4206F / Battery
#1
4206F / Battery
Ok here it goes. First time posting long time reader.
I figured this may actually require its own thread since I haven't read anything like this yet.
I took my vehicle to the local dealership today for service and the great 4206F.
I received a voice message in the afternoon indicating that my battery failed load test and needed to be replaced. I called back and asked if they had completed the recall at which time I was told that they were in the middle of the recall and had to place a new battery in the car to do so. When I picked up the car. I was presented with a bill for pro-rated battery replacement. In discussing with the service advisor, because they had to cold crank the engine as part of the recall they had to have a strong battery or it would not be able to be tested and the work would not be completed. I understood this but asked to have my original battery replaced since it was, under normal operating conditions, able to start the vehicle. I was then informed by the service advisor that if I choose to have them place the old battery back in my car, that they would make a note of it in the vehicle record, voiding the portion of my warrenty that would cover my car in the case of flooding. Then service advisor then told me that if the car then flooded in the future they would not provide warrenty coverage. Of couse with the history this particular model has with flooding issues, I would not risk having any part of my warrenty voided. I agreed to pay for the new battery but feel as if I was threatened into complying. So anyway, I have a letter into Mazda North America about the situation.
This is just the craziest thing I have heard of.... Ok course it is a normal wear and tear part not covered under warrenty, but if I do not pay them to replace the item they will void my warrenty???? And what about authorizing the replacement in the first place? Hopefully Mazda is not serious about this.
I figured this may actually require its own thread since I haven't read anything like this yet.
I took my vehicle to the local dealership today for service and the great 4206F.
I received a voice message in the afternoon indicating that my battery failed load test and needed to be replaced. I called back and asked if they had completed the recall at which time I was told that they were in the middle of the recall and had to place a new battery in the car to do so. When I picked up the car. I was presented with a bill for pro-rated battery replacement. In discussing with the service advisor, because they had to cold crank the engine as part of the recall they had to have a strong battery or it would not be able to be tested and the work would not be completed. I understood this but asked to have my original battery replaced since it was, under normal operating conditions, able to start the vehicle. I was then informed by the service advisor that if I choose to have them place the old battery back in my car, that they would make a note of it in the vehicle record, voiding the portion of my warrenty that would cover my car in the case of flooding. Then service advisor then told me that if the car then flooded in the future they would not provide warrenty coverage. Of couse with the history this particular model has with flooding issues, I would not risk having any part of my warrenty voided. I agreed to pay for the new battery but feel as if I was threatened into complying. So anyway, I have a letter into Mazda North America about the situation.
This is just the craziest thing I have heard of.... Ok course it is a normal wear and tear part not covered under warrenty, but if I do not pay them to replace the item they will void my warrenty???? And what about authorizing the replacement in the first place? Hopefully Mazda is not serious about this.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Shankapotamus3
Series I Trouble Shooting
28
03-14-2021 03:53 PM
Evan Gray
Series I Trouble Shooting
0
09-26-2015 12:30 PM