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

[RPDBlueMoon]

it’s always been my understanding that the main between hpde and racing is one is not a timed event and the other is

No, thats just what Ford defines as 'racing.' There are HPDE timed events. There is no real difference and multiple definitions of what racing is. Its just what the manufacture (in this case Ford) defines what they consider 'racing' outlined in the warranty. Car insurance companies have their own definition of exactly what "racing" is lol

Sponsored

 

[svttim]

it’s always been my understanding that the main between hpde and racing is one is not a timed event and the other is

You cant do timed events like SCCA Solo run groups or racing (wheel to wheel)

 

[CANTWN4LSN]

The first round will belong to the arbitrator. Look at it from that perspective.
1) No one can prove or disprove if the OP raced the car.
2) Track use does not exclude coverage, racing does.
3) Most people in HPDE events do not have roll bars and race seats installed in their cars.

The arbitrator can choose to believe the OP that he only installed those for safety and did not race.
The arbitrator can choose to believe the position of the insurance carrier that the preponderance of evidence based on the car's condition is that he did.

Seems to me it's a toss-up for the arbitrator and depends on his/her viewpoint. I don't think this is big bad insurance company out to screw the little guy, they are just doing their job. I think the OP has a legitimate complaint if he only did HPDE but the stuff in the car puts him behind the eight ball. The lesson is: don't put the stuff in the car or remove it before a claim is evaluated. If the arbitrator rules against it's an expensive lesson. I wish the OP good luck.

 

[K4fxd]

The key is under Ford's original warranty it was covered. The "ESP" was sold as an extension of the Ford warranty. The IMPLIED WARRANTY means it is covered.

OP, was there a roll bar installed when Ford warranted the engine? If yes the point is easily made. The seats are the same as seats that are installed by the factory, same with the rotors.

OP were there stickers on the car when Ford warranted the engine?

These points are important. Ford set the precedent when they fixed it under warranty the first time.

 

[luc]

The key is under Ford's original warranty it was covered. The "ESP" was sold as an extension of the Ford warranty. The IMPLIED WARRANTY means it is covered.

OP, was there a roll bar installed when Ford warranted the engine? If yes the point is easily made. The seats are the same as seats that are installed by the factory, same with the rotors.

OP were there stickers on the car when Ford warranted the engine?

These points are important. Ford set the precedent when they fixed it under warranty the first time.

You seems to completely miss the point that the real argument is that the original factory warranty and the esp are 2 different animals offered by 2 different legal entities
I love how so many people think that are lawyers and know better than anyone else

 

[K4fxd]

You seems to completely miss the point that the real argument is that the original factory warranty and the esp are 2 different animals offered by 2 different legal entities

Yes they are but the verbiage in the contract is the same. "Racing" is not covered. Ford says HPDE is not racing. The new contract does not say HPDE is racing or that it is NOT covered. If this is Ford ESP sold by a Ford dealer the expectation is the definition is the same.

Yes a judge may have to make the final call but the OP has some good ammo.

I am not a lawyer nor do I claim to be.

 

[Cobra Jet]

I had chimed in earlier in this thread a few times, but have been following it closely.

The bigger question that many of us have is this:
Why is the GT350 advertised as such (that it can be raced/tracked) in ALL of its sales ads, all of the public notoriety given to it when it was first released, all Ford Press, the original Dealer Brochures, and within its own GT350 Owners Manuals?

If the car can’t be used/driven as designed and faces Warranty denials for when XYZ fails while operating the car WITHIN its As Built specs, parameters, and conditions set forth by the Manufacturer, then isn’t Ford itself within breach of warranty AND liable for false advertising? If it’s built as such, advertised as such, touted as such, and sold to the consumer as such, then whether it’s the Ford Factory backed warranty OR a Ford sponsored or backed ESP, there shouldn't be a question if the car was racing or an HPDE course, right?

Who’s got the Midas touch to tap the shoulder of someone very important within Ford Performance or Ford Corp. to point them to this very perplexing and unfair denial of claim?

I don’t find any issue with having similar seats to the GT350 Recaros OR the 2-piece rotors… that’s just a “reach” for them to throw in more BS excuses as to why they won’t honor the warranty claim. The seats or the 2-piece rotors have no relevance whatsoever.

 

[Tycoon]

The key is under Ford's original warranty it was covered. The "ESP" was sold as an extension of the Ford warranty. The IMPLIED WARRANTY means it is covered.

OP, was there a roll bar installed when Ford warranted the engine? If yes the point is easily made. The seats are the same as seats that are installed by the factory, same with the rotors.

OP were there stickers on the car when Ford warranted the engine?

These points are important. Ford set the precedent when they fixed it under warranty the first time.

Are you a lawyer? These are wise points.

 

[Tomster]

I'm kind of siding with Ford on this case. Roll cage, racing seats, enhanced brakes for track or high performance applications, markings or stickers from a track. In Ford's eyes you were banging your car around a track for who knows how long and under what conditions. Ford has replaced the engine and now they are looking at a transmission and clutch. This has to make them dig a little deeper.

I agree that Ford advertises the car as a track car, and has information in the owners manual about how to maintain your car after track use. However, in their eyes the transmission & clutch did not fail because of a defect or workmanship, it failed because Ford thinks you banged on the car in a way that caused the failure, and they have good circumstantial evidence.

That's a nice GT you have that was never built, marketed, or warrantied for the track. I understand your confusion in this matter.

 

[Tycoon]

Also OP needs a snazzy lawyer to win in arbitration. I would not attempt this solo.

 

[Tomster]

Why is the GT350 advertised as such (that it can be raced/tracked)

No, not raced, but tracked. I'm surprised of all people you dont understand this.

 

[Tomster]

Who’s got the Midas touch to tap the shoulder of someone very important within Ford Performance or Ford Corp. to point them to this very perplexing and unfair denial of claim?

I attempted this a while back and got pushback when it was discovered it was an ESP matter.

There is no cavalry coming. I hope the results are posted here for future use.

 

[Tycoon]

This really, in my unqualified opinion, turns on whether under the body of law governing the arbitration provides for a presumption of race use based on the aftermarket features and previous warranty repairs. If so, OP bears the burden to show that the car was not raced. That would be hard to prove. If NOT, OP can argue that warranty repairs should be ordered as a matter of law.

 

[Cobra Jet]

No, not raced, but tracked. I'm surprised of all people you dont understand this.

I’m not trying to be argumentative or an ass here, but….

Do you see the word “race” and “racing” in this article? Granted it is discussing the GT350R, but the GT350 isn’t all that much different as far as how the vehicles were marketed and could be used by their respective owners:
https://media.ford.com/content/fordmedia/fna/us/en/news/2015/01/12/shelby-gt350r-mustang.html

In this article. it’s case in point to the OP’s argument. Ford offered “Track Attack” to GT350 Owners, in fact some members here on this very site bought some of those T/A GT350’s.
https://www.businesswire.com/news/h...-Get-Complimentary-Performance-Driving-School

What Ford was doing by offering such an event to GT350 owners isn’t any different from the OP taking his own GT350 to an HPDE event, is it? So Ford IS and WAS advertising the GT350R and GT350 as a vehicle that is race and track ready. No matter which way any of us wants to look at it, FORD was PROMOTING the very car and it’s performance capabilities, be it on the street or on a track. The word “race” and “racing” can be totally subjective and interpreted entirely different depending on the context in which it is used. Ford can’t speak out both sides of its mouth, then turn around and deny warranty claims where the car WAS being used as designed, per it’s own statements, media press releases, and advertisements.

Whether XYZ hardware failed under the Ford Factory backed Warranties (3/36 or 5/60 Powertrain) - OR failure occurred under a Ford sponsored ESP, it shouldn’t matter if that failure was on a highway, or on a track at XYZ event. After all, in many articles and actual Ford Press Releases, Ford is touting the vehicle as “track ready” and “track capable”. Does their analogy of “track ready and track capable” include the perception of racing or just HPDE? When one goes to VIR, are they racing or enthusiast driving? To be technical, taking any vehicle to a “track” is promoting exhibition of speed, period.

This article https://media.ford.com/content/ford...t350-mustang-raises-the-bar-for-handling.html
goes into detail about the 2-piece rotors, BUT also has the blurb from Raj Nair about how owners can essentially enjoy the roads but also enjoy the car at weekend track events. Although “track event” is not specific to the type of event, it’s still a Ford Rep. implying that the car has the capabilities of performance and can be used at a track, period.

The Corp/Manufacturer should not advertise and promote a vehicle as such if the same Corp/Manufacturer isn’t going to back the warranty that the vehicle comes with OR won’t support the sponsored ESP that their franchises are selling to these owners.

“Regardless of a person’s driving ability, this will be an unbelievable experience,” said Dan McKeever, president, Ford Performance Racing School. From the weekend track warrior to the car collector, this program provides the skills needed to really enjoy Shelby GT350 Mustang in the environment for which it is designed.”

This is directly from the 2017 GT350 Brochure:

Ford touting it as a vehicle that is a “highly capable RACE track performer” and can “go out for lapping days at RACE tracks”…. LMFAO - go shove that in the Arbitrators Face…

From the 2018 Shelby GT350 Brochure, there’s that word “race” again, multiple times:

The 2018 statement goes further by stating the car is equipped with “hard-core RACING equipment for track days”….

I mean, shall we keep going about the “racing” aspect?

 

[CANTWN4LSN]

Nice article. Under the terms of the factory warranty would agree that racing should be covered.
But the arbitrator is not looking at the factory warranty. So can you deny that the ESP contract specifically states "racing" not covered, which those of us with an ESP signed, mostly unknowingly? An ESP does not have to extend a factory warranty as such and can put limits on covered parts. If the engine blew after the factory warranty without an ESP we're SOL. If it blew with an ESP specifically excluding items covered in the factory warranty we are likewise SOL.
And again how do you prove/disprove you weren't "racing" with the aftermarket mods put on that rely not on our interpretation but the arbitrators as to whether they are for "racing"? Therein seems to reside the OP's fate.

Sponsored