Warranty - valid claim or not

[Shebeen]

I'm curious to the basis for these assertions? Where does one find information to say a frame is cat-eye strike proof? Where do you find the testing data against which to measure the assertion? Also, the assertion has to be backed up by numbers, not feelings. So how does the OP prove that the stated incident fell within acceptable impacting load to the frame, and thus should not have caused the damaged noted by the OP?

 

How we feel about something, and how that something actually is can be vastly different. I feel those two assertions are more emotive than factual, and thus baseless in their current forms.

 

Since the OP doesn't have the data to back up any emotional responses, i'd go with an insurance claim as the burden of proof is much reduced.

because a bike hitting a cat eye and then getting a frame crack from hitting a piece of soft fleshy with no fulcrum is a basically a JRA.

 

rubber stayed down, no collision - send it to the manufacturers for their view on it.

[Edge_Design]

If you hit a cat eye or any bump in the road and the frame cracks....i would say warranty. 

 

I have to say I'm tempted to agree with you. Roads are not flawless and a frame should probably be able to take the hit of riding over a bump in the road - especially one which wasn't even hard enough to damage your wheel/tyre/tube which you would expect to take the worst of the hit. How much impact can your leg really have on the frame if you still remain upright and riding?

 

Best bet is to take it and submit a warranty claim - the worst they can do is say no. If there is no crash or obvious damage that could have caused it then it's highly likely it will be replaced under warranty.

[Eugene]

I'm curious to the basis for these assertions? Where does one find information to say a frame is cat-eye strike proof? Where do you find the testing data against which to measure the assertion? Also, the assertion has to be backed up by numbers, not feelings. So how does the OP prove that the stated incident fell within acceptable impacting load to the frame, and thus should not have caused the damaged noted by the OP?

 

How we feel about something, and how that something actually is can be vastly different. I feel those two assertions are more emotive than factual, and thus baseless in their current forms.

 

Since the OP doesn't have the data to back up any emotional responses, i'd go with an insurance claim as the burden of proof is much reduced.

Look at it from another angle. What evidence will the manufacturer have to repudiate a claim. An event like this won't show any other damage.

 

Show them a bike with a buckled wheel and scratches everywhere, you'll have a tough time convincing them their product was faulty.

 

Show them a bike that has no other marks or evidence of a severe impact, they'll have a tough time finding reasons to repudiate.

 

Be honest, how sever can a cat-eye be? It is a small bump not a hole in the road

[Breezer]

Bene van yster?

[Slakkepas]

Damage due to impact will be insurance claim.  Whatever the source of impact might be.... 

Edited January 12, 2017 by Slakkepas

[Skinnyone]

if there is no crash damage to a bike then the manufacturer doesn't have much room to argue, BUT having said that, if it is a questionable break though like along the top tube where there is no known joint line then if the warranty manager is on the ball he may pick that up...and say its bike rack damage/other impact etc...

 

Sure it wasn't there before the incident? like from your bike rack?....

[finallygotabike]

if this is not a warranty claim, then what constitutes a warranty claim - by magic your bikes gets a crack whilst standing parked in your storeroom overnight? 

 

Surely this is grounds for warranty claim?

[Edition 507]

 had a nice big crack in it....this happened from my thigh hitting the top tube in the act of not falling off.

 

 

Cheesus Crust bro, how big are your thighs??

Please don't ever take up kickboxing!

[mtbDobby]

Hahah - thanks for all the input, the bike is is for a warranty claim but it's been referred to the head office in US for further comment.

 

I agree with everyone - which is to say I can see why some think it's a insurance claim and why some see it as a warrantee claim. I am hoping for the later as I have a excess if it's done thru insurance.

 

Will send pics of crack if I see the frame again. The bruise on my thigh is also impressive....like I said I have chunky thighs lol

[Patchelicious]

I don't THINK it's a warranty, I'm not debating if it is or is not. By definition it is an insurance claim.

 

You insure against and event you warranty against defect.

 

If damage is caused by an event, crash, falling, being driven into, farting too hard, it must be referred to the insurance company.

 

If the insurance company feels that the frame broke too easily, they can take t up with the manufacturers, or refer to an assessor, who will then in writing say as much, which you can take to the manufacturer.

 

If the manufacturer in your case happens to honor this warranty case, count yourself lucky as they have no obligation to do so and would probably be doing it to protect their brand.

 

Ps: Do you have insurance on the bike?

Edited January 12, 2017 by Patchelicious

[mtbDobby]

The bike is insured - the question s should the frame have cracked, I did not crash or abuse it. It was in the act of riding. Had I been riding in a straight line and not hit a cat eye and the frame cracked under load I.e out the saddle sprint, how is that technically different? There is no other scratch on the bike what so ever.

 

That is why I see this as a grey area and why I posted this.

[Patchelicious]

The bike is insured - the question s should the frame have cracked, I did not crash or abuse it. It was in the act of riding. Had I been riding in a straight line and not hit a cat eye and the frame cracked under load I.e out the saddle sprint, how is that technically different? There is no other scratch on the bike what so ever.

 

That is why I see this as a grey area and why I posted this.

If you have been riding and it just cracked, it would be categorized as normal use. Hitting a cat eye is an impact. You don't need a scratch on your frame to make it an insurance claim, you have a crack for that.

 

If I were you I would lodge a claim with the insurer. If the insurer believes it is a warranty issue, you have a much stronger case with the manufacturer too.

 

Like I have said, the manufacturer might very well warranty replace the frame, who knows.

 

Anyway, you asked for advice, I've done my bit by giving it.

 

Good luck.

Edited January 12, 2017 by Patchelicious

[porqui]

Was thinking about this while out riding - past some cat-eyes yes - somehow I feel the frame should not have cracked from being hit by leg or knee and if the impact from the cat-eye was that bad the rim should have gone first the frame if well made should have survived.

 

This all seems odd.

[WR 1.0]

Let's say it was your wheel that cracked from hitting the cat eye.... Good luck trying to swing that as a warranty claim. This is accidental damage, call your insurance. Probably less hassle than trying to convince the manufacturer to honor the warranty

[Eugene]

Isn't a cat-eye part of a road. Isn't it designed to be ridden over. In my opinion riding over a cat-eye is a normal riding condition. A frame should not break when used under normal riding conditions.

[Eugene Brown]

If frames were so susceptible to damage from standard features on asphalt roads, as cat eyes are, imagine all the broken frames in European cities where there are still cobbled streets. Some of the cobbles are much gnarlier than a cats eye. Be interesting to hear the outcome of this one.....