I don't know if this will help, but here is the CPO brochure. It looks like they have to check for any trouble codes and that they may be able to see if the ECU has been "tampered" with. As others have said the dealer may step up as in order to sell a Jaguar as CPO they have to sign off that the car is OEM. This sheet is then presented to JNA and is is only then a CPO is issued as it is Jaguar that is warrantying the car, not a 3rd party. Good luck.

 

If this was the selling dealer, as a matter of GOOD customer service, they should warranty the ECU and of course the O2 sensor is not related to the tune so that is COVERED no matter what.

 

Just to be 100% clear, the O2 sensor gets changed under warranty NO MATTER what.

Now, is the car driveable? Did they tell you that you need a new ECU just because of the permanent code? Did they try to perform an ECU upgrade and fry it? That is important info to know in order to help you.

 

The CPO inspection does not involve going into the engine management software to see if it has been modified. If they update other software it would not show a non oem calibration file.

 

As long as the ECU hasn't bricked, there should be no reason to change it unless the ECU needs to be updated to solve the o2 sensor issue. I suspect that swapping out the O2 sensor(s) is all that is needed.
I don't really think that is the point here. The OP bought a car with a CPO and he has been short changed as the warranty is not being honored due to no fault if his own.

 

The code persists even when the tune is reverted to stock. The ECU records that an unauthorized device programmed it, and the code doesn't disappear when the the original file is rewritten.

 

Agreed on all points.

 

Of curse you are correct. Most dealers freak out at that error code because they have NO idea of what it is and it's PERMANENT.

 

Is the servicing dealer the dealer that sold you the car? If so, this dealer is responsible for selling the car with this hidden issue. This is not unlike the frame damage that another member discovered.

 

Pixel....It's already been stated, but IMO, the real solution becomes apparent if you bought the used F Type from an authorized Jaguar dealer. If you did, I would calmly go back to the dealer Service Manager and explain what you already know....you purchased a defective used car from them, they certainly told you what and how long the remaining warranty was and therefore, they will have to repair the car at no charge to you.....it's not your problem who pays the charges, that's the selling dealer's issue. If the S/M blows you off, I'd contact/visit the dealer principle. As an authorized Jaguar dealer, he would never want the bad press in a situation like this where you are correct in your argument. Now if you bought it from another dealer or used car dealer, or worse yet, an auction, you very likely have a lost cause. Another full service new car dealer, might feel compelled to work with you (some kind of shared payment) since you bought from them, but the remaining other 2 possibilities, you'd be barking at the moon.

 

Good plan, although (getting into some semantics here) I wouldn't rate this as a 'defective used car'.....and I surely doubt the dealer would consider it defective.

It has a *defective sensor*...which is easily correctable.

It has a 'tune' which apparently isn't causing an operational problem with the car but jeopardizes warranty coverage. This, too, is correctable. it pretty much just comes down to "Who gonna pay?"



Hard to tell how any given dealer will play it. Some step right up to the plate. Others step up only after a battle. Some never step up.


Cheers
DD

 

Buddy of mine bought a preowned Shelby GT500 and his Ford dealer bricked the ECU when updating it due to a tune which wasn’t disclosed. The selling dealer (not a Ford shop) did the right thing and paid for a new ECU. YMMV.

 

BS. The OP bought a car that was supposed to be stock. It wasn't. If the tune is not a defect then why is there a question about the warranty. QED. The dealer is liable for recision. He sold goods that were not as represented. If he wants to make good by replacing the ECM and that makes the OP happy, fine. Personally I would take the tune as a signal of other potential issues and press for recision. Little old people don't tune these things. The dealer can buy the car back and sell it in a fully disclosed honest sale. Better he take the hit than the poor customer.

 

Can’t the dealer service just load the original program for that MY back into the ECU and be done with it? Does reverting back to the original tune always “Brick” it?
CRS

 

Not so simple. The dealer doesn't have the OEM tune for any given VIN. Only the factory would have it (other than the tuner who downloaded and used the OEM tune to create the modified tune). When bricked, ECUs are replaced, the replacements are programmed at the factory.

 

Doug....

"It has a 'tune' which apparently isn't causing an operational problem with the car but jeopardizes warranty coverage."

I wouldn't count on that. Most ""tunes" are made to produce more HP. You hope it doesn't cause an engine, transmission or drivetrain failure whether in the technical terms of the warranty (which is now being disputed) or possibly worse than that, after the EPTW has expired, but well within the normally expected life of that engine and powertrain.

 

Because it is a modification.

Maybe. The OP would probably have to prove that the dealer knew about the modification (and it seems that they didn't) before misrepresentation could be established; that is, it would have to be an intentional misrepresentation. But I'm no lawyer. I'm just going from personal experience...and laws regarding sale of used cars vary from state to state.

Agreed.

Cheers
DD

 

Right.

From the OP's remarks it appears there were no problems prior to the sensor failure. The existence of the 'tune' wasn't an issue....and apparently not even known about....until the sensor failed.

The OP actually never expressed unhappiness about the tune per se. But for the warranty snafu he might not care...or might even like the idea. I dunno.





Not sure if I would either. Maybe, maybe not. We don't have much info to go on here. But, a 'tune' is not a guarantee of future failure or premature failure. We can speculate to our heart's content, however


Agreed again.

If I was the OP I'd want the sensor replaced and the ECU replaced with a factory spec unit so my warranty wouldn't be questioned.

Cheers
DD

 

Makes sense..thanks for the clarification. So I imagine the original seller, who had a tune and traded it in, or whatever, to the dealer is gone with the wind, so to speak, because the dealer signed off on it and bought it back?
CRS.

 

Ugh.

JLR should just take the customer's word for it and replace the ECU with a factory flashed one and honor the warranty that was issued.

It seems wholly unreasonable for a dealer to be able to sell a car with a CPO warranty and then the warranty be voided after the fact due to no fault or action by the customer and for a reason that could or should have been detected by the selling dealer (if such an issue would determine the validity of the warranty at the time it was written). Additionally, if the dealer gets a 'pass' for 'not knowing' the tune was installed in the vehicle they sold, then the customer should likewise get a 'pass' for not knowing the same. If the warranty is voided, then the customer should get a refund on that, if the warranty was a factor in purchasing the car, then the customer should have the right to return it as well, at their discretion.

I also find it difficult to believe in this day and age that the ECU would need to be 'replaced' given that the dealer can flash ECU updates as required, so they should be equally able to reflash the software in its entirety, although I could easily believe that JLR withholds this capability for reasons that probably only make sense to them.

I suppose this (almost) touches on the subject of 'right to repair', 'right to modify' where consumers no longer have control over the product they have purchased due to manufacturers withholding the software required to make the product function. If the manufacturer says this problem requires a new $2000 or whatever ECU, whereas the actual fact is it needs a 30 second software flash at the dealer, but the software is being withheld by the manufacturer because they would rather charge $2K for a new ECU then it is extortion of a sort...

Want to add the switch to your car that came with active exhaust, but didn't have the switch? You can't, because the switch isn't a switch that controls the exhaust valves, it's an input to the computer and without the software that reads the switch (which you cannot have) the switch does nothing. Also, ignore the fact that the software could have been written to work both with or without the switch...if they wanted it to (since it doesn't, I suppose this could also be down to incompetence...or by design, you decide...)

I suppose these issues will play out in the courts over the coming years as consumer products become increasingly dependent on software.

(rant off!!)