Q–I bought a new Buick in 1994.
Three years later, out of warranty and with only 28,000 miles on the odometer, the exhaust system failed. It took three visits to the dealer to fix it to my satisfaction.
Then, while riding in a funeral procession, the ABS warning light went on, and I drove back to the dealership, where I was told the shop was busy and “maybe” they could look at it the next day. When they saw I was out of warranty, they said the earliest they could check the car was in a week.
I went to an independent mechanic who connected a diagnostic plug to my car that within 30 minutes told me nothing was wrong. The dealership should have done the same so as not to cause animosity.
A month later the car wouldn’t start. I thought the alarm had malfunctioned. I went to the independent mechanic again and he said the battery was dead and the alternator not functioning properly. I had both replaced for $400 and hope this corrects my problems until I can go shopping for a ’98 model. But I will never do business with the dealer again and never purchase a Buick or any GM product again. I plan to take my business to foreign cars and hope millions follow suit. G.J., Chicago
A–When you bring a car in for repairs unannounced in the vacation season, you have to expect a wait.
If the dealer had plugged your car into the computer, you would have known in 30 minutes the independent found out, but the dealer would have had to back up repairs for those with appointments.
That it took three visits to fix the exhaust system to your satisfaction hints that maybe the service writer feared your 30-minute job could have taken all day.
As for the battery/alternator problem, did anyone mention the alarm system as the possible power drain?
You indict Buick but you had problems that could be related to the few miles you travel. Condensation can destroy an exhaust if the car isn’t driven long enough for the system to heat and get rid of the moisture; an add-on alarm can hurt the battery/alternator if you don’t drive the car long enough to recharge the battery.
If you move to an import and take millions with you, imagine how long you’ll wait for service.
Q–I bought a new Buick in 1986 and paid for rustproofing. In 1994 a rust hole developed on the driver’s door. My claim was rejected. I complained to the Illinois attorney general’s office and two days before the hearing, the company sent me a check. Now I have a rust hole in the rear door. My claim was rejected, but the AG’s office doesn’t have the same hearing process.
The rustproofing company has a gimmick, saying rust must be reported within 60 days. If you report rust, the claim is rejected on the basis it hasn’t rusted through yet. If it has rusted through, the claim is rejected because you didn’t report it in time (to prevent rust from forming a hole). Please devote some space to this. S.V., River Grove
A–Over the years we’ve devoted enough space to rustproofing and why we don’t recommend it to cover your car in newsprint 10 times over.
One reason to be wary is the trouble you are having.
Many times a claim is denied because the car rusted from the outside and the warranty firm insists it covers rust that formed only from the inside. If after looking again, you say the rust formed on the inside, the company says, we cover rust that forms only on the outside. In other words, you can’t win.
Take comfort in the fact that your troubles are with an ’86 model. Today’s vehicles are made with so many rust-resistant materials and factory treatments rust is seldom an issue–and rustproofing even less wise.
It would be interesting to pull the interior door panel to see whether the rustproofing goop is there, which takes it beyond a warranty problem into the realm of fraud and would help open the door at the AG’s office.
