Looking for legal insight on a scenario related to vehicle warranties:
A vehicle (specifically a 2017 Kia) was stolen and later recovered with minimal or no damage. Despite that, the insurance company marked it as a total loss and the state issued a branded/salvage title, as is common with recovered theft vehicles.
Later, the engine fails with mileage well under the manufacturer’s powertrain warranty limit (e.g. 100,000 miles / 10 years for original owners). The owner is told the warranty won’t apply strictly because of the branded title, even though the title branding was not due to collision, flood, or any mechanical damage.
The manufacturer’s own warranty manual includes a clause that excludes vehicles with branded titles, but also says:
This becomes more complicated in cases where the branding stems from an issue currently under recall, such as Kia’s well-known vulnerability to theft in many of its 2011–2021 models due to the absence of engine immobilizers — a known safety flaw now acknowledged by Kia and covered under a software update recall.
Question:
Is there a valid legal argument that the manufacturer should still honor the powertrain warranty if the salvage title was issued only because the vehicle was stolen and later recovered? Could a case be made that denying warranty coverage in these cases is unreasonable or even legally questionable?
Would love to hear thoughts from anyone with experience in automotive law, warranty litigation, or consumer protection.
A vehicle (specifically a 2017 Kia) was stolen and later recovered with minimal or no damage. Despite that, the insurance company marked it as a total loss and the state issued a branded/salvage title, as is common with recovered theft vehicles.
Later, the engine fails with mileage well under the manufacturer’s powertrain warranty limit (e.g. 100,000 miles / 10 years for original owners). The owner is told the warranty won’t apply strictly because of the branded title, even though the title branding was not due to collision, flood, or any mechanical damage.
The manufacturer’s own warranty manual includes a clause that excludes vehicles with branded titles, but also says:
This becomes more complicated in cases where the branding stems from an issue currently under recall, such as Kia’s well-known vulnerability to theft in many of its 2011–2021 models due to the absence of engine immobilizers — a known safety flaw now acknowledged by Kia and covered under a software update recall.
Question:
Is there a valid legal argument that the manufacturer should still honor the powertrain warranty if the salvage title was issued only because the vehicle was stolen and later recovered? Could a case be made that denying warranty coverage in these cases is unreasonable or even legally questionable?
Would love to hear thoughts from anyone with experience in automotive law, warranty litigation, or consumer protection.
