Boxerworks.com

Steve in Golden wrote:

Zombie Master wrote:If I inform KTM that the work was not done properly KTM could say I don't have warranty.

Since KTM would likely do nothing anyway, except perhaps void the warranty, it probably wouldn't be worth the trouble to report it to them. Apparently your only option is to pay for the service twice: once to the dealer who may or may not do the work, and once for the parts and the time to do it yourself. Otherwise no warranty.

For once, I'm glad I live in the US of A. Our healthcare system sucks bad but at least we have some consumer protections built in to the laws of the land that are not found in other countries.

Understand: the law preventing dealers from voiding warranties unless all maintenance was done by the dealership was not really designed to protect consumers; it was intended to protect independent mechanic shops from monopolistic business practices by manufacturers. It's main "protection" for the consumer was by controlling business practices which were considered to limit competition, and thus be detrimental to the market, business in general, and (therefore) the consumer. They were primarily concerned with opposing the "monopoly" structure where the purchase of an item requires that one continue to do business with the seller to use the vehicle. That business model was struck down many years ago when Kodak would only sell you film by charging you for the processing at the same time, thus protecting their ownership of the processing market. That wasn't struck down until 1954, but it's the same precedent that led to the Magnuson–Moss Warranty Act: preventing a business from tying service to the sale of a product, and thus monopolizing the service market.

So, rather than it being based in a concern for the consumer (as an individual), it is really concerned with protecting the structure of capitalism.

Major Softie wrote:

Steve in Golden wrote:

Zombie Master wrote:If I inform KTM that the work was not done properly KTM could say I don't have warranty.

Since KTM would likely do nothing anyway, except perhaps void the warranty, it probably wouldn't be worth the trouble to report it to them. Apparently your only option is to pay for the service twice: once to the dealer who may or may not do the work, and once for the parts and the time to do it yourself. Otherwise no warranty.

For once, I'm glad I live in the US of A. Our healthcare system sucks bad but at least we have some consumer protections built in to the laws of the land that are not found in other countries.

Understand: the law preventing dealers from voiding warranties unless all maintenance was done by the dealership was not really designed to protect consumers; it was intended to protect independent mechanic shops from monopolistic business practices by manufacturers. It's main "protection" for the consumer was by controlling business practices which were considered to limit competition, and thus be detrimental to the market, business in general, and (therefore) the consumer. They were primarily concerned with opposing the "monopoly" structure where the purchase of an item requires that one continue to do business with the seller to use the vehicle. That business model was struck down many years ago when Kodak would only sell you film by charging you for the processing at the same time, thus protecting their ownership of the processing market. That wasn't struck down until 1954, but it's the same precedent that led to the Magnuson–Moss Warranty Act: preventing a business from tying service to the sale of a product, and thus monopolizing the service market.

So, rather than it being based in a concern for the consumer (as an individual), it is really concerned with protecting the structure of capitalism.

The whole thing just stinks and is totally non righteous.

It's enough to keep me from buying a new vehicle. OK, I guess that was never going to happen anyway. It still sucks, what people have to go through just so that I can get used vehicles much later.

enigmaT120 wrote:It's enough to keep me from buying a new vehicle. OK, I guess that was never going to happen anyway. It still sucks, what people have to go through just so that I can get used vehicles much later.

But you live in the US so doing your own work would not void the warranty.

Steve in Golden wrote:

enigmaT120 wrote:It's enough to keep me from buying a new vehicle. OK, I guess that was never going to happen anyway. It still sucks, what people have to go through just so that I can get used vehicles much later.

But you live in the US so doing your own work would not void the warranty.

My work? It should.

Here's our Federal Consumer Affair dept , the States add another layer .http://www.accc.gov.au/consumers

So I got the dealer to fax me the delivery certificate so that I could check on-line on the KTM site..
IF you have the Vin and the ID off the certificate you can log in and find out about the service history and recalls.

So it listed the the date of the service and had this comment:
einmalig nach 1000 km

I plugged this statement into a translator and it came up with "unique after 1,000 kms"

The bike had 1033klms noted on the service receipt .....maybe I've already lost my warranty due to excessive mileage

Fuk it I'm going down to the shop to install my center stand LOL only $234. !

Major Softie wrote:Understand: the law preventing dealers from voiding warranties unless all maintenance was done by the dealership was not really designed to protect consumers; it was intended to protect independent mechanic shops from monopolistic business practices by manufacturers. It's main "protection" for the consumer was by controlling business practices which were considered to limit competition, and thus be detrimental to the market, business in general, and (therefore) the consumer. They were primarily concerned with opposing the "monopoly" structure where the purchase of an item requires that one continue to do business with the seller to use the vehicle. That business model was struck down many years ago when Kodak would only sell you film by charging you for the processing at the same time, thus protecting their ownership of the processing market. That wasn't struck down until 1954, but it's the same precedent that led to the Magnuson–Moss Warranty Act: preventing a business from tying service to the sale of a product, and thus monopolizing the service market.

So, rather than it being based in a concern for the consumer (as an individual), it is really concerned with protecting the structure of capitalism.

Fess up Softie, how many Doctorates to you have?

I am a Renaissance Man.

My formal education is in Philosophy, Theatre, and Technical Theatre. But, my informal education is strongly informed from having a father with a Master's in Sociology (who was an amateur American Historian), and a mother and step-father who were both lawyers. When step-dad is a lawyer and mom is a court-clerk studying for the Bar, you can imagine what dinner table conversation is like.

While I know I'd need some work to pass the bar, I'll bet I could beat the average 2nd year law student, and I've only had a single "law" class, and that was "business law": a general ed class. 75% of law class is learning to think like a lawyer, and that is the part in which I've had a great deal of training.


When I was studying theatre, an instructor asked: "What is the best education for technical theatre?" The students suggested many possibilities: "Art history?" Architectural history?" Engineering? Construction? Mechanical Physics?

The instructor acknowledged that all those fields were valuable to technical theatre. I then suggested: "To know a little bit about everything?" He said: "THAT is exactly what the perfect background is for technical theatre."

I knew I had found my calling.

Does this mean that most theatre technicians are in the 60s ?