QuestionQUESTION: John - I'm glad you asked me for the warranty information. Here's exactly what Michelin states in their warranty.
WHAT IS NOT COVERED;
Tires which become unserviceable due to
- The addition of liquid, solid or gaseous materials other than air, nitrogen or carbon dioxide.
No one has yet made a determination that my tire is indeed unserviceable. They have only refused to repair it due to my use of FAF. They claim that this policy has been in place for years, although last Decemember I had a flat on this same vehicle, used FAF and they patched the tire - no problems.
I get the point that the use of FAF for tire techs is an emotional one - no one has been able to supply any scientific evidence to me that the use of FAF causes any type of unserviceability in tire repair. And besides, blaming the use of FAF on the car owner and not specifically the FAF manufacturer shields tire shops from liability and opens up a new line of business for these tire pros - selling unneeded tires to unsuspecting consumers.
My tires were all purchased on 9/2/07 - my van had 132,800 miles on it at the time. I had my first flat on 12/23/07 at 134,703 miles and my second on 3/12/08 at 135,705 miles. Hard to believe that after only less than 3,000 miles my tires are considered unserviceable.
ANSWER: "WHAT IS NOT COVERED
Tires which become unserviceable due to:
- Road hazard injury (e.g., a cut, snag, bruise, impact damage or puncture);
- Incorrect mounting of the tire, tire/wheel imbalance or improper repair;
- Misapplication, improper maintenance, racing, underinflation, overinflation or
other abuse;
- Uneven or rapid wear which is caused by mechanical irregularity in the vehicle
such as wheel misalignment, (a measured tread difference of 2/32nds of an inch
or more across the tread on the same tire);
- Accident, fire, chemical corrosion, tire alteration or vandalism;
- Use in commercial applications for treadwear; by this warranty for 6 years;
- Flat spotting caused by improper storage or brakelock;
- The addition of liquid, solid or gaseous materials other than air, nitrogen or
carbon dioxide (for example, waterbase sealers or balancing substances);
- Ozone or weather checking;
- Use of Michelin Self-Supporting Zero Pressure (ZP) tires without a properly
operating low air pressure warning system.
Tires branded “Blemished” or “BLEM” are not adjustable for appearance conditions."
That came right from the Michelin site, which covers every Michelin tire. http://www.michelinman.com/warranty/
This line here:
- The addition of liquid, solid or gaseous materials other than air, nitrogen or
carbon dioxide (for example, waterbase sealers or balancing substances);
Says it all.
Sorry to say, but that no repair policy comes right from Michelin. All tire companys have the same policy.
Fix a flat is a Waterbase sealer and a liquid.
It is not a scam to sell new tires.
I hope this clears things up for you.
John
---------- FOLLOW-UP ----------
QUESTION: John,
That is the same warranty that I copied you on previously, I just left all of the non-related stuff out.
Here's where I get confused.
The warranty says that "Tires which become unserviceable due to" and on and on "The addition of liquid, solid or gaseous materials other than air, nitrogen or carbon dioxide".
If the warranty wanted to exclude all tire repairs and warranty work, this statement would instead be something like, "The addition of liquid, solid or gaseous materials other than air, nitrogen or carbon dioxide will invalidate your warranty".
But the warranty does not say this, instead it conditions the use of FAF by filtering the requirement that "Tires which become unserviceable". In other words, a finding must first be made that the tire is unserviceable for a reason other than the use of FAF. Once found to be unserviceable, the warranty is violated by the use of FAF. It appears the way you are interpreting the warranty to read is that the use of FAF products render the tire unserviceable, however, I cannot locate any proof that this is indeed the case.
ANSWER: You mis-reading this.
The addition of liquid, (for example, waterbase sealers );
Will then make the Tire become unserviceable.
It says
Tires which become unserviceable due to:
This line has two key words. "due to"
So the tire is unserviceable "due to" The addition of liquid, (for example, waterbase sealers ).
So due to the The addition of liquid, (for example, waterbase sealers ) the tire is unserviceable.
Hope you understand now,
John
---------- FOLLOW-UP ----------
QUESTION: John,
With all due respect, I think you are the one that is misreading this statement;
"Tires which become unserviceable due to"
The tire doesn't become unserviceable just because FAF is used. It "becomes" unserviceable due to a finding that the tire cannot be repaired - although, nobody can seem to explain how unservicability is determined.
If it was true that simply due to the use of FAF, the tire would become unserviceable, why wouldn't that specific language be used. And in my case, Costco, would not sell FAF in its warehouses and online site - especially if it voided the warranty for road hazard repair.
AnswerI'M sorry. Are you trained by Michelin? I am. Are you or where you a Supervisor of a tire dept? I was for years. Do you have any tire training? I have lots.
So please do not tell me I am wrong on this matter when I am telling you, that you are reading this wrong.
Check it out.
It says,
Tires which become unserviceable due to:
- The addition of liquid, solid or gaseous materials other than air, nitrogen or
carbon dioxide (for example, waterbase sealers or balancing substances);
Ok look, I will make this simple for you.
The tire became "unserviceable due to" the "addition of liquid" ( adding fix a flat ).
That is the fact and proof you are asking.
They sell it to make money.
So yes it becomes unserviceable of fix a flat.
John
