the burden of proof is on the car manufacturer, not the consumer according to the Moss Magnuson Act.

And you can't go through a lawyer immediately, you must pursue arbitration prior to any legal action, it's written into the warranty.

I beat toyota on a set of blown turbos after going through arbitration. Deceptive trade practice was the claim, you can sue for 3 times damages (including hard parts, lost wages, rental car, etc.) and lawyers fees.

 

Sorry to hear man but IMO you had no chance from the start,

 

I believe this is true, and from what I've heard in the past it is very hard for the manufacturer to prove that your mods caused the issue.

 

You are right, it is hard to prove. BUT, although I am on Stew's side on this, the fact remains that the manufacturer covers these cars in stock condition.....PERIOD. Anything can be used against you mods wise since the owners manual states the warranty can be void due to aftermarket modifications. Again, I am on Stew's side and would be trying as he is if I were in his shoes, but deep inside I would know I was the one who took the chance by modding my car to begin with KNOWING from the countless threads on this forum about the terrible warranty issues people are having (me being one of them!) with Mitsu!

 

sorry to hear that

 

Sorry to hear this story hit a bump in the road good luck with the rest of your battle!!

 

I think the biggest problem for you (and anyone else trying to do this) is that the arbitrator considers the opinion of the dealership to be fact. In essence, they are treated as expert witnesses, and all they have to say is something to the effect of "based on our findings...yadda yadda yadda...the problem was casued by the modifications," and the arbitrator treats that as factual evidence sufficient enough to meet a burden of proof...even though they never really "proved" anything with physics, chemistry, etc. In cases like this, its not just what you say, but who says it. Your document would have had a lot more clout had it come from a certified/degreed technician , professional engineer, or some other form of "expert" that could rival the dealership in credibility.

Also, not being able to locate one culprit hurt your case. You had a couple "could-have-been's", but you didnt catch anything red handed. In other words, had you found an assembly line tool lodged in the oil circuit or could prove a certain bolt wasn't tightened, youd have more of a chance.

 

Guys, there is proof. Theres a spun bearing. Thats the cause of the broken rod bolts once the oil passages got blocked off and the rod was weldinging its self to the crank.

If ti was a manufacturing defect, it would have happened a long time ago. It doesnt take 15,000 miles for a loose bearing to tell its tale. I bet your cause of failure was detonation. A bad tank of gas could do it. When you tune and set high boost, low octane fuel (that you could of ran through the car weeks before failure) can cause detonation. Thats why the factory programs the ecu with such a big safty factor. Reflasher havent figured out anything more than mitsubishi engineers have, us power hungry addicts dont like safty factor.

Detonation pounds the hell out of bearings. This will destroy the crush and allow the bearing to do all sorts of things you dont want it to do. I speak with many years in the engine manufacturing business.... Sorry, but thats why your claim was denied.

 

WOW agreed

 

Im sorry to hear this. I really wanted to hear you come out on top. But hey, at least you pursued it. Screw mitsu.

 

Man, sorry to hear about the decision being negative. I was about to flash my ECU, but this whole thread has thrown that idea into doubt again. Now that arbitration is over, I hope you decide to pursue this through litigation.

 

The customer failed to provide....

Do you have had an "expert in the field" (maybe a machinist) that can testify that it is "possible" the problem could have been caused by a defect?

Could you show us a snippet from the "Lemon Law" statute in your state which supports their claim?

If it doesn't support their claim, does it support yours?

...Just getting you thinking for small claims/other court.

 

That's a shame man, sorry to hear it.

 

Not suprised at all.

 

If mitsubishi starts granting rebuilds of motors with people that have cars as modified as yours whats to say somebody with a small modified turbo blows up an engine at 7k miles and it isnt because of the tune, should he get it rebuilt on mitsu, hell no!

You took the risk of blowing up your car as soon as you modded it beyond stock, basically anything over an exhaust and intake I can see them voiding for regardless of how well it was installed or tuned, it doesn't matter because they really cannot know.

People can have stock cars break faster than yours and super modded ones last 10 times as long it's just how it goes as soon as you modify its on you. Also, hate to put this out there but why didn't you return it to stock?

Scorke