Master Cylinder, Brake Booster, not in recall

you got hit and insurance doesn't cover it?

 

Do we have here a failure to communicate? Did you say you have an extended warranty that you bought and paid for, but later somebody at the dealer thought the question was "is this problem covered under the free warranty extension that applies to the brakes"? They do get that question a lot.

Seems to me if you have a purchased extended warranty, that ought to cover stuff that breaks.

 

Also, if the brake problem started immediately after the collision, but insurance is not listening, maybe you need to talk to a lawyer. Or mention the "L" word to the insurance?

 

The recall should have done when it was issued, not after an accident. And recalls are free.

If the other person was at fault and you have full coverage, then insurance would have to pay for damages. And never buy extended car warranty, most companies wants you to bend over backwards to show in print in your policy that it covers the exact issue and not some wear and tear consumable parts over time.

 

is insurance paying to fix the rest of the damage?

 

you're going to need another code reading to clarify the problem

 

Hmm, it doesn't really work that way. It happens a lot here on PriusChat that people will tag onto a thread and say "hey, I'm having the same problem!" going just by warning lights and how it's acting. It's an understandable mistake, but they don't understand there are only a few lights on the dash to tell you to read the codes; there are a couple hundred known issues that could arise in the brakes and the codes will help sort them out, but the lights won't, because they all light the same lights.

More than that, even if you have the exact same trouble codes as somebody else, even that doesn't mean you have the same issue. Three of you could have the code for RF wheel speed sensor and one of you might have a bad sensor when one has a broken wire and the third has a failing ECU. The codes only reveal what needs to be examined; they don't pin down what the examination is going to find the problem is.

So thinking the issue is the same even when the codes are the same is still a bit of a stretch, and needless to say, thinking the issue is the same when the codes aren't is even stretchier than that.

In essence, when Toyota says "we'll do this warranty extension work for anybody who has the same codes", they're willing to eat the cost of occasionally doing the work for people who have the same codes because of some other issue. I'm sure they just figure that's less hassle than trying to explain to a customer how it's not always the same issue even with the same codes.

But they might be willing to endure the hassle of explaining how it's not the same issue when the codes are different.