Ford Inspector for Warranty Repair-Update:Warranty Denied Claim Due to Off Road Racing

[passwords]

My PremiumCARE ESP exclusions section is MUCH shorter than the attachment above. OP, does Section 7 of your ESP look like the one Tom attached? Judging from your earlier posts and the denial document from your dealer in Post #5 I believe your ESP is likely the same as mine.

Sponsored

 

[Tomster]

Here is the warranty

Pretty consistent with the ESP exclusions. The only discrepancy I see is the term in the ESP which states "competitive driving/racing/off-road use". I think the description in quotes is to define the type of driving which anyone would want nothing to do with. It looks to me like the three terms are bunched together to describe what is obviously an abusive environment. You know, where all the marbles are on the table, where the engine has to be torn down and rebuilt after 40 hours, like the kind of driving you see in actual races?

Ford got involved in marketing these cars as occasional use track cars. Ford sold the OP a warranty for a car that was used as it was designed. The ESP folks should not sell extended service plans for cars like these if they feel that their use as designed is too much of a risk.

Words are everything. They define meaning to avoid misunderstandings. That is why we have contracts so that agreements can be enforced.

The OP used the car in accordance with the design, manufacture, and intended use of the vehicle. The folks who sell these ESPs need to stop doing so if they do not intend to honor the agreement.

 

[Creedog]

I’m going to try and paraphrase this to shorten it: Life is hard. Don’t try.

I know more than a handful of people who have tried and lost. All of them the same situation. Modded the car, tracked it, things went wrong and wanted Ford to fix it. All spent more money and time wasted. He will not win. He took the chance on tracking his car and things went badly. Now wants Ford to cover his losses. If you can’t pay to play, don’t play. Of course you will be there by his side all the way right? Helping him fight this battle financially of course too? I bet not. I’m being brutally honest. You just don’t like it.

 

[MikeR397]

Ford got involved in marketing these cars as occasional use track cars. Ford sold the OP a warranty for a car that was used as it was designed. The ESP folks should not sell extended service plans for cars like these if they feel that their use as designed is too much of a risk.

Indeed. This is the same situation I mentioned about my carbon fiber wheel claim under the 5yr wheel/tire warranty Ford sold me when I bought the car. To summarize:

1. My carbon spoke was cracked from a pothole (presumably).

2. My claim was denied b/c of the contract term exclusion: "No coverage for tire OR wheel if tire tread is less than 3/32 on inside, middle, or outside of tire." (why tire tread is relevant to a wheel claim is beyond me, but that's what it said and that was their ground to deny).

3. The stock Cup 2 tires are 1/32 on the outside tread when new which means I paid $1100 for a warranty that has a term that allows the issuer to NEVER provide coverage. That's either illusionary coverage or fraud, but they vehemently told me to f off when I informed them of this and sent pics of a brand new Cup 2 measuring 1/32.

4. I retained an attorney (free of additional charge to me under my prepaid legal plan), presented the situation and a draft Demand Letter which was forwarded from the attorney's firm to the coverage provider (third party). Funny how the same statement signed "Esquire" from a law firm got a different reaction with the exact same set of facts! They immediately agreed to full coverage, and included a free Cup 2 tire which wasn't otherwise required.

I'm still very bitter about this entire situation, but AFAIK this company discontinued offering any coverage on carbon wheels after 2017. My claim was in late 2019 IIRC, so it was clear they didn't really appreciate the cost of replacement or actually know the starting tire tread was sub 3/32 which is their standard language that applies to all warranties sold. They discontinued offering coverage which is perfectly fine, but they can't void coverage on false/invalid exclusions for the contracts they did issue.

The point of all this is: EVEN IF A WARRANTY EXCLUSION IS LISTED, THAT DOESN'T MEAN IT'S VALID. That's not the situation here, so no need to muddy the waters. The applicable ESP warranty only excludes "racing" and DE is not racing. That's why this is such a straightforward situation.

 

[MikeR397]

I know more than a handful of people who have tried and lost. All of them the same situation. Modded the car, tracked it, things went wrong and wanted Ford to fix it. All spent more money and time wasted. He will not win. He took the chance on tracking his car and things went badly. Now wants Ford to cover his losses. If you can’t pay to play, don’t play. Of course you will be there by his side all the way right? Helping him fight this battle financially of course too? I bet not. I’m being brutally honest. You just don’t like it.

Sorry, but this is a pile of red-herring nonsense.

What if he has $1 billion dollars in his checking and can pay to play just fine? Does that mean the contract terms are more or less valid? A: Irrelevant.

What if 20 prior people just rolled over and didn't fight an invalid denial? Does that mean the 21st person isn't able to enforce the contractual terms just b/c the prior saps didn't fight? Would be the first I've heard of that kind of legal precedent.

A vehicle mod can void coverage for sure. Hell, I'll be the first to say the contract even says that. However, a roll cage didn't cause his transmission to go out.

OP is a big boy who can afford some big boy toys. He's aware of how attorney fees can rack up, but what if he has a family member attorney that will take the claim pro bono or reduced/contingent fee? What if he has a prepaid legal plan (as I do) that would cover 100% of attorney fees in a situation like this? What if he wants to use some of that $1B in his checking to right a wrong?

BTW, he's not asking Ford to cover his losses, so save the "dire economic straights, striking workforce" counter. The opposing party is the ESP here, not Ford.

 

[RagmopInKona]

There is a saying in motorsports. Don't races what you can't afford to replace or don't want to lose.
What ford built as a "race car" had limits and why it did not come with a roll bar,cage or a proper race seat ,4,5point harness,belts.
This is the part lost on many in this thread . The cars intent and limits as built isn't what the added part(s) say about the units use.
Good luck .

 

[Cobra Jet]

Very rarely do I disagree with you. However, I feel you are wrong here.

Reference the attached ESP terms and conditions. 7. e) losses to to negligence, racing. 7. t) Vehicles used for competitive driving/racing/off-road use.

Reference the warranty language defining racing (despite the ESP not specifically defining the term racing. Ford defines racing as "for competition or time".

HPDE events are not racing. Every HPDE event I have ever been to does not advocate any kind of competition or competitiveness. To the contrary, they strictly forbit it. The car was designed to be a track use car. It is advertised and marketed that way and that is not a stretch.

The car in question has been used in a manner in which the car was designed, engineered, and marketed as.

If you were to use the car at an HPDE event in a competitive manner, racing others around the track, like there was a hottie with a large check at the end of it, you would be black flagged and thrown out. That is not a stretch either.

While I respect your response, the focal point in this entire thread seems to be on “racing”….. I also do agree that the Shelby is designed, built and marketed to be used on a track, at a track event, whether it’s HPDE or other… I’ve never stated otherwise regarding the car’s design/intent/type of use.

What I have stated previously is that “racing” is too generic a term and can be interpreted differently by the writer of the Contract vs. the event in which a vehicle is participating in (or has participated in).

According to NASA’s own site, going through the HPDE levels, there is the ability to obtain a “time trial” license and obtaining a provisional “racing” license.
If you advance to HPDE4 and you want to go further, you can apply for either a Time Trial license or take the CCR test and apply for your provisional racing license.

To get to the point of being able to obtain the above, the Driver had to “learn” limitations and other aspects of driving skills that would NOT be learned, taught or gleaned from “daily driving” where and when on a TRACK pushing a vehicle to certain limitations and/or speed.

We all know that during an HPDE event the vehicles aren’t pacing each other at 25mph… I mean let’s be serious here, although not “competitive”, you’re till being taught evasive maneuvers and/or driving skills to getting ahead of the next vehicle in a so called “safe” manner….by also being able to “push” the vehicle as one would not be able to do on public roads.

Fact:
The HPDE event and course is held on a closed environment, a “track”, which by the way is considered “off road”.

Not only is “racing” and “off-road” mentioned in the “What is Not Covered” exclusions, again which I have previously mentioned, BUT if you were to go further in the docs you’re presenting, there are other exclusions for denial of claim that exist such as:
- 7e … overloading…. (This could be argued that bringing a vehicle to an HPDE event can result to an overloading event IF the vehicle was being pushed harder than one would do if daily driving it from A to B in an environment controlled by traffic control devices and traffic congestion).

- 7e (1) Alterations or modifications of the vehicle including the body, chassis or components after it leaves the control of the manufacturer… (ie. ROLL BAR, Slicks, etc)

- 7e (2) Tampering with the vehicle … (ROLL BAR, as the vehicle didn’t come that way from the factory)

- 7e (4) Any part designated for “off road” only that is not installed by the manufacturer including but not limited to . . . roll bars . . . (Also note in this same paragraph it notates the use of “oversized tires”, while the tires mentioned that were on the OP’s vehicle were not “oversized”, they fall into the classification of the “but not limited to”… because they are not what the vehicle was produced/sold with from Ford).

- 7k Repairs needed to a covered part due to the failure of a non-covered part (This is extremely broad… a “part” is not being defined. A covered part would be the transmission, while a non-covered part would be the roll bar. Although in no way are the (2) components associated with each other or that a failure of one would affect the other, but interpretation is left wide open as to the fact that the roll bar is a non-covered part installed by the OP.).

- t) Vehicles used for competitive driving/racing/off-road use. . (Competitive “DRIVING”. Although many are saying HPDE events aren’t “competitive”, the owner is DRIVING it on a closed circuit track, which is off-road. Again NASA’s own site states as a driver progresses through the HPDE levels, they can obtain a time trial or provisional racing license - which in order to do so, one must demonstrate the ability to apply what was learned to “drive” at those skill levels, which is pushing the vehicle to X-limitations, gained by progressing through the off-road closed environment track….).

I’m not trying to start some bickering BS. I’m demonstrating that the ESP Plan is riddled with so many exclusions, generic but not clearly defined terminology, and “but not limited tos”, that the OP’s vehicle and others covered as such can be denied a claim for literally ANYTHING if deemed so by another individual who’s trying to make the claim denial FIT the dang words and paragraphs we all see…

Buying any ESP is throwing $$$$ into the trash. An ESP isn’t worth it’s weight UNLESS the vehicle is being used daily AND where an owner may kill the Factory 3/36 Bumper to Bumper AND the Powertrain 5/60 mileage provision quicker than expected, where an ESP may be beneficial. It is also only beneficial if again miles driven are the concern and the owner will be keeping the vehicle longer than 3-5 years (on average). An ESP should never be purchased to apply to any vehicle that is mothballed in a garage, OR a vehicle that may see ANY track use, or one that will be modified beyond factory As Built spec.

That ESP verbiage is a baited with so many “can’t dos” in between the lines, that it’s so wonder any claims are ever granted. I mean, it even calls out in 7c that an owner can’t add Ford Performance accessories or other similar parts/modifications that would fall into the “but not limited to” line of BS.

OP should take this as a learning experience with how an ESP is garbage, how Corp. Entities can do whatever they want to the Consumer regardless of whatever the manufacturers or 3rd Party Warranties state or imply. Go cash out the ESP if there’s any value left, buy a new trans that is better than the old - and go have fun….

 

[jmn444]

Those comments about NASA really just prove HPDE isn't racing lol... they literally don't allow you to race till you've done enough HPDE to be qualified to do so!

 

[RagmopInKona]

Those comments about NASA really just prove HPDE isn't racing lol... they literally don't allow you to race till you've done enough HPDE to be qualified to do so!

Like down shifting into wrong gear and sending the rpm's to the moon, and running over parts.

 

[MikeR397]

While I respect your response, the focal point in this entire thread seems to be on “racing”….. I also do agree that the Shelby is designed, built and marketed to be used on a track, at a track event, whether it’s HPDE or other… I’ve never stated otherwise regarding the car’s design/intent/type of use.

What I have stated previously is that “racing” is too generic a term and can be interpreted differently by the writer of the Contract vs. the event in which a vehicle is participating in (or has participated in).

According to NASA’s own site, going through the HPDE levels, there is the ability to obtain a “time trial” license and obtaining a provisional “racing” license.
If you advance to HPDE4 and you want to go further, you can apply for either a Time Trial license or take the CCR test and apply for your provisional racing license.

To get to the point of being able to obtain the above, the Driver had to “learn” limitations and other aspects of driving skills that would NOT be learned, taught or gleaned from “daily driving” where and when on a TRACK pushing a vehicle to certain limitations and/or speed.

We all know that during an HPDE event the vehicles aren’t pacing each other at 25mph… I mean let’s be serious here, although not “competitive”, you’re till being taught evasive maneuvers and/or driving skills to getting ahead of the next vehicle in a so called “safe” manner….by also being able to “push” the vehicle as one would not be able to do on public roads.

Fact:
The HPDE event and course is held on a closed environment, a “track”, which by the way is considered “off road”.

Not only is “racing” and “off-road” mentioned in the “What is Not Covered” exclusions, again which I have previously mentioned, BUT if you were to go further in the docs you’re presenting, there are other exclusions for denial of claim that exist such as:
- 7e … overloading…. (This could be argued that bringing a vehicle to an HPDE event can result to an overloading event IF the vehicle was being pushed harder than one would do if daily driving it from A to B in an environment controlled by traffic control devices and traffic congestion).

- 7e (1) Alterations or modifications of the vehicle including the body, chassis or components after it leaves the control of the manufacturer… (ie. ROLL BAR, Slicks, etc)

- 7e (2) Tampering with the vehicle … (ROLL BAR, as the vehicle didn’t come that way from the factory)

- 7e (4) Any part designated for “off road” only that is not installed by the manufacturer including but not limited to . . . roll bars . . . (Also note in this same paragraph it notates the use of “oversized tires”, while the tires mentioned that were on the OP’s vehicle were not “oversized”, they fall into the classification of the “but not limited to”… because they are not what the vehicle was produced/sold with from Ford).

- 7k Repairs needed to a covered part due to the failure of a non-covered part (This is extremely broad… a “part” is not being defined. A covered part would be the transmission, while a non-covered part would be the roll bar. Although in no way are the (2) components associated with each other or that a failure of one would affect the other, but interpretation is left wide open as to the fact that the roll bar is a non-covered part installed by the OP.).

- t) Vehicles used for competitive driving/racing/off-road use. . (Competitive “DRIVING”. Although many are saying HPDE events aren’t “competitive”, the owner is DRIVING it on a closed circuit track, which is off-road. Again NASA’s own site states as a driver progresses through the HPDE levels, they can obtain a time trial or provisional racing license - which in order to do so, one must demonstrate the ability to apply what was learned to “drive” at those skill levels, which is pushing the vehicle to X-limitations, gained by progressing through the off-road closed environment track….).

I’m not trying to start some bickering BS. I’m demonstrating that the ESP Plan is riddled with so many exclusions, generic but not clearly defined terminology, and “but not limited tos”, that the OP’s vehicle and others covered as such can be denied a claim for literally ANYTHING if deemed so by another individual who’s trying to make the claim denial FIT the dang words and paragraphs we all see…

Buying any ESP is throwing $$$$ into the trash. An ESP isn’t worth it’s weight UNLESS the vehicle is being used daily AND where an owner may kill the Factory 3/36 Bumper to Bumper AND the Powertrain 5/60 mileage provision quicker than expected, where an ESP may be beneficial. It is also only beneficial if again miles driven are the concern and the owner will be keeping the vehicle longer than 3-5 years (on average). An ESP should never be purchased to apply to any vehicle that is mothballed in a garage, OR a vehicle that may see ANY track use, or one that will be modified beyond factory As Built spec.

That ESP verbiage is a baited with so many “can’t dos” in between the lines, that it’s so wonder any claims are ever granted. I mean, it even calls out in 7c that an owner can’t add Ford Performance accessories or other similar parts/modifications that would fall into the “but not limited to” line of BS.

OP should take this as a learning experience with how an ESP is garbage, how Corp. Entities can do whatever they want to the Consumer regardless of whatever the manufacturers or 3rd Party Warranties state or imply. Go cash out the ESP if there’s any value left, buy a new trans that is better than the old - and go have fun….

Roll bar caused the transmission failure, gotcha

what’s next, hanging my garage door opener off the sun visor is another mod that voids my entire powertrain warranty?

racing is not generic. You need a timer or a winner. Hpde is not officially timed and there are no winners. You are over complicating this to an extreme level.

also, do you park your car in your garage? If so, you musta just voided your warranty for going “off roading” sorry, you should have read your contract better.

 

[sublime1996525]

There is a saying in motorsports. Don't races what you can't afford to replace or don't want to lose.
What ford built as a "race car" had limits and why it did not come with a roll bar,cage or a proper race seat ,4,5point harness,belts.
This is the part lost on many in this thread . The cars intent and limits as built isn't what the added part(s) say about the units use.
Good luck .

Here’s the thing. Ford didn’t build the GT350 as a race car. They built it as a track capable street car.

 

[Egparson202]

Like down shifting into wrong gear and sending the rpm's to the moon, and running over parts.

See ya.

 

[jmn444]

I didn't even want to respond to whatever that was supposed to mean lolololol

 

[mikedahammer]

My PremiumCARE ESP exclusions section is MUCH shorter than the attachment above. OP, does Section 7 of your ESP look like the one Tom attached? Judging from your earlier posts and the denial document from your dealer in Post #5 I believe your ESP is likely the same as mine.

Attached is the contract minus the first page that has all my info on it.

 

[Creedog]

Sorry, but this is a pile of red-herring nonsense.

What if he has $1 billion dollars in his checking and can pay to play just fine? Does that mean the contract terms are more or less valid? A: Irrelevant.

What if 20 prior people just rolled over and didn't fight an invalid denial? Does that mean the 21st person isn't able to enforce the contractual terms just b/c the prior saps didn't fight? Would be the first I've heard of that kind of legal precedent.

A vehicle mod can void coverage for sure. Hell, I'll be the first to say the contract even says that. However, a roll cage didn't cause his transmission to go out.

OP is a big boy who can afford some big boy toys. He's aware of how attorney fees can rack up, but what if he has a family member attorney that will take the claim pro bono or reduced/contingent fee? What if he has a prepaid legal plan (as I do) that would cover 100% of attorney fees in a situation like this? What if he wants to use some of that $1B in his checking to right a wrong?

BTW, he's not asking Ford to cover his losses, so save the "dire economic straights, striking workforce" counter. The opposing party is the ESP here, not Ford.

What counter are you talking about? I being brutally honest how is going to go down. Maybe I’ll be wrong in the end, but no ruling in the OP’s favor any time soon I’m sure. Attorney or not. If this ever gets to court, judge rules in Ford’s favor because they have documentation of the items listed below. How can anyone view it any other way?

It does not matter how we interpret HPDE’s. Only how Ford/ESP interprets it.
ESP is outsourced but backed by Ford. If they see a vehicle with multiple warranty claims, ie this vehicle, engine and transmission (several of them), racing seats, roll bar, and racing tires in for additional service claims and computer history of going 140 mph at high rpm’s, they are going to deny the claim because the car has been raced. He modded it, tracked it, and it broke. How is this Ford’s/ESP’s responsibility? It’s not. The mods did not cause this issue, but track use did per Ford/ESP. Track use is racing to Ford/ESP. The people I know denied coverage for motors, the mods did not cause the problem. But they tuned it, tracked, modded other things and Ford/ESP denied. Some did not have the money to correct and others were able to cover replacement. This is a harsh reality and I face it too, but I know what the repercussions are and accept the responsibility for pushing this car to its limits sometimes. I’m more concerned about my life and possible injuries that might occur when I do.
I would think the OP would rather get his car fixed and back on the road than waiting endlessly for Ford/ESP to come to a different decision.

Sponsored