomenologist |
||
12th Feb 2014 10:55 pm |
|
choccymonster Member Since: 27 Sep 2013 Location: Chichester, West Sussex Posts: 513 |
Can't see anything in there that we didn't know already, to be honest.
|
||
12th Feb 2014 10:57 pm |
|
The Doctor Member Since: 09 Jul 2010 Location: Gallifrey Posts: 4615 |
Perhaps the author of the memo is American then or just made a spelling error. Either way, the point is worthy of mention and worth bearing in mind.
|
||
12th Feb 2014 10:58 pm |
|
The Doctor Member Since: 09 Jul 2010 Location: Gallifrey Posts: 4615 |
That thought crossed my mind too but many will not realise or not realise fully so a worthy post in fairness LL.B (Hons) - University of Derby LOT (Lord of Time) - University of Gallifrey |
||
12th Feb 2014 10:59 pm |
|
ghawk2005 Member Since: 15 Sep 2013 Location: Plymouth Posts: 172 |
hang on I'm confused - is this stating that there is a risk it actually causes damage to the engine parts (even if driven carefully) or is it making the point more about the fact that it won't be covered under warranty? |
||
12th Feb 2014 11:01 pm |
|
The Doctor Member Since: 09 Jul 2010 Location: Gallifrey Posts: 4615 |
Both. They are saying there is a risk and if the risk becomes reality and the add on causes a fault which you then try to claim for, they will refuse such a claim. LL.B (Hons) - University of Derby
|
||
12th Feb 2014 11:03 pm |
|
|
All times are GMT |
< Previous Topic | Next Topic > |
Posting Rules
|
Site Copyright © 2006-2024 Futuranet Ltd & Martin Lewis