Fuel system appears bad... Should I buy an outside warranty?

[hybridity]

The fuel gauge on my 2001 Prius just began flashing abnormally tonight. It's a full tank of gas, but at first only half of the bars lit up. Then they started flashing. Now only the bottom bar lights up, and it flashes.

So, based on the description in owner's manual, I'm guessing my fuel system is bad. I know this is a common problem with Classic Prii.

My factory warranty has expired, and Toyota won't let me buy an extended warranty, so I've been considering buying a non-Toyota warranty for the car. First National Warranty/Warranty America, LLC just offered me a 5-year bumper-to-bumper warranty (covers what the factory warranty would cover -- just about everything but the batteries, they claim) for $1,800. Suddenly, with a new repair facing me -- like, next week -- I'm taking this offer seriously.

My questions are as follows:

1) Anyone know the ballpark price range for a fuel system repair...?

2) Anyone have any experience with First National Warranty or Warranty America, LLC? Know if they're trustworthy? Will issues pop up that they'll refuse to cover? Do they pay promptly, reliably, etc.? (They say they pay Toyota dealers with a corporate credit card.)

3) Know any better warranty options...?

I just bought this car. I love it, but (before this upcoming repair, anyway) I could still sell it to a dealer and make a small profit above what I paid in April. What with the remaining warranties on the verge of expiration, I'm considering selling it right away and trading it in for a car with smaller car payments. Wish I could afford a brand new Prius, or almost any brand new car for that matter, but I can't.

So now I have to make these decisions in a matter of a few days.

Can anyone help with a little advice...?

Thanks!

[kirbinster]

YOU ASK --- Anyone Know if they're trustworthy?

Come on now, you have some nerve! You want them to be trustworthy when you are not. You just stated you have a pre-existing fault that you expect them to pay for -- sounds like you deserve to be screwed over. If I misread what you are saying I apologize, but I hate insurance fraud as it makes my rates go up.

That said, to dump $1,800 now against the possibility of future repairs on a car that is worth around $15k does not sound like sound logic to me. Especially since you have a 7 or 8 year warranty on the Hybrid drive. Do you really expect a reliable car like a Prius to require over $1,800 worth of repairs.

[hybridity]

(1) You haven't asked whether this insurance program covers pre-existing issues.
(2) The insurance company doesn't ask whether the car has pre-existing problems, only how many miles are on the car. I haven't done anything fraudulent -- I haven't lied about the condition of the car. How am I being untrustworthy?
(3) If the symptoms of my "pre-existing" problem appeared one day after I bought the insurance, you'd have no problem with me asking the insurance company to pay, and you wouldn't worry that your rates would go up. But they appear one day before I buy the insurance, and you call it "fraud" regardless of the terms of the deal. Here's the offer this insurance company is making: You pay us $1,800 and we'll cover every repair it needs. They're gambling that $1,800 is greater than the cost of the repairs the car will eventually need. I'm not going to lose sleep over asking them to pay for a repair they would have had to cover had I enrolled yesterday (as I contemplated doing). Your rates will be as safe if I enrolled today as they would have been had the problem occured after I enrolled. The financial equation for the insurer is exactly the same.
(4) YOU'RE expecting that $1,800 is greater than the cost of the repairs that the car will eventually need. Why would the rates of their other customers go up if they're making exactly as much money as they expected to make on this deal?
(5) This kind of logic -- one day before, ahh you're fine, one day after, you're fraudulent or unworthy of coverage -- is the logic that keeps the people who most need help with health costs from being able to obtain insurance. A theater company once captured the absurdity of this problem with a sketch called "The Health Insurance Cafe": A customer at a restaurant confesses to the waitress that he came into the restaurant because he's feeling hungry. "A-HA!" the waitress cries, furiously pointing at the customer. "PRE-EXISTING CONDITION!!!"

And you want to talk about nerve.

[longjohn931]

I don't see where you got an estimate for the repair. I would first spend a few dollars for an estimate from a reputable Toyota Dealer before plunking down $1800.00 for warranty coverage. Also check out Clarkhoward.com, a leading consumer advocate, he is not to high on "third party" warranties as so many go belly up, without ever covering a claim.
This might be just some sort of sensor problem, we have lots of knowledgable priuschat members who may responde to this thread with some insight for you.
Good luck with you repair.

[kirbinster]

hybridity:

Calm down - not trying to attack you personally. I just have a problem with any fraud. If the problem cropped up after you bought the policy then all bets are on - BUT as you say it happened one day before you bought the policy then you can rationalize it anyway you want - but it is fraud plain and simple. Sorry but that is the way insurance works. How is it any different than if you totalled your car and then the next day somehow managed to buy insurance and then claim you totalled the car today rather than yesterday? Insurance is only a transfer of risk based on expectations. If one party has already sustained a loss then they are cheating and the future cost for everyone else goes up.

Enough lecturing. Generally speaking aftermarket insurance is a loosing venture for car owners. Sure, you may have won before or know someone that has won, but you can bet your last dollar the only reasons insurance exists is for the sellers to make money - just like a casino which is not their for the entertainment of customers. So, on average everyone that buys insurance in the longrun looses. The question you have to ask yourself is for this car do you think you will have more than $1,800 future repairs. The insurance company (which has better historical data than you or I) is betting that you will not. It is generally a bad idea to bet against the house.

[hybridity]

If I misread your post I apologize, but what you said was, "Come on now, you have some nerve! You want them to be trustworthy when you are not." How is that not attacking me personally?

Again, the insurance company has not told me they will not work on "pre-existing" problems, so there is no fraud involved here. I have not lied about the condition of my car, and they haven't told me pre-existing issues are a problem. The day on which symptoms appear is not the primary determinant of fraud. Deception is. (American Heritage Dictionary defines fraud as "deception deliberately practiced in order to secure unfair or unlawful gain.") Some insurance companies knowingly assume the risk of pre-existing conditions -- for example, when an HMO accepts a patient even though a doctor has told him he should have leg surgery or a filling for a tooth cavity. Insurance companies decide what they can afford, and make their policies about pre-existing conditions accordingly. In this case, the insurance company in question has apparently decided it can afford to cover some pre-existing issues. Obviously, a totaled car is different from a fuel system malfunction, just as a person with HIV or bipolar is more likely to be denied insurance than someone with, say, pre-existing back pain or a cavity.


You're right, of course, that insurance rates go up unfairly when people make fraudulent insurance claims -- say, when someone drives his car into a wall in order to collect insurance benefits. Rates don't go up when the policy is used for what the insurer anticipates it will be used for. As you admit, they have done their math and expect to come out ahead if they charge me $1,800. I don't plan to drive my car into a brick wall, or otherwise cause my car to malfunction.

Thanks, John, for a very helpful post. I'll have to check out that web site.

You both might be right that I'd be better off skipping the third-party insurance.

[kirbinster]

I would bet if you told them that the car had "X" broken before you signed the policy that they would then decline to pay to repair it. Assuming that is the case, then to expect them to pay for it by not informing them of same is fraud. But that is something you and your sense of ethics must decide on.

That not withstanding, extended warranties are generally a bad buy. They are bad for two reasons: as I said before they are designed for the house to win, when the house does not win they usually go out of business before you can collect - in each case you loose.

I believe the same applies to certified cars. When I bought my BMW I had a choice of certified cars with about 45,000 miles on them that were about $4,000 more than the non-certified one that I bought that had 29,000 miles on it. For $4,000 and 16,000 miles I decided self insurance would be a better value for my money.

The only aftermarket warrantee I have ever purchased was on my high eff furnace as I know they have costly electronic problems. That one has cost the gas company a fortune, as this furnace requires a new circuit board twice a year. They keep trying to talk me into buying a new furnace as it costs them a fortune to repair it. I have no contract on my standard furnace as it is simple technology and anything that goes wrong is easy to fix myself.

[galaxee]

My take on the issue is that you haven't brought it into a dealer and gotten a professional to tell you that your fuel system is bad. Right?

I see this kind of like health insurance. I am currently without insurance. My eczema has been flaring up lately but I'm not about to buy a cream for it at $100something a tube. Since I have no insurance I could wait till August 16 when my coverage kicks in and go see a doctor, and since I haven't seen a healthcare professional about it yet, it IS covered. It's only pre-existing if you have had a diagnosis or doctor's advice within a certain waiting period.

There just might be nothing wrong with the car. (although I doubt it.) It hasn't been "diagnosed" yet so you can't be sure.

Just my take on the issue... I also don't think that aftermarket warranty places should be held in high opinion.

[bethmaup]

Around twenty years ago, my husband and I paid $650 for third-party insurance for a Dodge Caravan. Three or four months later we got the door latch or lock fixed, costing them $65.00. A couple of months after that we got a letter to the effect that the company went belly up. Nothing back on the premium, of course--so we just got a high-dollar door repair along with a very short term dose of reassurance about coverage. Guess how we feel about third-party coverage.

Beth

[Frank Hudon]

carefully read the contract. I'd be willing to bet that there is a pre-existing clause in it. Allow yourself a couple of hours to read and understand it. It'll be time well spent. And I'm sure you'll save yourself some money. The first thing I would do is the fuel gauge setup.