Headlight adjusters Warranty

[Saul.Lex]

Hi guys,

Lexus extend warranty refused to pay for headlight adjusters saying it was wear & tear. I thought such items were supposed to last for the life of the vehicle.

Has anyone else had their headlight adjusters repaired or replaced under warranty?

 

Thank you

 

[royoftherovers]

Absolute nonsense Saul.

Look at Wear and Tear examples in the Warrranty Document and I expect it nor anything like it , to be included within  any examples shown.

Headlamps are adjusted rarely, so cannot be a wear and tear item.

Regards

John

[Saul.Lex]

18 hours ago, royoftherovers said:

Absolute nonsense Saul.

Look at Wear and Tear examples in the Warrranty Document and I expect it nor anything like it , to be included within  any examples shown.

Headlamps are adjusted rarely, so cannot be a wear and tear item.

Regards

John

I don't see any examples on the warranty document. What page do you see this on?

[royoftherovers]

Saul....I was using your phrase.

I have looked through the Full Terms and Conditions Document and the phrase does not occur.

What does appear is "Excluded Parts and Operations", and your Headlamp Aduster matter is not a defined exclusion included in Sections 4.1 or 4.2 or 4.3.

I can send you the link if you do not have the Full Document.

 

Regards

 

John

[Saul.Lex]

11 hours ago, royoftherovers said:

Saul....I was using your phrase.

I have looked through the Full Terms and Conditions Document and the phrase does not occur.

What does appear is "Excluded Parts and Operations", and your Headlamp Aduster matter is not a defined exclusion included in Sections 4.1 or 4.2 or 4.3.

I can send you the link if you do not have the Full Document.

 

Regards

 

John

Thank you John, I have the document and I agree, I see the same.  

You know, the document clearly defines wear & tear items as "consumable items" (4.1 e)  If that is the case headlight adjusters are not consumable items.  

I forgot to mention that they sent an independent engineer to visit and he said that wear & tear caused the headlight adjusters to stop working. I guess that still doesn't make a valid reason for refusal as its not a consumable item, or does it?

[royoftherovers]

33 minutes ago, Saul.Lex said:

Thank you John, I have the document and I agree, I see the same.  

You know, the document clearly defines wear & tear items as "consumable items" (4.1 e)  If that is the case headlight adjusters are not consumable items.  

I forgot to mention that they sent an independent engineer to visit and he said that wear & tear caused the headlight adjusters to stop working. I guess that still doesn't make a valid reason for refusal as its not a consumable item, or does it?

Headlight adjusters  almost by definition are not used frequently, so cannot possibly be classified as wear and tear. The failure of the adjuster is either mechanical or electrical and so does fall within the requirement to be dealt with under the Warranty, in my view SAUL.

Regards

John

[Saul.Lex]

5 minutes ago, royoftherovers said:

Headlight adjusters  almost by definition are not used frequently, so cannot possibly be classified as wear and tear. The failure of the adjuster is either mechanical or electrical and so does fall within the requirement to be dealt with under the Warranty, in my view SAUL.

Regards

John

Well explained John, wish you were my claim handler! :)

[royoftherovers]

consider using the Appeals/Complaints procedure contained within the document SAUL AND FEEL FREE TO USE SUCH of my wording as you feel is appropriate. Submit whatever documentation/ receipts you still have available and request that they submit to you their reasoning for defining how the failure of a rarely used (if ever?) part can be classed as wear and tear or a consumable.

If you are not successful consider writing to Honestjohn and informing him of the poor customer relations service offered by Lexus.They will not like the publicity.

Best of luck.

[Saul.Lex]

20 minutes ago, royoftherovers said:

consider using the Appeals/Complaints procedure contained within the document SAUL AND FEEL FREE TO USE SUCH of my wording as you feel is appropriate. Submit whatever documentation/ receipts you still have available and request that they submit to you their reasoning for defining how the failure of a rarely used (if ever?) part can be classed as wear and tear or a consumable.

If you are not successful consider writing to Honestjohn and informing him of the poor customer relations service offered by Lexus.They will not like the publicity.

Best of luck.

Yes, i intend to do this and may go far as the Ombudsman too.  Will keep you posted.

Thank you for your help

[Shahpor]

14 hours ago, royoftherovers said:

Headlight adjusters  almost by definition are not used frequently, so cannot possibly be classified as wear and tear. The failure of the adjuster is either mechanical or electrical and so does fall within the requirement to be dealt with under the Warranty, in my view SAUL.

Regards

John

This is a good point.  Even if it was classed as wear and tear, can something that is hardly ever used wear out in this space of time?

My understanding is that it uses a motor with cogs?  in which case, which part is supposed to wear?

I agree with John, complete nonsense.