RAC Vehicle Warranty

[Bigboab29]

Hi Guys, just a heads up for anyone thinking of purchasing a second hand vehicle with a RAC warranty.........................don't!!

I recently bought a 2008 Outlander as a shooting truck and I paid extra to have the approved RAC warranty with it. So after 3 months I had a catastrophic engine failure, con rod managed to smash out through the engine block, took it back to the garage and they were pretty sure the warranty would pay for the new engine, I was of the same opinion as it says on the warranty details the con rod cam rod engine block etc are covered so the RAC chap came out to inspect the engine and said that the rod wasn't the problem it was a bolt the holds the rod which has sheered and this is not covered by the warranty. After lengthy discussion with the garage I purchased it from he has paid for the replacement engine and the majority of the bill with me sharing the labour cost with him 50/50.

Again RAC Warranty is not worth the paper its printed on, certainly not worth the money I paid for it!! stay well clear!!

 

[paul o']

ITS A CROCK OF SHAT don't buy it and not worth the 2k I paid for the Platinum Cover . There wording doc's at best are like tissue paper , if you make a claim they find the a way not to pay and give findings like your turbo that we had sent and stripped down is now useless and you need to buy another as the rod arm was corroded , my turbo had failed p**ing oil into the intercooler thus blowing oil out the rear end also if it had got to the inlet manifold it word have sent the engine into melt down ? and as I did not suffer a catastrophic fail we won't pay out I had the motor in to the dealer as part of my duty to maintain my car under the conditions of the agreement ,so in informing them of the fault I had not let the turbo go catastrophic ?? see they use that word a lot ? . btw this part could have been replace at £66 plus 0.6 hrs time to fit ??? but as they requested the turbo and intercooler be removed all the clips and fitting pipes ect had to be removed so they also had to be replaced with a bill to me after 7 weeks without a car tol: £2600 .
They even then gave conflicting expert findings to why they would not pay . In there own doc' it states we will not request a full strip unless we intend to pay ,well that did't work out ! there are more holes and cross wording in the insurance doc's its a joke ? and as to there experts ? they are on there side and being paid by them to prove that you do not have not got a case and not your side , I have sent my case to the Ombudsman

 

[foxdropper]

Fair play mate .
Pity more people don’t complain ,about everything .

 

[Milligan]

They are all crap..
Had a vibration damper inside a pulley fail on an a6, they said it wasn't a mechanical part...

 

[potshotpat]

Glad I've got a Defender.

 

[Rusty Gate]

They never cover gaskets, sealer etc when reassembling either the customer picks up the tab. Exclusions are always brakes/exhaust suspension/tyres & FAIR WEAR & TEAR which is a very wide scope of opinion dependent on who you are or who you ask.

I would take the paperwork & bills to Citizens Advise or small claims in any event like this. To much is left to interpreting the guidelines instead of a firm set of rules. All these Empress & Car warehouse types insist on these warranties as they are a forecourt & you can take your warranty to any local dealer. Yeah right! As a dealer find g them a nightmare paying we were forced to get an authorisation number for the customer, bill the customer as they were then paid quickly. Its a sham all around.

Best advice..... put the money in the bank & leave it there. Top it up now & then so you can use it for the odd service or repair.
If you can have £500 to £1000 to one side it could take the dent out of the average unexpected event.

Never be afraid to use small claims courts, they look at what the average person expects not a trained/experienced engineer.

 

[Skietindiekop]

These warranties are in fact insurance policies and therefore will only cover specific items that will be subject to exclusions.
Always have had a very dubious reputation and often never cover the problem encountered and even rarer to cover it fully.

 

[Yorkie]

My jeep came with a warranty direct one. When you read the small print there are more holes than a colander. Fortunately I never needed it.

I have breakdown repair cover as an extra with AA and that is allegedly not bad. If anyone knows different then please tell. Pays first £500 in repairs after breakdown. Vehicle must have documented proof of service which is fair enough.

 

[takbok]

Had RAC breakdown cover and they're useless. Never again. Ended up getting my wife to tow me to the garage last time. Will pay a towing company if required in future.

 

[Rusty Gate]

My jeep came with a warranty direct one. When you read the small print there are more holes than a colander. Fortunately I never needed it.

I have breakdown repair cover as an extra with AA and that is allegedly not bad. If anyone knows different then please tell. Pays first £500 in repairs after breakdown. Vehicle must have documented proof of service which is fair enough.

The first £500 ONLY IF it's an item they actually cover. I would refer to my post further up.

If everyone put the money for the warranties in the bank instead for the two to three cars you've had it could earn a very small interest. If you don't claim its a total loss, if you try & it's not covered (which can be very open to interpretation depending on underwriter) again its a total loss PLUS the cost of the repair your now left with.

 

[tozzybum]

Renault Laguana ,i know shouldnt by French carp ,handbrake failed and rolled into a Honda CRV ,eating it .Sorry sir fair ware and tare not covered 360 quid new part .Shysters =RAC ,refuse to pay ,Agree with nothing and Charge higher premiums next year

 

[highseat6.5]

Hi Guys, just a heads up for anyone thinking of purchasing a second hand vehicle with a RAC warranty.........................don't!!

I recently bought a 2008 Outlander as a shooting truck and I paid extra to have the approved RAC warranty with it. So after 3 months I had a catastrophic engine failure, con rod managed to smash out through the engine block, took it back to the garage and they were pretty sure the warranty would pay for the new engine, I was of the same opinion as it says on the warranty details the con rod cam rod engine block etc are covered so the RAC chap came out to inspect the engine and said that the rod wasn't the problem it was a bolt the holds the rod which has sheered and this is not covered by the warranty. After lengthy discussion with the garage I purchased it from he has paid for the replacement engine and the majority of the bill with me sharing the labour cost with him 50/50.

Again RAC Warranty is not worth the paper its printed on, certainly not worth the money I paid for it!! stay well clear!!

Surely a mechanical failure caused the bolt to shear , how the hell he can look in a smashed engine and just say the bolt failed for no apparent reason is madness ..The insurance industry is one big con , my friend recently had a big fire at his garage that effectively put him out of business for a month ..the very expensive insurance policy that he had been paying for for over twenty years was worth less that the scrap value of the burnt out cars ..they had so many get out clauses (that were only explained after the fire) that he started laughing as the insurance assessor went through the things he wasn’t covered for and why ..Seems the RAC are up there with the worst of them ..

 

[Rusty Gate]

These warranties are in fact insurance policies and therefore will only cover specific items that will be subject to exclusions.
Always have had a very dubious reputation and often never cover the problem encountered and even rarer to cover it fully.

That is correct up to a point. Gaskets nuts/bolts etc normally wouldn't be. However, a con rod big end bolt is itself a main component, designed for a very specific purpose & specification. You can't just grab one of these & bolt the exhaust back on with it as many have a shaped head that sits one way in the big end cap, are high tensile and not threaded fully anyway. Even the weights between each is almost identical for balancing. Your standard bolt could be used on a door hinge, alternator mount or exhaust just as a few examples.
This is where "enterpretation" of the guidelines falls fail. If you are not happy with a decision/diagnosis you can request they stop work for a locally recognised independant to inspect.
If you dont know who they are ring your local Ministry Of Transport ( MOT governors). They are there for exactly these reasons & will refer you to the nearest. They may better explain the matter in question & your garage ( or them) would relay back to the warranty provider that a judgment has been questioned & now indipendantly inspected. They WILL double check the cover provided & in some cases it can be as simple as "it wernt covered last time" going by the name not realising its a differing component.
They're not always mechanically minded or could be quite new to the role from a call centre etc.
Most policies don't cover dampers, ask 20 people what one is & a lot will knowingly say suspension but some will ask which one..... a crank pulley is also classed as a damper as are spring loaded pulleys for aux belts & hydraulic units on cam chain drive system. The policies try not to include them but they are prob the most likely in their system to fail. Save your money.

 

[Skietindiekop]

That is correct up to a point. Gaskets nuts/bolts etc normally wouldn't be. However, a con rod big end bolt is itself a main component, designed for a very specific purpose & specification. You can't just grab one of these & bolt the exhaust back on with it as many have a shaped head that sits one way in the big end cap, are high tensile and not threaded fully anyway. Even the weights between each is almost identical for balancing. Your standard bolt could be used on a door hinge, alternator mount or exhaust just as a few examples.
This is where "enterpretation" of the guidelines falls fail. If you are not happy with a decision/diagnosis you can request they stop work for a locally recognised independant to inspect.
If you dont know who they are ring your local Ministry Of Transport ( MOT governors). They are there for exactly these reasons & will refer you to the nearest. They may better explain the matter in question & your garage ( or them) would relay back to the warranty provider that a judgment has been questioned & now indipendantly inspected. They WILL double check the cover provided & in some cases it can be as simple as "it wernt covered last time" going by the name not realising its a differing component.
They're not always mechanically minded or could be quite new to the role from a call centre etc.
Most policies don't cover dampers, ask 20 people what one is & a lot will knowingly say suspension but some will ask which one..... a crank pulley is also classed as a damper as are spring loaded pulleys for aux belts & hydraulic units on cam chain drive system. The policies try not to include them but they are prob the most likely in their system to fail. Save your money.

Don’t worry, I wouldn’t buy one at any price.
Been in engineering all my life and had my own garage so fully aware of the limitations and pitfalls.
I only insure what I legally have to with the only exception being the house as I cannot afford a rebuild if it burned down. As I have always said the only thing guaranteed with an insurance policy is an argument in the event of a claim.

 

[Rusty Gate]

Don’t worry, I wouldn’t buy one at any price.
Been in engineering all my life and had my own garage so fully aware of the limitations and pitfalls.
I only insure what I legally have to with the only exception being the house as I cannot afford a rebuild if it burned down. As I have always said the only thing guaranteed with an insurance policy is an argument in the event of a claim.

Agreed, my experience also from running depts in multi franchised garages

 

[Yorkie]

Hi Rustygate
Thanks for that. I will look further into it.