I recently purchased a 2003 Turbo from Park Place Porsche in Dallas - the also sold me on a "bumper to bumper like" warranty through Prizm that was supposed to be nearly as good as a CPO.

I then noticed a Pentosin leak. Porsche of North Houston informs me that my slave cylinder needs replaced and that the warranty does not cover clutch parts - they want $1,500 for repairs.

Park Place is now trying to see what they can do to help...the first option they came up with is "helping" me out if I were to drive the car to Dallas for repair. Not sure how much they plan to help($).

I really hate dealing with this kind of stuff. Can anyone provide any advice? Is this typical with aftermarket warranties? Not what I expect when you drop $4K on a 2 year warranty.

 

Bummer... I would keep working with the dealer you purchased the car from. If you can save a lot by taking the car back to Dallas it may be worth it. Not sure how the leak affects driveability, is that even an option given the issue? Additionally, there may be others on here that have replaced that part at a Porsche qualified repair facility for less. Worth checking that out too if you can't reach an agreement with the dealer.

 

Porsche's CPO now is just about as good as the original factory warranty. I wonder why they didn't just CPO this car for you instead of selling an extended warranty - maybe because they would have had to do that repair themselves first. Buyer beware on any of the exclusionary policies. I'd probably raise hell with Park Place and find out why they aren't covering the entire thing if you come back to Dallas for the repair.

BTW - RUF quoted me about $1000 to do the slave and accumulator, so I bet an indy would be cheaper than your Houston dealer if you have to pay out of pocket.

 

Incidentally - I wonder if you bought the car I looked at on line. They originally had it for $42,900 Certified, then changed it after a few days to $39,900 without the CPO. I've seen them do that several times - I wonder if it's because they find repairs needed and would rather not do them and just sell the car cheaper but add on an extended warranty.

 

you replace the clutch accumulator and slave at the same time is good practice.

if you want an indy locally ill PM you some info.

now as far as the warrantys they couldn't sell you a real CPO, car is too old and they would of had to fix this issue most likely. so they sell either EZ care warrantys (great ) and some others like the one you got.

and not to say it hasnt happened before but the inspections they do are not as throughout as what a real CPO should be, a friend bought a car from a Houston dealer and it would not have met Porsche CPO requirements in many areas.

 

03 might not be too old - as long as the in-service date is <8 years it can be CPO'd. I guess it's pushing it now depending on when it was first bought.

 

in 2009 when i searched for a turbo anything over 6 years old was not eligable for CPO

 

Thanks for the responses. Yes, the car was about 6 months too old to certify.

I assume the slave and accumulator require similar labor costs?

 

Is this clutch slave/accumulator issue caused by time or mileage primarily?

I only ask because I am wondering how long this new one will last once I get the work done - I only plan to drove the car 500 miles per year or so.

 

500 miles a year? Just curious, but how come? 500 miles is a little less than two weeks for me. You have some nice cars, but none as much fun as the 996.

I drive mine through rain, sleet, snow and, in Iowa, the rare sunny day.

 

OP-

Your fault for not reading and understanding the warranty you were buying.

Sounds like you relied on their verbal description that it 'was supposed to be as good as a CPO'. Have you even bothered at THIS point to read and understand your Prizm warranty???

Coverage will all depend on the language of the policy- if you simply rely on THEIR interpretation, be sure you will be screwed.

Did you have an independent PPI done before buying it?

 

You know, I never thought of that...your help IS much appreciated.

Bottom line though, you are right. It is my fault. Long and unfortunate story of why I got in to this car but I had a great experience with the dealer and wasn't thinking into it as clearly as I should have.

I've aways had CPOs or factory warranties and have never had to deal with this type of aftermarket warranty. The dealer and I reviewed the Prizm warranty together and both agree that the blanket "clutch components" statement is extremely grey.

I did not have a PPI (didn't even know it existed at the time as this is my first Porsche) but the dealer did perform the CPO checklist. Sounds like the PPI is much more detailed with compression testing, over-rev logs, etc.

The car is extremely visually clean and up on all maintenance (it came with records). There are no issues with the drive, brakes, steering feel, noises, etc. I am hoping I can get through this issue and enjoy it for a few years with low miles and then I'll trade up for a CPO.

 

Agreed. I had a e92 M3 that I loved but had a buddy pass in a bad accident and it scared me with my wife driving the car and all. I decided I would rather trade it and get a larger car (ended up with the XC90) as a daily driver.

I can't stand driving my car too much around here anyways with all of the pot holes and steep inclines. The M3 was such an inconvenience sometimes - i.e. there are parts of my parking garage that I couldn't reach due ramp angles. I've got a passion for cars and needed something fun - the idea is to keep the Turbo garaged, wax it for fun every once in a while, and take it for a spin on the weekends. Would have kept the M3 but have to think that an 8 year old Turbo is going to hold value much better than a one year old M3.

 

PPI isn't a porsche thing!!!! It is a pre-purchase inspection...it is done on ANYTHING..house, car, boat, horse...you get the idea.

Bring it to park palce and tell them to fix it- tell them the CPO checklist was fraudulent, the leak was there and should have been caught.

 

My bad, sometimes the way PPIs are referenced on this forum it almost seems like there is a Porsche specific standard that is used.

Good point on the fraud claim. We will see what happens...