On December 22, 2008 I took my vehicle for service. While it was in their garage they found that there were problems with the steering. The pitman arm wiggled on the shaft whenever the wheel was turned. The service technician worked to determine what was wrong so that repairs could be estimated. It was found that the mounting nut holding the pitman arm on the shaft of the steering gear assembly was not tight against the pitman arm. This allowed the pitman arm to wiggle on the shaft, with a result that the nut was damaged, and it could not be turned on the shaft.
In order to remove the pitman arm, the service technician had to heat the shaft to remove the nut. When the nut was removed, it was found that the threads were stripped and the steering gear assembly was unusable. Thus, both the pitman arm and the steering gear assembly had to be replaced. The service manager called Interstate to get authorization for repair. He was told that someone from Interstate must examine the vehicle and parts before authorization could be issued.
I was called on December 26, 2008 and told that Interstate had examined the parts and had authorized the replacement and installation of the pitman arm but refused to authorize the replacement and installation of the steering gear assembly.
It would appear to be arbitrary, capricious and illogical that they would choose to authorize the replacement of a new pitman arm onto a steering gear assembly which had been made unusable due to the fact that the previously poorly attached pitman arm had irreparably damaged it!
Two service managers talked to Interstate about this matter, telling them that the assembly must be replaced since the wiggling movement of the pitman arm had damaged the nut and shaft, causing to be irreparable. However, Interstate persisted and refused to authorize the replacement of the steering gear assembly.
Since I had need of the truck, I told the dealer to repair the truck so I could use it. I was finally able to pick it up on January 2, 2009. The total charges I paid were almost $1100 more than the original estimate I had authorized. These additional charges were solely due to the fact that Interstate would not authorize the replacement of the damaged steering gear assembly.
I have carefully read the Star Diamond contract that I purchased on January 15, 2005. I find no printed statements, addenda, waivers, annotations or other words or information that would indicate that the damaged and unusable steering gear assembly is not covered under the contract. Instead, it is quite clear that it is covered! There is no mention of any conditions that would disallow a claim against the service contract.
Three persons at two different automobile dealerships interceded for me in this matter, and still Interstate refused authorization.
I thus feel that they are in violation of their contractual obligations as stated in the extant Interstate Star Diamond Vehicle Service Contract, established on January 15, 2005.
Gary
Porter Corners, New York
U.S.A.