DaveW68

Oh....a member of your fanboy club agreed with you? Gee.....shocking!! BTW, you were never personally attacked by me. I view attacks as somebody lying about another person to change somebody else's view about that person. Hmmm....you seem to be pretty good at that. Pot, meet kettle.

You'd make a hell of a politician. Somebody makes truthful statements that discredit you and you completely deflect and change the subject. I think there may be a future for you in politics.

Katie22

Yes I recall you saying incorrect information about my car and suggesting that it was a lemon and that I was hiding that fact and insinuating I am selling it to get rid of it for that reason so yes I do distinctly recall you doing just what your talking about. Of course what you did was spew false information so again it fits your track record.

You bring up politics and that is kind of funny because you distinctly remind me of this orange loser we got rid of a few months ago that constantly told false information/lies and if anyone said facts he did not like he would attack them any way he could.

You also bring up this fan club thing which I dont understand. In one of your posts that was deleted by the moderator you even attacked those you perceive as my fan club. You gave this analogy of guys in this forum being on a navy ship for six months and then coming home to see the girls and being girl crazy.

I will share my feeling about what you said. I recall this story about the guys that go on submarines. When the sub leaves for six months 100 men are on board. When the sub returns from deployment 50 couples leave the boat. That is kind of what you remind me of Dave (since you seem very critical of women) but look I am not discriminatory its all good with me it will just remain our little secret.

DaveW68

Prove it!

I stated exactly what was in the CarFax report. I'm sorry that they "may" have made some mistakes in their reporting due to the information that the repair shops reported to them. Their problem, not mine. IIRC, you used the report I published to contact CarFax and have a couple of items changed so that the service history on your car wouldn't look so bad with trying to sell your car at a huge premium over market value. Did I ever get a thank you for pointing out the discrepancies or an apology for attacking me personally about that too? Nope.

MBNUT1

Which policy do you have?

Katie22

Crap would would by ANY policy from a company who even offers such a terrible policy to a consumer.

To refresh Daves memory here are his words that he sprouted off about me and my car. He simply took the carfax at face value without ever asking any questions and insinuated I was selling the car because it was some sort of lemon.

Originally Posted by DaveW68 View Post
Just ran a Carfax on Katie's car. It appears that it has not been the trouble-free and meticulously maintained car that she no longer drives as she claims. It "appears" she's trying to dump it before it buries her in repair costs.

She was taking it in for almost monthly service visits from March, 2017 through March, 2018 during which point she put on 24k miles. Kind of makes one wonder why it was in the shop so often.
Then there was a 19 month gap between documented service visits where she put on 32k miles during that time. Was she going to a different shop for service during that time that doesn't report to CarFax? Perhaps. But she wasn't taking it to her regular dealer during that time.
Then there was a new transmission installed at 68k miles in Oct, 2019. You'd think that a meticulously maintained car wouldn't need a new transmission at only 68k miles. But don't worry....the trans failed in my S600 with only 28k miles and needed replacement. Perhaps they can't handle the twist of the V12.
So perhaps a little truth in advertising would be helpful.

He makes these assumptions about all sorts of nefarious things. Funny the car to the dealer a number of times between March 17 and March 18 was for that snare drum sound coming from the HUD display. DOCUMENTED HERE IN THIS FORUM BY ME. He suggested I took the car to a non reporting place for repairs after the warranty which is funny since I did all the maintenance myself except the repair for the ABC pump and Seat pump line since my scan tool does not allow me to access the computer for these two repairs. Funny those TWO repairs are not even listed on my Carfax but of course I showed the receipts for them in the post.

Like I said there really is nothing the guy says that I can take as truth. And icing on the cake is the guy is expecting some sort of apology for sprouting off misinformation.

Katie

DaveW68

Endurance Diamond Exclusionary - Total Exclusionary Coverage. Sold by Endurance, administered by Ownershield/Smart Autocare.

DaveW68

Let it go Katie. You're very desperate. People can read all of the comments here and in any of the other threads you've posted in and judge for themselves who is right or wrong.

Katie22

Dave your confusing desperate with entertaining. I am not surprised you are confused based on your track record with facts and the truth but I promise this is purely entertaining at this point.

DaveW68

Oh yes....this has been very entertaining. We haven't had one this good that I can recall since my W221 days. There was a great one about some Russian kid living in Oregon IIRC thinking he could buy and restore a totaled S550 with massive frame damage to it's former glory with a rubber mallet. I'll see if I can locate that old thread and post a link.

The kid was quite a nitwit, but at least he didn't have issues with the truth or incessantly personally attack other members of the forum with a bunch of moronic lies.

DaveW68

Here's the thread. 100 pages of pure bliss. It even inspired a screen play! Enjoy

https://mbworld.org/forums/s-class-w...-fellas-2.html

MBNUT1

Do you have a link for that policy? I see Supreme that they say is the same as diamond and titanium

DaveW68

Sample policy attached here. My actual policy is much shorter as I only have the IL state disclosure and not all of them.

MBNUT1

Two items of concern would be

WHAT IS NOT COVERED F.1. PARTS AND SERVICES NOT COVERED

This Agreement does NOT provide coverage for any of the following parts or services: (a) Interior maintenance, adjustment and wear items including buttons, carpet, water leaks, dash pad, door and window handles, knobs, rearview mirror (glass, housing, housing contents), and trim. (b) Exterior maintenance, adjustment and wear items including but not limited to glass, service adjustments for body parts, bright metal, bumpers, body panels, door handles, latches, hinges, moldings, outside ornamentation, convertible or vinyl tops, paint rust, sheet metal, side-view mirrors (glass, housing, housing contents), air and water leaks, weather-strip, wheel covers/ornaments, wind noise, and physical damage to alignment, bumper, or body parts. (c) Service adjustments/cleaning, a contaminated fuel system, air conditioning recharge, all batteries, all hybrid batteries,electronic transmitting and receiving devices failure due to battery loss of capacity, battery cables, fuses, relays, bolts and fasteners, belts, brakes (drums, shoes, linings, disc rotors and pads), exhaust system (including catalytic converter), lights (ANY COMPONENT WHOSE ONLY PURPOSE IS FOR ILLUMINATION, SUCH AS BUT NOT LIMITED TO: SEALED BEAMS, HIGH INTENSITY DISCHARGE (XENON) HEADLAMP, LEDS, LIGHT BULBS, LENSES), manual clutch, pressure plate throw out bearings, clutch master or slave cylinder, manual transmission clutch disc and lining, shock absorbers, spark plugs and wires, squeaks or other noises, tires, tune-ups, wheel balancing and alignment, wheel studs, wiper blades, shop supplies, friction materials, glass, hoses (except steering and air conditioning). Filters, lubricants, coolants, refrigerants, fluids and taxes (where required by law) will be covered only if required in conjunction with the repair or replacement of a Covered Part. (d) A replacement part not supplied by the Vehicle manufacturer, unless it is of a kind and SAM

https://mbworld.org/forums/s-class-w...ad-lights.html

F.3. CONDITIONS NOT COVERED This Agreement does NOT provide coverage under any of the following circumstances/ conditions:

(j) A breakdown caused by the lack of proper and necessary amounts of coolants or lubricants, or resulting from carbon, contaminate(s) and contamination of fluids, environmental damage, foreign object(s), rust or corrosion, sludge, salt, or due to leaking fluids, fuels, coolants or lubricants from non-covered parts. Any repair or replacement of any covered part if a Breakdown / Mechanical Breakdown has not occurred. Gradual reduction in operating performance is not covered unless it exceeds the published tolerances allowed by the manufacturer. Valves, valve guides, valve seals, and/or piston rings are not covered if the purpose of such is simply to raise the engine’s compression, performance, or to reach acceptable oil consumption.

DaveW68

Not sure what the issue is here. I don't know of any exclusionary policies that cover lighting. And as far as F.3., this reads like almost all exclusionary policies from all carriers. Why would they cover something where a mechanical breakdown HAS NOT occurred? And why would they pay to replace parts that have not worn out beyond mfr specs?

This policy is MUCH more comprehensive than any MB policy that is not the original factory warranty.

DaveW68

I almost forgot about this gem of a thread.

https://mbworld.org/forums/s-class-w...st-gear-2.html

MBNUT1

CPO wouldn't cover headlight failures? The way I read it is that they won't replace rings if you have an oil consumption problem.

Wolfman

Thread closed. Another train wreck of a thread. To the OP, please open a new thread if your question wasn't completely answered.