Specialized bad after sale service.

[BarHugger]

I thought it's Pasen when you took it from Momsen with the Datsun?

[Dusty]

Surely internal corrosion must be a manufacturing fault? This is not a paint issue therefore 2 yr warrantee has no relevance.

 

If this was my bike I would not be happy.

[(Deon)]

I would just ask Spez to confirm (in writing) that the corrosion does not create structural weakness and that the frame is safe to ride - and move on if they say it is safe - if what it looks like worries you - get it touched up after checking what that does to any outstanding warrantee that might be left on the frame.

Very good call!

 

If the issue is not causing structural weakness, continue as planned.

 

If it is, their report needs to explain exactly what is causing the problem and not simply state the the result of the problem, being rust. By this, Spez needs to tell you why the rust is starting in the first place, and confirm how the problem, (not the rust) is affecting the structure.

[(Deon)]

Surely internal corrosion must be a manufacturing fault? This is not a paint issue therefore 2 yr warrantee has no relevance.

 

If this was my bike I would not be happy.

"Rust" is used widely in their clause.. but the rust in this case could be seen as the result of the fault.

[Lefty V]

I think regardless loyalty and or how meticulous you are about maintaining your bike or reading fine-print every single hubber would be miffed if he or she ended up in this situation. You can debate all the steps that lead up to whether there is a legal leg to stand on or not, but can we at least agree that in the end nobody would be happy if they were the OP.

 

I certainly was reminded by this to go check the exact wording on my warranties - which I would hazard to guess the majority of owners don't do. 

[Skinnyone]

Agreed Lefty, Like I said I do feel for him and can most certainly agree that I would be upset in the given situation, BUT he has done what he can, albeit too late and now it's done....See the situation any way you want - whether it's Specialized skirting around the warranty or see it as the OP waited too long and now its tough luck that he tried to claim outside the warranty period.

 

He is probably more miffed with himself for not acting sooner and now taking that frustration out on the brand. Same thing could happen to any brand and it does - just search any forum to see for yourself.

 

Yes he can go legal but I will guarantee that he will spend more than a new frame's worth in lawyers.

[raptor-22]

I would just ask Spez to confirm (in writing) that the corrosion does not create structural weakness and that the frame is safe to ride - and move on if they say it is safe - if what it looks like worries you - get it touched up after checking what that does to any outstanding warrantee that might be left on the frame.

 

 

"Rust" is used widely in their clause.. but the rust in this case could be seen as the result of the fault.

 

 

If they use "rust" as the term for corrosion then they are specifically excluding aluminium oxidation and therefore are ignoriong their own warranty terms and conditions. "Rust" is a term used for Iron Oxide.

 

I am completely behind the OP on this one. Its a straight manufacturing defect because ;

1) the area between the carbon and aluminium bond is not electrically isolated

2) this obvious fact gives rise to the questions is the frame structurally sound due to insufficient glue being present allowing moisture to come between the two materials and act as an electrolyte. Since the drop out is a key structural component of the frame, its failure will give rise to an injury or worse.

 

The distributor seems to want to ignore theses aspects of their responsibility and hide behind their rules. Problem they're also reading the rules in a manner that benefits themselves and not their customer, especially when rider safety is the main concern.

 

I find it desperate that a distributor of such a well funded brand would want to play chicken with a customers safety.

[Skinnyone]

Read their policy I posted a few pages back, CORROSION is excluded under their policy, and technically speaking rust is the result of iron/steel corroding into iron oxide like you state....Again was this a latent defect with the frames? I don't think so...if it were then there would be more people coming forward saying "yes my frame did the same thing..."

 

The distributor has obviously declined this warranty as it is only cosmetic and not structural...I don't think they are that stupid to "play chicken" like that, If there was any doubt in the frame's integrity then I bet they would have replaced it. 

[Fat fish]

Is this part of the paint warranty or structure. I will think that corrosion will be under the frame warranty as the infected area is on the frame which cause the paint to bubble. 

[(Deon)]

If they use "rust" as the term for corrosion then they are specifically excluding aluminium oxidation and therefore are ignoriong their own warranty terms and conditions. "Rust" is a term used for Iron Oxide.

 

I am completely behind the OP on this one. Its a straight manufacturing defect because ;

1) the area between the carbon and aluminium bond is not electrically isolated

2) this obvious fact gives rise to the questions is the frame structurally sound due to insufficient glue being present allowing moisture to come between the two materials and act as an electrolyte. Since the drop out is a key structural component of the frame, its failure will give rise to an injury or worse.

 

The distributor seems to want to ignore theses aspects of their responsibility and hide behind their rules. Problem they're also reading the rules in a manner that benefits themselves and not their customer, especially when rider safety is the main concern.

 

I find it desperate that a distributor of such a well funded brand would want to play chicken with a customers safety.

Correct, that's how I'm seeing this too. The corrosion is a result of something else manufacturing related.

 

It all comes down to whether they would be willing to put their findings of integrity on paper.

[(Deon)]

Read their policy I posted a few pages back, CORROSION is excluded under their policy, and technically speaking rust is the result of iron/steel corroding into iron oxide like you state....Again was this a latent defect with the frames? I don't think so...if it were then there would be more people coming forward saying "yes my frame did the same thing..."

 

The distributor has obviously declined this warranty as it is only cosmetic and not structural...I don't think they are that stupid to "play chicken" like that, If there was any doubt in the frame's integrity then I bet they would have replaced it. 

Let me ask it this way. 

 

If you buy a car and it has a limited corrosion/rust warranty of 2 years, you assume it relates to the paint and the undercoat. But if on the engine block, within the 20 000km mechanical warranty, one of the coolant blanking plates develops a leak due to corrosion/rust, does the manufacturer deny all mechanical claims because they have a 2 year corrosion/rust warranty?

[EmptyB]

I think regardless loyalty and or how meticulous you are about maintaining your bike or reading fine-print every single hubber would be miffed if he or she ended up in this situation. You can debate all the steps that lead up to whether there is a legal leg to stand on or not, but can we at least agree that in the end nobody would be happy if they were the OP.

 

I certainly was reminded by this to go check the exact wording on my warranties - which I would hazard to guess the majority of owners don't do.

 

Fully agree!

[SwissVan]

Is this part of the paint warranty or structure. I will think that corrosion will be under the frame warranty as the infected area is on the frame which cause the paint to bubble. 

 

Does not matter, Specialized exclude corrosion from the warranty process.

Especially after this amount of time the above cannot be argued. If it was only a few months old and you reported it then you might have had a chance.

 

To answer your question anyway....I'd gamble and say its under the paint warranty. For the corrosion process to happen it would need moisture to be present and in contact with both metal and carbon, which would mean that the exterior coating (paint, clear coat, resin or whatever they put on) is not sufficient or missing.

 

As i mentioned earlier, they could also say that the scratches in the vicinity compromised the protective coating and allowed moisture to enter.

 

I feel for you, imo its most likely due to some failure in the manufacturing process BUT they have an ACE* up their sleeve.

 

 

 

 

*ACE = Arse Covering Exercise

[Skinnyone]

Let me ask it this way. 

 

If you buy a car and it has a limited corrosion/rust warranty of 2 years, you assume it relates to the paint and the undercoat. But if on the engine block, within the 20 000km mechanical warranty, one of the coolant blanking plates develops a leak due to corrosion/rust, does the manufacturer deny all mechanical claims because they have a 2 year corrosion/rust warranty?

Ah ha- see what I did there...ANY manufacturer will put that limited word in their warranty...and then underneath there would be fine print...Remember any manufacturer (bicycle,car, electronics) will have an ACE (as swiss puts it) lawyer on their books....

 

So in your above example, yes the paint/corrosion warranty will be limited to the body work and related structures - windows and panels, not the engine, and they can and will argue that there was an insufficient amount of anti-freeze/coolant (which has corrosion inhibitors) in the radiator to prevent this from occurring....Clever neh... always read the fine print and remember the fat cat lawyer who came up with all the loop holes...

 

At the end of the day again, it comes down to this - any manufacturer of consumer products will have this in place so that Joe blogs who's ridden his bike in its moer can't stroll in to his shop 10 years down the line and claim a new bike.

 

Someone mentioned car batteries, I have had numerous batteries die just after the warranty expires - why? because the manufacturer knows that they have to make their product last a certain period and then the product decays and is no longer useable and they make their warranty as such - so if a product can last 18 months before decay sets in then the item will have a 1 year warranty on it.

 

Why does Giant only warranty its paint for 1 year? as apposed to Specialized's 2 year warranty?

Why does Stages warranty their power meters for one year as apposed to PowerTap's 2 year? 

 

Specialized in my eyes have done all they can do according to their policies and yes they have put their findings on paper and it's here for all to see....Again OP should have acted sooner and he may well have had a different reaction...

[raptor-22]

Does not matter, Specialized exclude corrosion from the warranty process.

Especially after this amount of time the above cannot be argued. If it was only a few months old and you reported it then you might have had a chance.

 

To answer your question anyway....I'd gamble and say its under the paint warranty. For the corrosion process to happen it would need moisture to be present and in contact with both metal and carbon, which would mean that the exterior coating (paint, clear coat, resin or whatever they put on) is not sufficient or missing.

 

As i mentioned earlier, they could also say that the scratches in the vicinity compromised the protective coating and allowed moisture to enter.

 

I feel for you, imo its most likely due to some failure in the manufacturing process BUT they have an ACE* up their sleeve.

 

 

 

 

*ACE = Arse Covering Exercise

 

The distributor cannot hide behind science fiction and what ifs to avoid honoring their warranty. Paint has nothing to do with the pathway created between the two components .

Moisture in this case could be present from inside the frame or even present in the glue used to bond the two components due to be exposed too long to a humid atmosphere.( these things are not glued with 5 min epoxy .....)

[SwissVan]

The distributor cannot hide behind science fiction and what ifs to avoid honoring their warranty. Paint has nothing to do with the pathway created between the two components .

Moisture in this case could be present from inside the frame or even present in the glue used to bond the two components due to be exposed too long to a humid atmosphere.( these things are not glued with 5 min epoxy .....)

 

What if, "could be" is equivalent to "what if " ?

 

Could be that your theory is correct, I'm no expert on carbon fibre manufacturing so i cannot say if what you suggest is a possibility.

 

I think its more likely that moisture got in after the initial manufacturing process, either due to poor protection on the surface of the base material (inadequate coating applied at manufacture) or via damage to the coating (scratches or solvent damage) after manufacture.

 

Very difficult to prove either