Well, I just bought my first Ford since 1980, a 2005 F-150 Supercrew King Ranch with 118,855 miles. It's in pretty nice shape, has a few miner dings, the interior is very clean. It drives smooth and is very "tight", no clunks or rattles on bumpy roads. The best part; it's got the cam phaser diesel song. It could easily be mistaken for a VW diesel if ya weren't looking at it. I said it's the best part because I bought it for $11,575, about $6k below NADA for our area.

Now for the repair. My thought is to get it repaired and done the right way. The spake plugs haven't been replaced so might as well get them done as well. I realize a service contract will not cover the plugs but is a service contract a good investment? I looked at one company's definition of "failure" and I don't see any way they will pay of anything, at any time. It says, "

"Failure is defined as a failure of a “defective part” or faulty workmanship as supplied by the Manufacturer or Dealer, but does not include gradual reduction in operating performance due to wear and tear or damage from failure of non covered parts."


First, the part must be "defective", whatever that means. Then, the defective part must "fail". Say what? Isn't that what a defective part is, a failure? What a hoot. If that isn't a setup for the attorney's to make lots of money, I don't know what is.

Are there any vehicle service contracts/companies out there? Ones who have definitions that are clear, concise and understandable? I'm thinking I'm money ahead to get it fixed rather than buy a service contract and drive it until it falls apart inside and argue to get my claim paid.

That said, has anyone here purchased a service contract, filed a claim and got it paid without a hassle? If so, what part failed and which company?

Thanks for your input

kenn

 

Have you looked into the Ford ESP? I'm not sure of the details but you don't have to buy the vehicle from a dealership in order to buy the service contract. You would have to pay for them to inspect it though.

 

Service contracts on a vehicle over 100k miles will rarely be of any good to you, and buying a contract when you already have a problem is like buying life insurance for someone who is already dead. Filing a claim on an existing problem is simply fraud.

I have extended the warranty on many new vehicles, virtually always with the mfr. In most cases, I have come out far ahead on the warranty, but in a couple cases I "wasted" the warranty money. But this is like saying you "wasted" your insurance money because your house didn't burn down or you didn't die.

I once bought a non-factory warranty on a '92 Grand Prix that we owned from new. That car had so many problems the warranty was a great payback, but it was a royal PITA to file a claim.

On my '02 Ford E150, I extended the factory warranty from 3/36 to 5/60. Cost me about a grand, and I got about $700 worth of front end parts and a couple engine gaskets out of it. BUT the cylinder heads on my run of Romeo 4.6 engines had a design problem (early PI heads) with the cooling passages at the back of the heads and there was a TSB issued. So I also got $4200 worth of new cylinder heads at about 42k miles I think, for a $100 deductible. THAT warranty paid off bigtime.

Again, a 3rd party warranty on a vehicle over 100k miles is probably not something I would bother with. You can shop around, but check the fine print. They sometime exclude much of the failure-prone parts, sometimes limit the hourly mechanic's rate to $50 per hour, sometimes require you to jump thru approval hoops before getting anything done, etc. Insurance companies are out there to MAKE money, not to give away money. It should be your expectation that if you are an average policy holder, you will lose money on the deal.

George

 

Hello George,

Thank you for your reply. Yes, the will not cover an existing condition but what does an existing condition mean? Is a part that appears to be failing an existing condition? At which point is it considered to be failed vs normal wear and tear. I've not read where a 5.4 with the diesel sound is excluded. Further, at what point do those parts fail; when the begin making a diesel sound or when the diesel sound is so loud one can't hear the radio at full volume. Or is it considered to be failed when it goes so long that it finally throws a rod, etc.

I don't know the answer to that and no consumer does. I do know these companies are in business for one reason, to make money and their goal is to deny a claim if at all possible. Thus, the ambiguous definition for 'failure'.

Again, thanks for responding.

kenn

 

Yes but Ford says my truck is not eligible, probably because it has over 100k

Thanks for the suggestion.

kenn

 

You have a truck with 120k miles making death noises so IMO you have a pre-existing condition. You are welcome to research 3rd party insurance companies and their terms and conditions. If they require an inspection, my guess is that whoever inspects it will notice that something does not sound right and either deny a policy totally or exclude the engine.

If I were you, I would be researching mechanics who can fix your engine properly. That is where your money should go.

Good luck,
George

 

Well George, I have been doing both simply because, even with your definition of a failed part doesn't me that's what they consider to be failed. They write a vague definition for a reason, not to pay a claim. I would much rather put my money towards a good mechanic rather than argue over what the definition of 'Failure' is. The problem is, they will not be clear on that definition, until a claim is submitted.

kenn

 

You are trying to justify committing insurance fraud by seeking some kind of a loophole in the wording of the policy. Ain't gonna work, sorry. You are even failing your own smell test. How stupid do you think insurance companies are?

Good luck,
George

 

Yo, George,

Get real!! What definition of fraud are you using? Do you really think that your interpretation of fraud or your definition of 'failure' is what they will use to pay a claim? Why do you think there are so many dissatisfied policy holders who thought the same as you and their claims were turned down? The answer is easy; common sense says there is a part failure. Unfortunately, their claims were denied because the company didn't agree with common sense.

Tell me, at which point does the "normal wear and tear" on cam phasers become part failure? Once you define that, do you think you can get them to agree with you? Believe me George, I'd like nothing better than to have you come up with a common sense definition and then get them to adopt that as a standard. You've got good common sense, George. What you lack is the experience in dealing with companies like this who don't care about common sense. They only care about their pocket book and they will let you and I go over the water fall for a $5 bill. Fortunately, not all are that way. Some are up front and fair and that's the company from which I want to buy a policy.

For the record, George, I've worked in the law enforcement arena since 1970 and I still investigate fraud. Call it a loophole or a technicality, but if they use it to not pay a claim, would you call them fraudulent? And even if you did, the court would not agree with you because it's all in how the definitions are written whether it's their definition of 'failure' or criminal statutes.

kenn

 

So far, so good, guys.

Please continue to keep is civil where different opinions converge.

Thanks.

Stewart

 

Sir, I have worked with legal pension documents for 38 years and have dealt with and written legal language with stakes of millions of dollars and argued fine legal points with attorneys, companies and union, the IRS, and countless pensioners. You have a time bomb vehicle and are trying to insure it. Good luck with that.

I have also bought 40-50 cars in my lifetime and been "taken" especially when I was a dumb kid. I would recommend that you should have bought a truck that was not making death noises, but that horse is out of the barn. If you bought a new truck and had a problem, it would be covered. If you bought a truck before reaching 3/36, Ford would have sold you an extended warranty and covered you if you were able to produce service records. I presume you have full service records for your truck now, going back to the day it was new. Warranties require proof of required maintenance.

Insurance companies have access to Internet pages like this one:

2004 Ford F-150 Engine Failure | CarComplaints.com

You might also want to read TSB 06-19-8 which pretty clearly indicates that your noise *is* the failure.

http://www.stangnet.com/images/stori...s/06-19-08.pdf

You are looking for an insurance company to take responsibility for your already-failed truck. Like shopping for life insurance and trying to get them to overlook your cancer which is "only" at Stage 3. Would an engine that runs fine but has just a "little" rod knock meet your definition of "failure" or does than only happen when the rod siezes or makes the engine lose oil pressure and die?

FYI, my '02 E150 van had a problem with the cylinder heads (early Romeo PI heads) where the "failure" to be diagnosed was just a slight ticking sound audible from the wheel well area. (Bad cooling passages at the rear of the heads would cause the exhaust valve stems to carbon up and stick in the guides just a bit.) Engine ran fine, no other symptoms or problems. I was on great terms with my dealer service manager, my van was under an extended Ford warranty, I had used the dealer for all service work and oil changes, and I got a new pair of cylinder heads, value of $4200, when my van had 42k miles on it. It cost me a $100 deductible. So extended warranties can be great, but your truck is broken already. The noise is an indication of the failure of the cam phasers. Kind of like "shifting funny" often means your transmission has failed and it's just a matter of time before the truck no longer will move forward.

Good luck with it. I've given all the input that I can. You should have bought a 4.6. I come here to talk about trucks. If you want to parse legal language, I do contract work by the hour and I am not cheap.
George

 

Then you should know that one does not presume or assume anything when it comes to these types of contracts. To do so is inviting disaster in more ways than one.

Wrong, sir. Rare is the vehicle that is 7-8 years old that has full service records.

Thank you for the links. Yes, I read the TSB a few days ago. It points out different sources for the noise such as the:

Injection fuel system, Valve Train and Variable Cam Timing.

The bulletin states:
If the noise intensity is more than a lightly audible knock at hot idle under 1200 RPM at engine operating temperature, replace the cam phaser using the “In-Vehicle Repair” Camshaft Phaser and Sprocket procedure found in the Workshop Manual, Section 303-01.


No where do I see the use of the word "failure" or an admittance by Ford that the part has failed and certainly not when making a light noise.



veral figured they would have links to all kinds of sites as well as TSB bulletins. I also figured that when I tell them I have a 2005 F-150 with the 5.4, they would be well aware of the problems to the point to where the rates would be quoted accordingly.


Very good question, George and I am with you on that. However, please understand, it makes no difference at what point you or I consider it to be failure. That has nothing to do with it. It's what the insurance carrier considers to be failure and as I said before, they don't know either and hence, they write ambiguous definitions of the word 'failure'.

Today I spoke with the Ford dealer from whom I bought the truck. I asked specific questions about at which point this issue is a failure and guess what, I could not get a definitive answer. It was suggested to me to purchase a contract through them because the company they do business with has always paid the claims without a hassle. They said the carrier depends on them to make an honest call. That was good enough for me so I bought a 24/30 contract .

As far as parsing legal language, George, you and I are in agreement about when a failure occurs. It's the carrier that does not agree with us. If they had their way, "failure" would not occur until it's as you say, "or does than only happen when the rod siezes or makes the engine lose oil pressure and die?" You see, they don't want to pay a claim

Re: the 4.6 engine. No thanks, It has the same or similar issues.

Thank you, George, for this interesting discourse. As you said the insurance companies have access to the TSB and various other sources. Thus they know the history of the 05 5.4 engine. If not, that's their problem, not mine. If they are willing to write a policy, I'm willing to buy it. That, sir, is not fraud nor is it a loophole. It's simply doing business.

kenn

 

The 4.6L mod engine is a 2V engine and doesn't have cam phasers.

It doesn't suffer the same issues.

Stewart

 

The 4.6 in the F150 in your year truck did NOT have the cam phasers until the 3 valve version in 2009. Before that, it would have been the same 2 valve engine used in millions of cop cars, taxis, and other trucks. It is a GREAT engine but as the problem I described with my van, was not perfect. It also blew out a few spark plugs--fewer than the 2 valve 5.4 and 6.8. But most of them will run hundreds of thousands of miles.

It sounds like your dealer may be willing to stand behind you in a warranty that they sell you. This is a great thing--helping you get out from under a broken truck that they sold you. To me, that makes them part of the possible insurance fraud plan, but I guess you will see how that works out. Do let us know, and good luck with the truck otherwise. Ford makes good stuff, with some occasional problems. I assume the dealer will do the inspection and "fail" to hear any noise. A graceful way for them to save face. I wonder if you bring the truck to them in a couple months they will be able to hear the noise? My understanding on dealer 3rd party service contracts is that the dealer commission can be 50% of the price, so it sounds like a good racket for them.

Without service records dating back to the beginning, I would think you may have *some* issue with the warranty company denying coverage if they want to attribute the problem to faulty maintenance, using the wrong oil, not changed enough, etc. Read your fine print. But if the maintenance was done by the selling dealer, or shows up on Oasis, you may be in luck.

Here's an old thread on FTE about cam phasers. This along with the stuck plug issue makes me never want to get near an early 3 valve engine (how's yer plugs? that could become another hobby for you that will make you wish you'd gotten the 4.6):

https://www.ford-trucks.com/forums/5...am-phaser.html

Good luck, peace and out.
George

 

[quote=YoGeorge;12843008]The 4.6 in the F150 in your year truck did NOT have the cam phasers until the 3 valve version in 2009. Before that, it would have been the same 2 valve engine used in millions of cop cars, taxis, and other trucks. [quote]

This is what the TSB says which you mentioned.

FORD: LINCOLN:
2005 Mustang 2005 Navigator
2004-2005 F-150
2005 Expedition, F-250, F-350

This article supersedes TSB 06-4-7 to update the Service Procedure

ISSUE WHICH MAY INFLUENCE THE INTENSITY OF
Some vehicles equipped with a 4.6L 3-valve or 5.4L 3-valve engine may exhibit a ticking and / orknocking noise after reaching normal operating temperature, or a rattle upon starting. The noisemay be described as ticks, taps, knocks, or thumps. In some cases the noise may be a normal characteristic of these engines. In other cases the noise may require further investigation. Sorting out and defining the noise as reported by the customer is important to successfully diagnose and / or repair the condition.

Looks like Ford has been using the 4.6 3v earlier than what many folks thought.

Now George, That was not necessary, especially from someone with your experience in understanding legal documents. You've made another assumption. You just don't get it. Just because a part is making a noise, doesn't mean it has failed. It may be failing but it hasn't failed.

If I said I had a failing heart, I would still be alive, would I not? Once my heart fails, it's then, and only then, that the heart has failed.

If a window motor squealed a bit but still opened and closed the window, would you say there is: A - Nothing wrong with it; B - it's failing or C - it's failed?

The pre-existing conditions are for parts that have failed (past-tense). I would argue that most parts on a vehicle are in a stage of failing just like our bodies are in a stage of failing since the day we were born. Again, it makes no difference what answer you choose because it's irrelevant. The policy will not cover it until the carrier considers the part to have failed.

George, YOUR ARGUMENT OF FRAUD AND FAILURE HOLDS NO WATER. IT IS IRRELEVANT. As I said before, I do agree with you on this but the insurance company DOESN'T CARE WHAT WE THINK! THEY DO NOT CARE!! They will never agree with us, not now, not ever. They don't want to pay a claim. If they agreed with us, they would be paying all kinds of misdiagnosed claims. So please, stop suggesting this is fraud and the dealer is part of it. It is not fraud!!!!!! You should know better. As I said in the beginning, this is what one Service Contract Writer defines 'Failure':

"Failure is defined as a failure of a “defective part”

Can you tell me what that means?

Sorry, you are wrong again. I checked with companies direct and brokers and all say the same. There is a waiting period of 30 to 90 days AND 1,000 to 1,500 miles and at some point during the first 60 days, the oil must me changed to prove the mileage and the oil weight, etc.

Thank you for the link. Upon reading it, I found it to be quite clear that Ford does not consider this to be failed. Faulty perhaps but not failed. As a matter of fact, two dealers would not make it right but a 3rd dealer did. If you read the fine print in the service contracts, no where is the word "faulty" used. They use 'Failed'. Ford may well replace faulty cam phasers either during or out of warranty but that does not mean they failed. It's simply not maintaining the original specs and not performing as intended.

kenn