Fri
Feb 05 2010

Are long warranties as good as they sound?

James Ruppert
There is only one car related story in town at that moment and that involves an accelerator pedal.

But just in case you are as bored by that as you are of John Terry’s non-footballing activities, I'm going to write about Kia's seven-year warranty - which sort of ties in with Toyota, as it's an example of putting things right when they go wrong.



You may have noticed that Kia is offering a seven year warranty as standard now. My view - challenged by Kia - is that actually it really isn’t as good as it sounds.

Few items are going to wear out on a new car during the initial three years of ownership. Indeed, if something did then that would more than likely be replaced as a good will claim.

When a car gets to four, five and six years old then you do get parts which are going to fail because of wear and tear. These, of course, won’t be covered by Kia - only manufacturing faults will be.

Which brings me to recalls. All cars are covered by a recall, regardless of age or warranty status. If there is a defect which could make a vehicle unsafe then the manufacturer is obliged to fix it.

Like me, you have probably owned a car that has been subject to a recall. I had a Mk2 Golf which was over a decade old and that was recalled in the mid 1990s to fix heater pipes that potentially could have scalded my ankles.

So if Kia fix a manufacturing fault after six years don’t go and hug their service manager and buy him a bunch of flowers, because that is his job.

I’ve had emails from Kia and Hyundai owners saying how happy they are with their cars and I could not be happier for them. Just be realistic about what you are getting for your seven-year warranty.

Sign-in or register to add your comments

About James Ruppert

Used to sell BMWs, but he's no yuppie; has a '64 Mini Cooper in his garage and a '57 BSA Bantam in his house. Has bought and sold hundreds of used cars, and he isn't finished yet.

Comments

giulivo February 5, 2010 5:35 PM

If a car is only driven a limited number of km, then there are indeed parts that are likely to break down four or five years down the line, We have suffered two auto'box write-offs in the family on cars between three and six years old.

On the other hand, I understand the extended warranty is voided if services are not carried out by authorised dealers, so Hyundai-Kia is getting something back.

As a marketing tool, you cannot argue with the extended warranty; after all if the people who built a car aren't confident enough in its reliability to offer me a long warranty, then why should I be?

Spencerooni February 5, 2010 5:42 PM

It's still very helpful I think, and gives much more reassurance. My mum has an 07 Mini Cooper which has had  2 semi-major fixes (don't ask me what they were) and 1 minor fix, covered and fixed under warranty. She's now considering getting a different car as it's about to come out of its 3 year warranty, but she loves the car. If other problems such as these had held off til after 3 years, she'd be out a small fortune. Although saying that, I get the feeling Kias are so reliable that Kia can afford to do this and probably still undercut the average costs which other manufacturers occur for warranty fixes. And it's definitely gotta sell more cars...

sierra February 5, 2010 5:46 PM

"What is actually covered

Some items have a natural limited life/durability and are therefore covered for less than 7 years.  These items include (but are not restricted to) consumable parts such as worn windscreen wiper blades, clutch linings, etc.  The vehicle battery is warranted for a period of 2 years.  The audio system is warranted for 3 years/60,000 miles and vehicle paint is warranted for 5 years/100,000 miles.

For all other components, the total cost of parts and labour associated with any warranty claim are covered"

Sounds reasonable to me

LP in Brighton February 5, 2010 5:54 PM

Fair enough, I'm happy to accept that things like clutches, brakes, dampers, drive belts and brakes wear out and are rightfully excluded from long term warranties.

But I'm hearing so many horror stories about expensive electrical failures involving engine and gearbox ECUs and ABS / VSA systems, that I for one would be reassured by a 5 or 7 year manufacturer's warranty.  

Maybe a fleet operator is happy to accept risk spread over a large number of cars, but as a private punter I am not. Shouldn't a 5 year warranty now be the industry norm?    

Winston February 5, 2010 7:29 PM

Why do we expect long warranties on cars? They have a huge number of moving parts, the manufacturer has no control over the way the car is used, how many operatives it has, what the prevailing weather condidtions are, and they are made with tiny profit margins. Yet anything less than three years is seen as being mean.

Why then does my telly only have a one year warranty?

Winston February 5, 2010 7:31 PM

Oh, and it is important to differentiate between a safety related recall instigated by the DVLA, and a "product enhancement campaign" instigated by the manufacturer and usually only completed at time of service. It is rare for a manufacturer to write to a customer for a recall unless the DVLA have instructed them to.

Winston February 5, 2010 7:34 PM

And, (sorry, I'll shut up in a minute), all car warranties exclude wear and tear regardless of the period. the devil, as always, is in the detail - how will Kia apply these rules on older cars - I suspect it will depend how much warranty budget is left that year, so don't break down in Decemer.....

The Apprentice February 5, 2010 7:35 PM

Our previous Kia had a usual 3 year warranty, at the end of which we were offered by Kia a 2 year extension for about £250, very reasonable! Just before the 5 years were up we traded it in, having never needed to claim.

(the £250 also included full breakdown, recovery and homestart cover for 2 years as well!!!)

Leslie Brook February 5, 2010 7:56 PM

Don't forget, that to maintain the validity of the warranty you'll probably have to follow the service schedule religiously, so that's seven years of main dealer service charges to pay...

40summat February 5, 2010 8:32 PM

Used car warranties should also be examined in detail.  For example, my wife owns an 06 Fiat Idea, bought from a main dealer @ 3.5 years old. The "free" 2 yr warranty will actually cost us at least £450, based on the condition that the car is returned very 6 months for a "service" which consists of a mere oil change for £150.  It's been for one "service" and the dealer also had the temerity to flag up the fact it needed another £400 of work required, wear and tear of course, which wasn't warranted.  Needless to say she's been to an independent since where the work that actually needed doing was carried out for £100.

The Apprentice February 5, 2010 8:43 PM

"Don't forget, that to maintain the validity of the warranty you'll probably have to follow the service schedule religiously, so that's seven years of main dealer service charges to pay..."

The last routine service on our Kia Sportage at a Kia dealership was £145.97.. any need go to some dodgy independent?

This dealer has proven to me to have excellent expertise on the cars too.

Leslie Brook February 5, 2010 9:04 PM

"This dealer has proven to me to have excellent expertise on the cars too."

It would be rather surprising if they didn't have expertise on the cars for which they are a main dealer.

Not all routine services are the same by the way. Check your service book. I bet there are some big bills coming when they start swapping cam belts and various brake and steering fluids. My first few routine services were less than £200. I'm lucky to get it done for less than £400 now. £75 an hour on labour alone to have the workshop apprentice change my oil? That's obscene.

Uncle Mellow February 5, 2010 9:15 PM

    Of course a 7 year warranty isn't as good as it sounds , but it is better than any other maker offers. If your stability control fails after 3.1/4 years , like in a Golf , or your headlamp bulbholders melt after 5 years , like in an Avensis , you don't have to put your hand in your pocket.

  Give credit where it's due James.

Casanova February 6, 2010 12:42 AM

In response to a couple of comments above, I think under (European?) law now, manufacturers cannot make the warranty dependent on having the servicing done at a main dealer.  You only have to have it done using manufacturer's recommended parts.  I keep my warranty intact by buying the right oil and filters etc cheap off the internet.  I do the minor services myself and the major ones get done by my pet independent.

Old Toad February 6, 2010 5:59 AM

First off I would not mind a bit of John Terrys non footballing activity. With his missus or mistress. Ok thats the important bit dealt with then.

My experience of warranties has not been good but then again I was trying to claim from Rover and Renault. Renault were utterly useless about replacing ignition coils even though they acknowledged they had a manufacturing fault .

Rover were better but sadly the dealership must have thought a free repair meant the customer would not mind if the repairs  were bodged.

After that I have binned main dealer servicing as I think warranties are not worth the paper they are printed on.

I suppose the moral of the story is to buy from a manufacturer with a good reliability record .

jerry99 February 6, 2010 10:02 AM

Even Kia buyers must realise that certian parts are wearing parts and not covered. As long as it covers the transmisson excluding the clutch plate and all of the suspension (except shock absorbers?) and the engine internals and cabin internals that seems a good deal to me. Although it could be agued that most modern cars could match that without the warranty.

On the sunject of VW I was not convinced by their extended warranty dependent on a continuous VAG service history. This covers all labour between services and gives free breakdown cover. When I bought a well used model and the crank sensor/coil post failed the result was a tow from an tow franchise, a 150K Nissan Micra loan car with a misfire in the wet and paying full price for the VW parts fitted by the franchise. That was enough to convince me to go my own way with maintenance after that.

To my mind it is the insurance company backed warranties for second hand cars that are the near worthless ones.

Lee23404 February 6, 2010 10:15 AM

I think we'll just have to wait and see how Kia deals with this down the line but I think James has a good point.

My wifes 3 1/2 year old Meriva recently needed a new (£500) steering rack, covered fortunatley under extended warranty. If the same part had failed on a kia at say, 6 years and 9 months old would that be a manufacturing defect or wear and tear?

I'd be interested to find out because a Venga could possibly be a reasonable replacement for the old bus in the future.

Dougie130 February 6, 2010 10:31 AM

I wish I knowed a Kia. My 06 BMW X3 which has full dealer service history and fully comp BMW extended warranty. Needs a new turbo due to carbon build due to unknown reason. Cost to decarbon the engine plus turbo £4000 and the warranty doesnt cover it.

James Ruppert February 6, 2010 10:31 AM

Glad that some people get what I'm on about here. In fact aftermarket warranties do cover wear whereas a manufacturers or Kia's warranty would not. A Turbo unit that goes pop and that would not be covered unless there was a manufacturer fault. If you bought a private warranty then it would be. In my column in Autocar Kia went on about tyres and I have never mentioned tyres, but then I never spoke to him, that quote was inserted afterwards. All I want is transparency and the Kia warranty does not offer anything extra, it just looks good as a slogan.

Lee23404 February 6, 2010 10:42 AM

SO effectively James your advice would be that in relation to warranties anyway, the wifes meriva would be better replaced by a C3 Picasso and an extended warranty rather than a new Venga?

Interesting stuff, it pays to read the small print doesn't it.

Paul J February 6, 2010 3:37 PM

Maybe they aren't as good as you are supposed to believe, but they are better than the 2 year one offered on new Porsches, after which I am required to fork out £1000 (ish) per year to extend it.

jerry99 February 6, 2010 6:43 PM

The last car I bought where an insurance company warranty was offered with about four levels of cover (bronze, silver, gold and platinum or something like that).

It was only the platinum version that really included most components that could be described as wearing and it was several hundred pounds a year. I took the risk and have spent about £250 over and above annual servicing costs over three years.

I am not sure what hppens if a suspension bush is worn to the point that it it can be felt through the steering wheel but will still pass the MOT? Can the insurance company claim that it is not worn enough yet?

keeforelli February 7, 2010 5:31 PM

richard its got to be better to have a 7 year warranty than not have one- Kia hardly make you pay through the nose for their products, and its a confident manufacturer that offers this kind of cover.-

if its full of loopholes and not really worthwhile why does no one else offer it?

with a new car being so tech heavy these days, its good to know that potentially expensive faults later in  its life wont cost you.

kia dont promise a no maintenance costs car, but for a bit more peace of mind and some brand building, its a remarkable USP...

everyone knows a warranty doesnt cover wear and tear, so im confused as to what point youre trying to make.

keeforelli February 7, 2010 5:41 PM

and one more thing- well known maunfacturing faults are rarely fixed for free by the makers unless safety related-

renault and its  megane 2 1.6 VVT failures were ALL OVER the owners forum,  were obviously defective as on such a large scale and were NEVER fixed as goodwill...even when just out of warranty, less so further down the line.  Goodwill and the admission of defects are pretty darned rare, and very hard to get as a rule.

so yeah, kia is doing the owners a favour, far more so than other brands that generally wash their hands of you.

Lee23404 February 7, 2010 6:31 PM

@Keeforelli - everyone knows a warranty doesnt cover wear and tear, so im confused as to what point youre trying to make.

I think the point is that if most things after 6 years are considered wear and tear then what's the point in offering a 7 year warranty?

The example I used earlier was a steering rack, if I had a Venga and the rack failed after 6 1/2 years I don't think I'd reasonably be able to complain that it was a manufacturing defect. If that's the case then what's the point in a 7 year warranty?

keeforelli February 7, 2010 6:45 PM

well, if you dont have one you will never know...

here is an example of warranty work-

my 2 year 11 month old ibizas pasenger electric window came off its runner- a failure that i wouldnt specifically call wear and tear)  took it to my dealer- warranty fix agreed, mentioning in passing to me that it has happened on a few of them...

move forward 4 months- exactly the same thing happens to the driver window...the response from the same garage and SEAT uk?....sorry its out of warranty...

me out of pocket to the tune of £180.

some warranties have mileage capped- this is one way of managing the wear and tear angle.

i am still confused as to why james is making this point.-

never look a gift horse in the mouth an' all that...

Lee23404 February 7, 2010 7:03 PM

I know all about the Ibiza window problems, it and faulty coil packs were the only problems the wife ever had with her Ibiza. She had to pay for it because the car was 4 years old when it failed, but that part's (electric window) warranty has been extended to 5 years on VW's with the same problem.

I think the point is that if something fails within 3 years it can reasoanably be argued that it was a manufacturing defect. If it fails after 6 years then that's wear and tear isn't it? Surely after 6 years Kia could argue that anything that fails is due to wear and tear and not a manufacturing defect, making the warranty worthless.

I'd be very interested to get a definitive answer from Kia. Thing is, I bet they can't give one other than the standard tyres, exhausts, clutch exclusion.

Uncle Mellow February 7, 2010 7:23 PM

"I am not sure what hppens if a suspension bush is worn to the point that it it can be felt through the steering wheel but will still pass the MOT? Can the insurance company claim that it is not worn enough yet?"

 This couldn't happen - if you can feel it , the tester should be able to spot it.

Armagh February 7, 2010 9:44 PM

So Kia only covers MANUFACTURING DEFECTS  for 7 years or 70,000 miles.

How many manufacturing defects will appear after 3 years or even 2 years ?? not many. James you are spot on with your argument

If a water pump, alternator, starter motor, door lock motor, steering rack, shock absorber, spring, head gasket, radiator, wheel bearing........ etc...fails and you have done 6 years and 60,000 miles you will only be covered if you can prove MANUFACTURING DEFECT .

The reason this is not an issue for the normal three years is because the manufacturers would not dare reject claims due to wear when a car is only 35 months old.

If a wheel bearing failed due to wear you won't be covered. I think most insurance backed aftermarket warranties cover failure caused by wear and things like potholes etc... The Kia cover looks like a great marketing ploy to fool the many as you can see from lots of the other posts !!!

Charm El Snake February 8, 2010 2:35 PM

I'm sorry, but I totally disagree with James Ruppert.  Why do any of us buy extended warranties with other manufacturers if not to cover us against manufacturing defects?

I have paid approx £1200 over the past five years for extended warranties for my Toyota.  It just covered me when the coolant pump needed replacing, but I would rather have had it covered as standard by Toyota.

As long as Kia are clear and list items not covered (such as tyres, wiper blades, etc), then a seven year warranty can only be a good thing.

It's not so long ago that manufacturers extended their warranties to three years, and I hope in these hard times they will soon be forced to extend to seven years to keep up with Kia.

jerry99 February 8, 2010 7:21 PM

I am still puzzled by this. To mind wear and tear can only be applied to parts whose wear rates can directly be influenced by the driver. i.e. tyres, clutch plate, brake pads and perhaps shock absorbers.

Surely a wheel bearing has a design life in terms of mileage and should be covered unless the driver needs bent wheel rims replaced every year for four or five years? Same for a water pump, an A/C compressor, a cambelt or a crankshaft bearing? Alright in extreme climates these lifetimes may need to change but they are still definable.

I would assume that Kia know this and design such components to last at least 7 years/100,000 miles at that there wwould be few quibbles from them if the driver had clearly followed the service schedule and not abused the car by regularly driving over kerbs or something outside the norm.

softlove010 February 27, 2010 6:05 PM

hello dear friend

How are you today , i know that all is well with you

My name is Gift ,I am a female,I was impressed when i saw your profile  and will like to establishe a long lasting relationship with you. In addition,i will like you to reply me through my private e mail box here is it;(giftbaby09@yahoo.com) Thanks waiting to hear from you soonest.

Gift

Please contact me with my Email address here is it.(giftbaby09@yahoo.com)

All about Autocar

Newsfeeds

Subscribe to our news with our RSS feeds

Advertise

To advertise with Autocar contact us

Buy our magazines

Discover our titles at themagazineshop.com

Autocar latest issue - cover 15.2.12

NEW ISSUE OUT NOW

FAST, EASY & SECURE
SUBSCRIBE NOW>>