The online Classic Cars Pricing Guide gives retail values. Say in 20 years NADA says the car is only worth $2000.00 and your engine goes. If the engine costs $5,000 to replace, Chrysler will only pay you $2000 (car's cash value)..but since the original extended warranty cost $2300.00 - you're only out $300 . So assuming that the value of the car doesn't go below what you paid for the extended warranty you won't actually lose if they cancel the policy.
I think I'm more worried that Chrysler won't be around to honor the warranty.
Originally Posted by Rob M
Exactly! The Max Care Lifetime Warranty is not really lifetime at all. It's likely that at some point your policy will be canceled in return for partial payment on a repair.
I think some people actually believe they are going to own a vehicle, keep it for the rest of their lives and never pay a repair bill again!
"IMPORTANT! The maximum reimbursable amount should a
covered component fail will be THE TOTAL COST OF THE
REPAIRS, PER VISIT, LESS THE DEDUCTIBLE, OR THE
CASH VALUE OF THE VEHICLE WHICHEVER IS LESS!
The cash value of the vehicle will be determined by the
average retail value as listed in the current NADA Used Car
Pricing Guide. In situations where the repairs costs exceed
the cash value of the vehicle, the remainder of the Plan
coverage will be cancelled."
Another item in that paragraph that may present issues is the claim of "average retail" and "NADA Used Car Pricing Guide." NADA publishes different periodical used car guides for vehicles up to 8 model years old, used cars from 9-20 years old, and a third guide for collectible/classic/exotic/muscle cars. Note that the used car guides provide "retail" pricing info, but the classic car guide instead provides "market" values. I would not be surprised that when someone takes their 21 year old Crossfire in for a "covered" repair that they are told that their policy is no longer in effect because the "average" retail vehicle is $0 since the typical vehicle is in a junk yard by then. Maybe the plan provider would use "market" pricing, but since it's not explicitly stated in the policy I would have some doubts.