Imported motor warranty issue

[DLT]

First, just accept that there may be information out there, that we don't have, that would change your mind.

With that, would you expect that a motor you bought new in the USA was covered by the manufacturer's USA branch?

[Paul S]

It should be. If there was a hint of not being a USA model, the selling dealer should cover his @ss and make the buyer sign clearly stated release form stating the fact that he is giving up his factory warranty for a lower cost up front.

[Chip Hindes]

Unless specifically stated otherwise in plain language, I expect any product bought in the United States to have a warranty valid in the U.S. Anything else is at the very least misrepresentation. If it's not against the law, it should be. I'm not a lawyer, but even absent a specific law prohibiting such, I'm quite sure a case could be made for fraud. I hope you read all the small print. In the euphoria of buying a new boat (BTDT) you might well be tempted not to.

I've gotten used to checking for such things on transactions done over the 'Net with fly by night outfits I've never heard of before, but I wouldn't expect it from an established U.S. business.

That may be the problem, despite the name, Havencraft is not in any way the same business the rest of us dealt with when we bought our Xs. What absolutely astounds me is that, despite the seemingly unending litany of substandard to unsatisfactory dealer performance, it's still damn difficult to get anyone to say something bad about Otho Campbell or the new Havencraft.

[Frank C]

I posted a somewhat belligerant comment that Paul should haul his suppliers into court, but in retrospect, I think we're thinkin' wishfully. It does not matter what a jury of peers feels is reasonable, this is a simple case of commercial law. The judge would surely instruct the jury on that law, so the reasonable man is out of this loop.

Just guessing, I now suspect that there is ZERO warranty on ANY sale of ANY product in the USA, unless a warranty is specifically mentioned in the bill of sale. Absent an explicit warranty, I believe that the only standard Paul could expect the vessel to meet is "merchantability."

I'd think that means means if the buyer accepts a product, it floats, it starts, and he uses it .... then the sale is complete, valid and final. In California, the vessel is considered a "motor vehicle" so the motor vehicle code might extend added protection for the buyer ... but does the bill of sale even specify the sale is a NEW (previously unused) product? Hmmmm.
(One might easily guess how I voted).

[DLT]

merchantable

Is the pictured damage a flaw?

How about the lack of the expected Honda USA warranty?

[Mark Prouty]

caveat emptor - let the buyer beware.

However, this seller should be held to a minimal standard of disclosure which would include disclosing this motor did not have a warranty even though the buyer did not explicitly request that information.

[Frank C]

MERCHANTABLE - adj. a product of a high enough quality to make it fit for sale. To be merchantable an article for sale must be usable for the purpose it is made. It must be of average worth (not necessarily special) in the marketplace and must not be broken, unworkable, damaged, contaminated or flawed.

- Is the pictured damage a flaw?
- How about the lack of the expected Honda USA warranty?

You have a point DLT ... if a judge believes that Paul found what he pictured and didn't "create" it himself, then the pictures probably reveal a broken or damaged engine. Was that the condition when delivered by Havencraft, or was that the result of Woods' first service attempt? Again, if a judge believed that Paul didn't create the problems himself, then I'd think Woods' repair job was "unmerchantable." At that point it would become a debate between Woods & Havencraft.

As to an "expectation" of a Honda USA warranty ???
... if it's not explicit, it's not part of the deal, IMO.

[Mark Prouty]

Since implied warranties (assumed quality of goods) and consumer protections have come upon the legal landscape, the seller is held to a higher standard of disclosure than "buyer beware" and has responsibility for defects which could not be noted by casual inspection

Paul has an exceptionally strong case IMHO.

If it were me, I'd get that motor fixed somewhere other than Woods. You have to get it fixed anyway and you sure don't want those bozos touching it again... Then, send them both copies of the bill with a letter describing your position (with supporting evidence - the photos) asking for reimbursement within 30 days.

When you don't get it, the next thing I'd do is file a small claims case against Woods, in Woods' county. I'd demand whatever it took to get it fixed, plus any money already paid to Woods for the water pump repair and diagnosing the oil leak. I'd ask for the $75 charge for fixing the linkage too...

This is what I'd do. Except I'd file the claim against Havencraft. That Honda motor has an oil slick on the scale of the Exon Valdez.

[mike]

That Honda motor has an oil slick on the scale of the Exon Valdez.

That's one of those Microsoft "it's a feature, not a bug" situations... it serves as a locating aid (like a dye marker) for the Coast Guard search helicopters to find him when his motor breaks down.

--Mike

[Divecoz]

Internet SCUBA gear sales anyone ??? Let the buyer beware seems shady at best and no doubt developed buy the . . shady dealersthemselves a long long time ago in a distant land very far from here

[Mark Prouty]

I've made mistakes like this in my life and been taken advantage of. But it isn't worth the stress and my time to fight to try to make things "right."

I have the skills and the money to make it right myself, and when it comes to involving law, that's usually a much cheaper route anyway, even if I have to take it to another professional to do the job right.

I can also let go of it and get over it. I'd have had a stroke or heart attack by now if I didn't.

Not me. In a situation like this, I'd spend the time and money to set things right even I had an ultimate loss.

I do not take getting ripped-off lightly. This is clearly and unequivocally getting ripped-off.

For the sake of future customers, I hope Paul makes a court case out of this.

Dead fish are slimy. Outboards and retailers shouldn't be.

I also enjoy a good challenge.

[Jeff Drumm]

Not me. In a situation like this, I'd spend the time and money to set things right even I had an ultimate loss.

I do not take getting ripped-off lightly. This is clearly and unequivocally getting ripped-off.

For the sake of future customers, I hope Paul makes a court case out of this.

Dead fish are slimy. Outboards and retailers shouldn't be.

I also enjoy a good challenge.

Mark, I agree that the origin of the motor should've been disclosed at the time of sale. I also received a Canadian motor with my 2002 26X, and didn't find out until I needed service on it (failed hydraulic motor for engine tilt).

The thing is -- Otho (Havencraft/Millennium) did everything he could to make sure that the problem was taken care of quickly and with virtually no hassle for me. He dealt directly with the Honda repair center, Strout's Point Wharf in South Freeport, ME, and my boat was ready to get wet the following weekend.

The only other service issue I've had with the boat was with the throttle/shifter, and I fixed that myself. When I let Otho know about the problem so that he could warn his installer, he was so pleased that he didn't have to send someone to Maine to fix it that, well, let me just say that I got more than the value of my effort in return.

I wouldn't hesitate to do business with him again.

I feel for Paul; I'd be quite upset in the same situation. However, I feel it's necessary to point out that Havencraft did right by me, and appears to have gone the extra mile for Paul too (motor origin notwithstanding).

[Chip Hindes]

I feel for Paul; I'd be quite upset in the same situation. However, I feel it's necessary to point out that Havencraft did right by me, and appears to have gone the extra mile for Paul too (motor origin notwithstanding).

I couldn't disagree more. They sold you guys motors with no factory warranty without disclosing that they had done so. It's totally unethical if not illegal.

Everything they've done since then is CYA; they have to do it for self preservation if they want to stay in business. IMO, too late. If I were in the market for a new boat right now, knowing what I do about how they do businees, I'd buy my boat from anybody else but them.[/u][/list]

[Jeff Drumm]

I feel for Paul; I'd be quite upset in the same situation. However, I feel it's necessary to point out that Havencraft did right by me, and appears to have gone the extra mile for Paul too (motor origin notwithstanding).

I couldn't disagree more. They sold you guys motors with no factory warranty without disclosing that they had done so. It's totally unethical if not illegal.

Everything they've done since then is CYA; they have to do it for self preservation if they want to stay in business. IMO, too late. If I were in the market for a new boat right now, knowing what I do about how they do businees, I'd buy my boat from anybody else but them.[/u][/list]

Isn't a factory warranty "CYA" too?

The motor was provided with a Havencraft warrantee, and the net result for me was that it was fixed at no cost. I got a good price on the motor, too. How is the lack of a "factory" warranty impacting me? As far as I can see, the only potential issue would be if Havencraft/Millennium went out of business . . .

[DLT]

Which is alot more likely than Honda USA going out of business...


Hey, by all means, if you are happy with Havencraft's warranty, then more power to you...

All I'm saying is that the decision should have been the customer's to make. In both your and Paul's case it sounds like you were never informed (at least not upfront), and therefore never got to make an informed decision.

hull, I might even make that decision, given the decision to make...


The fact remains that most any consumer, in the USA, buying something brand new, with a major manufacturer's name on it, naturally (and I think reasonably) assumes that it include's that manufacturer's normal warranty.

It looks like, by not informing his customers, Havencraft capitalized on his customer's Honda name recognition.

But, what you really bought was a Havencraft engine manufactured by Honda, while thinking you were buying a Honda engine.

He says that he passed his savings on to his customers. No doubt he did pass on some savings. But how much? Did it allow him to sell the boat or other accessories at a higher rate and still beat a boat with a Honda USA motor? How did the total price compare to another available boat with a Honda warrantied motor? Was it enough to make you buy from him, if you knew the truth?

You say you are happy with his Service. Great! I am truely glad it worked out for you. I really am. But, it is easier to look back and say that it worked out well for you, than it is to look forward and 'take at chance'... Unfortunately, it hasn't worked out so well for Paul.

In any case, you didn't even get the opportunity to make tht decision...