Help, Toyota Denying Battery Warranty!

Is NJ mentioned in warranty booklet for 10 year/150K HV battery warranty eligibility?

 

Hold on right there! Traction battery failures (the big battery) are few and far between. Before going off the deep end...What is the status of your 12v battery? If it is original, the odds are good that it is what is causing all the problems.

Check this thread first: Weird stuff happening? MPGs dropping? Test The Battery

 

^^ Yep. I would also wait until the car has been left for many hours or overnight before checking it.

 

Interesting case. Presumably, Toyota is using the argument that the warranty only applies to model year 2008 and newer, since that is when CARB was adopted there.

By the way, you do NOT have to pay $5K, if it comes to that. PC user jdenenberg lives in CT and had someone install a ReInvolt battery for him, total cost was what, $2100?

 

If CT adopted CARB only in 2008, why does the warranty booklet from 2005 include CT in the 150k/10yr warranty ?

Sounds to me like OP has a decent argument, assuming the warranty booklet is read correctly. I have always thought that the source document for the warranty contract is that little booklet.

 

According to the 2007 data from the Maryland Department of The Environment, your vehicle does not qualify. Your 2005 is too old because the model years the law effects are 2009 in NJ where it was sold and 2008 in Connecticut where it is registered now. A 2005 meets neither of these model year requirements.

I would agree to check simple causes like a 12v failure before spending too much time chasing HV battery ghosts. East coast driving should be no problem for 105k miles. Me-thinks you have another issue and this is just a symptom of something else.

 

Crap, screwed it up on that one. So much for doing internets research. If the car has only been registered in NJ or CT and never anywhere else, then there's no excuse.

For California specification vehicles sold, registered, and operated in California, Connecticut (starting with ’05 MY), Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire (starting with ’05 MY), New
Jersey (starting with ’05 MY), New York, Oregon (starting with ’08 MY), Pennsylvania* (starting with ’08 MY), Rhode Island (starting with ’05 MY), and Vermont, this repair is covered under the California Emission Warranty. This warranty is in effect for 180 months or 150,000 miles, whichever occurs first, from the vehicle’s in-service date.

 

Adoption is different then when it takes effect. Consider if they adopted a new law forbidding white socks tomorrow. Well that wouldn't be fair to consumers who only have white socks, stores which currently only stock white socks, or similar situations. So they say "no more white socks in 2014" and it gives people time to prepare.

 

2k, the table you posted earlier has an asterisk * that says the effective date is for GHG compliance; we are talking PZEV emissions here.

Anyway, I think you misunderstood my post. If Toyota's 2005 warranty booklet says CT and NJ cars are eligible for the PZEV warranty, that should have legal standing.

Obviously, IANAL

 

May be for GHG, may be for full compliance, may be for any compliance. I don't currently have the time to read each of those statutes and figure out when the PZEV effective date was, but basically it is murky water between the adoption date and effective date unless you read the law. And a MY 2005 might have been built in 2004 which would mean it wouldn't count anyways, even murkier.

 

This interpretation of this chart cannot be correct, as it would indicate that my MY2010 in Washington State carries the 10year/150k battery warranty. But my warranty booklet, page 24, shows that WA and PA get a separate weaker warranty than the other CARB states, and don't get the longer battery warranty.

 

It sounds like Toyota really didn't learn from their fiasco of two years ago. Mr Toyoda, where are you?!

Maybe it's time for a lawyer.

 

What do the corporate people tell you? Have you tried them? 800-331-4331

 

Mr. Toyoda apologized in front of congress for a successful Detroit FUD and misinformation campaign surrounding brakes.

If he is invited back, it should be only to apologize to him for our abject behaviour.

 

Addendum: apologies for the annoying non-link that is popping up in some of my posts. I am still unsure what the cause is. I am starting to suspect a picture of a small magnifying glass I sometimes see in the edit box.