[ciscopete822]

Originally Posted by Lynxi2k

All I wanted was your approval!

Thanks for being an adult about it.

No need for my approval , I made that mistake and had issues because of that. Trying to steer you off 48 months idea but you seem to be set on that deal no matter what. 3rd old Merc or Beemer or Audi for that matter is always a risk. Amount of electronics in the car will cause issues sooner or later.

I presented all arguments against , choice is yours.

Dont take it from me. Ask 24/36 vs 48 months question on Pistonheads and see what they say.

[speedski]

Originally Posted by Alice Coupe

KIAs will no doubt be looked down on in this forum but they manage a 7 year warranty. I don’t see why a BMW couldn’t cope with similar reliability.

Kia's 7 year warranty is all inclusive for three and limited for 4-7 - the 4-7 period is like the AUC warranty from BMW.

Surprised Kia are still getting away with calling it 7 years - ask any dealer and they will tell you after 3 years the approval process is 'can we put it to wear and tear - if so refuse claim'

[Alice Coupe]

Originally Posted by speedski

Kia's 7 year warranty is all inclusive for three and limited for 4-7 - the 4-7 period is like the AUC warranty from BMW.

Surprised Kia are still getting away with calling it 7 years - ask any dealer and they will tell you after 3 years the approval process is 'can we put it to wear and tear - if so refuse claim'

Nothing like a laclk of facts getting in the way of reality. I ve had warranty claimes every year from KIA - corroded diamond cut alloys and never had a problem. They also replaced a cracked spring in year 5 off their own bat. No problems

Anyway as I said to Alex, I was not debating Kia’s warranty, which btw is better than BMWs, but the stupid claim that keeping a car for more than 3 years is a massive risk, which it isn’t.

[speedski]

Originally Posted by Alice Coupe

Nothing like a laclk of facts getting in the way of reality. I ve had warranty claimes every year from KIA - corroded diamond cut alloys and never had a problem. They also replaced a cracked spring in year 5 off their own bat. No problems

Anyway as I said to Alex, I was not debating Kia’s warranty, which btw is better than BMWs, but the stupid claim that keeping a car for more than 3 years is a massive risk, which it isn’t.

I have facts to back it up, don't you worry - just putting balance based on experience.

Besides - I agree its not a massive risk.

[Goneinsixtyseconds]

Originally Posted by Alice Coupe

Nothing like a laclk of facts getting in the way of reality. I ve had warranty claimes every year from KIA - corroded diamond cut alloys and never had a problem. They also replaced a cracked spring in year 5 off their own bat. No problems

Anyway as I said to Alex, I was not debating Kia’s warranty, which btw is better than BMWs, but the stupid claim that keeping a car for more than 3 years is a massive risk, which it isn’t.

So, on one hand you say it's not a big risk owning a car past 7 years and on the other you say you've had a warranty claim EVERY year. I'm confused, you seem to be too.

[Alice Coupe]

Originally Posted by Goneinsixtyseconds

So, on one hand you say it's not a big risk owning a car past 7 years and on the other you say you've had a warranty claim EVERY year. I'm confused, you seem to be too.

Yet again you cannot read what was written. Where did I say it was not a risk owning a car over SEVEN years?

I have only said it is not a massive risk owning a car beyond 3 years. How hard can you make this?

As for the KIA, getting alloys replaced FOC has not been any risk. It was a very easy and painless task. In fact it’s been less risk than my bmw which has also had diamond cut alloys replaced every year under warranty but won’t next year.

[Goneinsixtyseconds]

Originally Posted by Alice Coupe

Yet again you cannot read what was written. Where did I say it was not a risk owning a car over SEVEN years?

I have only said it is not a massive risk owning a car beyond 3 years. How hard can you make this?

As for the KIA, getting alloys replaced FOC has not been any risk. It was a very easy and painless task. In fact it’s been less risk than my bmw which has also had diamond cut alloys replaced every year under warranty but won’t next year.

My seven was a typo, should have been three. You say it's not a massive risk after three, but then state you have a claim every single year after?

You don't think a warranty claim every single year after three years is a big risk if you don't have a warranty in place? It proves things can easily go wrong, and surely you can't always guarantee it's going to be the the small stuff?

Warranty companies charge what they charge for extended warranties based on claim history and experience, and then add their profit to it. So £700 for a warranty might equal £500 average claims per customer. As quite a few will have zero, it means that there are other much bigger bills coming in. In my book, and all the warranty companies out there, that makes it a risk. In your book it doesn't. I'll take their experience over yours thanks.

And using your own tone to another poster, what has the ease of your claims with Kia got to do with the risk of going over 3 years without a warranty?

[Alice Coupe]

Originally Posted by Goneinsixtyseconds

My seven was a typo, should have been three. You say it's not a massive risk after three, but then state you have a claim every single year after?

You don't think a warranty claim every single year after three years is a big risk if you don't have a warranty in place? It proves things can easily go wrong, and surely you can't always guarantee it's going to be the the small stuff?

Warranty companies charge what they charge for extended warranties based on claim history and experience, and then add their profit to it. So £700 for a warranty might equal £500 average claims per customer. As quite a few will have zero, it means that there are other much bigger bills coming in. In my book, and all the warranty companies out there, that makes it a risk. In your book it doesn't. I'll take their experience over yours thanks.

And using your own tone to another poster, what has the ease of your claims with Kia got to do with the risk of going over 3 years without a warranty?

I don’t think the claims I’ve ve had warrant the massive risk that the poster has now since retracted.


Keep twisting the posts Alex. Maintain your always right regardless mantra.

[Goneinsixtyseconds]

Originally Posted by Alice Coupe

I don’t think the claims I’ve ve had warrant the massive risk that the poster has now since retracted.


Keep twisting the posts Alex. Maintain your always right regardless mantra.

Who's twisting? I just acknowledged yours were small in the last post, but it doesn't mean all the things that can go wrong have to be small. Warranty companies charge what they charge because not all claims are small. But you conveniently ignored that part.

I don't insure for anything I could afford to fix or replace without too much pain. Never paid insurance on electrical goods, and never bought all the extra cover offered when buying a car, dents, tyres etc.

But, I do buy insurance for things that would impact my lifestyle, or my families, if the worst was to happen. And a big out of warranty repair on a car would do just that. It can be, and often is in the thousands for some repairs.

You are welcome to have your opinion that it's not a "massive" risk. That is up to you. I'm entitled, as are others, to decide for themselves how big they think that risk is.

Unless you think the warranty companies are out there making huge profits, the numbers prove that there is at least a reasonable risk involved.

I avoid having to make the decision about wasted money, or good value, on an extended warranty, by getting my car on a pcp, not a lease and changing before the warranty runs out.

Costs me nothing extra, as leases for the high miles that I do are generally less competitive anyway. 10,000 mile pa leases are good value, 25,000 not so good.

[Alice Coupe]

Originally Posted by Goneinsixtyseconds

Who's twisting? I just acknowledged yours were small in the last post, but it doesn't mean all the things that can go wrong have to be small. Warranty companies charge what they charge because not all claims are small. But you conveniently ignored that part.

I don't insure for anything I could afford to fix or replace without too much pain. Never paid insurance on electrical goods, and never bought all the extra cover offered when buying a car, dents, tyres etc.

But, I do buy insurance for things that would impact my lifestyle, or my families, if the worst was to happen. And a big out of warranty repair on a car would do just that. It can be, and often is in the thousands for some repairs.

You are welcome to have your opinion that it's not a "massive" risk. That is up to you. I'm entitled, as are others, to decide for themselves how big they think that risk is.

Unless you think the warranty companies are out there making huge profits, the numbers prove that there is at least a reasonable risk involved.

I avoid having to make the decision about wasted money, or good value, on an extended warranty, by getting my car on a pcp, not a lease and changing before the warranty runs out.

Costs me nothing extra, as leases for the high miles that I do are generally less competitive anyway. 10,000 mile pa leases are good value, 25,000 not so good.

You are absolutely right * Happy now?



* drop in truck loads of sarcasm here.

[Goneinsixtyseconds]

Originally Posted by Alice Coupe

You are absolutely right * Happy now?



* drop in truck loads of sarcasm here.

Fuck me, I said I'm entitled to make my own conclusion on what is a massive risk, and so are you?

What more did you want? Presumaby for me to just agree with your opinion? Sigh.

[Lynxi2k]

Originally Posted by ciscopete822

No need for my approval , I made that mistake and had issues because of that. Trying to steer you off 48 months idea but you seem to be set on that deal no matter what. 3rd old Merc or Beemer or Audi for that matter is always a risk. Amount of electronics in the car will cause issues sooner or later.

I presented all arguments against , choice is yours.

Dont take it from me. Ask 24/36 vs 48 months question on Pistonheads and see what they say.

Why didn't you just say you had a bad experience start with?

I said I was looking both 36 and 48 months, and I just said I didn't think a 4th year was a big risk, but agreed it was a risk all the same...

Your point is taken

[Goneinsixtyseconds]

I think everybody is right in what they're saying, even Alice, just saying it in different ways.

The risk of something big happening is reasonably small. But if it did happen, the penalty could be really high. Everyone's take on what they want to do with that is up to them.

As said, personally I avoid having to make the choice by never going past the end of the warranty, which I think is the point Pete was making too.

[Lynxi2k]

This forum can be very useful and fun, but there always seems to be a point in a thread where someone is right, if you don't agree you must be a moron and then results in childish name calling. Or talking down to people.

Debate is rarely productive on here, which is a shame.

[Quantox]

Originally Posted by Alice Coupe

If exceeding 3 years without warranty is the massive risk you claim, they need to. If they don’t need to, It’s not the massive risk you claim.

Or is I they don’t need to because it’s better to scare people into buying an extended warranty


And that has feck all to do with anything relevant here.

Eh? I didn't make any comment about massive risks. Was just trying to contribute to the thread.

Methinks you were deep into your cups when you posted. Hope you slept well.

BTW, my comments on the Stinger should have been regarded as a generous review of their first attempt, I'm not knocking them.

Q

[doncarlyon]

Sausages!