Cannondale 'lifetime' warranty nonsense

norvernrob

If you don't get anywhere, take them to small claims court. It costs very little, there is nothing extra to pay should you lose and you can claim up to £10,000.

I can't see you losing tbh, there is no way on earth that using a bike on a turbo trainer made specifically for training on a bike can be classed as abnormal use.

To me the real winner is that it doesn't specifically say not to use a turbo trainer in the warranty details, so how would anyone know Cannondale don't expect you to.

ratsbeyfus

NorvernRob wrote:

If you don't get anywhere, take them to small claims court. It costs very little, there is nothing extra to pay should you lose and you can claim up to £10,000.

I can't see you losing tbh, there is no way on earth that using a bike on a turbo trainer made specifically for training on a bike can be classed as abnormal use.

To me the real winner is that it doesn't specifically say not to use a turbo trainer in the warranty details, so how would anyone know Cannondale don't expect you to.

Thanks. This is my planned course of action. It just means that I will be without my 'proper' road bike for what will prbably be a considerable length of time, which scuppers my plans to race this summer.

Anonymous

NorvernRob wrote:

I can't see you losing tbh, there is no way on earth that using a bike on a turbo trainer made specifically for training on a bike can be classed as abnormal use.

How does that make any sense unless Cannondale made the turbo trainer, or the bike was made by Tacx or whoever?

gabriel959

ratsbeyfus wrote:

Thanks luv2ride . I feel like a kid whose been told off for something they didn't do. Really feelin cheesed off with the whole thing...

Have you tried Twitter and/or Facebook? You can contact them that way and see what they say. That will probably go to the main Cannondale HQ as opposed to the UK Distributor.

ratsbeyfus

gabriel959 wrote:

ratsbeyfus wrote:

Thanks luv2ride . I feel like a kid whose been told off for something they didn't do. Really feelin cheesed off with the whole thing...

Have you tried Twitter and/or Facebook? You can contact them that way and see what they say. That will probably go to the main Cannondale HQ as opposed to the UK Distributor.

Tried twitter - I've been ignored. Not on facebook. Will contact their US (Canadian?) HQ.

matt_n-2

gabriel959 wrote:

ratsbeyfus wrote:

Thanks luv2ride . I feel like a kid whose been told off for something they didn't do. Really feelin cheesed off with the whole thing...

Have you tried Twitter and/or Facebook? You can contact them that way and see what they say. That will probably go to the main Cannondale HQ as opposed to the UK Distributor.

Was just about to say the same, make a 'public' complaint on Twitter and or FB and I'll bet you'll get a better response.

Monty Dog

Don't forget Roadbikereview forum - it has a predominantly US audience. US are particularly obsessed by 'warranties' even though many aren't worth the paper they're written on as they are purely a marketing 'gimmick', particularly used by brands who generally have a rubbish reputation for quality.

ratsbeyfus

Monty Dog wrote:

Don't forget Roadbikereview forum - it has a predominantly US audience. US are particularly obsessed by 'warranties' even though many aren't worth the paper they're written on as they are purely a marketing 'gimmick', particularly used by brands who generally have a rubbish reputation for quality.

Thanks Monty. It's a good idea, but I'm never keen on people who join up on Bike Radar just to have a moan. I feel I've served my time on the BR forums over the years and have earned my right to moan big time today... I've spent a fair few posts praising Cannondale and my CAAD9 in the past, so I guess it's only fair I re-dress the balance. Would feel a bit wrong doing it on a forum I don't know. I would love someone from Cannondale to come on here and join in the discussion (I did send a link in my email) but I doubt it will happen.

I know from your posts in the past Monty on the subject that you aren't impressed with the brand... didn't you say they had the nickname 'Crackandfail'?

ratsbeyfus

BTW - what is the difference between a Warranty and a Guarantee? Why are warranties marketing gimmicks? Genuine question.

Lookyhere

Did you pay for the bike on a credit card or even a deposit? if so, you can claim under section 75 of consumer credit act, there is no time limit on claims, this act make the credit card provider jointly liable.
Regardless, you need to remember your dispute is with Evans not Cannondale, no matter how nice Evans are.

http://www.moneysavingexpert.com/shoppi ... -purchases

gabriel959

I think on this day and age all brands have frames that fail, a friend of mine has got 2 Giants, both have failed twice in the past 3 years but the Giant distributor in the UK has replaced them each time.

From what I had seen in the past Cannondale had a good reputation for warranties but this doesn't look good.

ratsbeyfus

Lookyhere wrote:

Did you pay for the bike on a credit card or even a deposit? if so, you can claim under section 75 of consumer credit act, there is no time limit on claims, this act make the credit card provider jointly liable.
Regardless, you need to remember your dispute is with Evans not Cannondale, no matter how nice Evans are.

http://www.moneysavingexpert.com/shoppi ... -purchases

Again, Evans didn't sell me the bike... they are just acting as an agent for Cannondale as they are my nearest Cannondale dealer.

The bike wasn't bought on a credit card, as it was bought on Cyclescheme. I did contact Cyclescheme today to see whee they stood. they were interested in hearing about my experience with Cannondale, and have said that I should write in with the details of what Cannondale finally decide in this case.

Essex Man

I had a similar (but very much less costly or significant) experience with Cannondale recently. My stem developed a crack. I contacted them through the retailer and they came back saying that this was caused by over tightening, as previous problems like this had been caused by over tightening. I said I had used a torque key (true), but no dice.

It's an interesting argument they seemingly like to apply. If my seat post breaks I expect they will come back saying its because I'm too fat, as previous broken seat posts have been caused by fat riders.

Party Weirdo

There is another thread for this in Road 'General' ... Any reason why you feel you need to double up?

Starting to smell like hoping your bad mouthing the brand online will help get someones attention and you get your way?

ratsbeyfus

Party Weirdo wrote:

There is another thread for this in Road 'General' ... Any reason why you feel you need to double up?

Starting to smell like hoping your bad mouthing the brand online will help get someones attention and you get your way?

This thread was started originally, as it's a 'road buying' issue. When I tried to convince the Cannondale rep that very few cyclists would view using a turbo as abnormal, I decided to start a poll to prove my point to him. I told the Cannondale rep about the poll and offered him the chance to add his voice, but he declined.

I'm sorry if this smells bad to you - yes I do want to exert pressure on Cannondale because I believe they are wrong. I also want to share the experience and garner the opinions of others... I've raved about my Cannondale in the past, and bike websites are full of puff-pieces promoting this frame and that. Threads like this may help to give another side to the debate. By all means, Cannondale customers who've experienced good service are welcome to post on here and the other thread. I know, for example, that Gabriel previously mentioned he had friends who had had good experiences with them.

Ultimately Cannondale can change their mind, prove to me that the crack was somehow caused by me, or the matter will go to the small claims court and a judge can decide. Whatever happens, I will update the thread. If mods want to combine the two threads I don't have a problem.

Party Weirdo

Fair enough ... It's not my problem and no doubt it sucks for you having all this hassle (and no bike) ... There's a fine line with these things so as you say, if the mods feel it's 'too much' then they'll do the necessary.

robbo2011

I'm always interested to hear about companies who do not support their customers and weasel out of warranty claims and also conversely, those who go the extra mile for the customer. It helps to informs my buying decisions.

In this case, however, I would not buy a Cannondale anyway due to the dreadful BB30 system they insist on using.

Monty Dog

ratsbeyfus wrote:

BTW - what is the difference between a Warranty and a Guarantee? Why are warranties marketing gimmicks? Genuine question.

http://www.access-legal.co.uk/free-lega ... y-1314.htm

kentphil

This is on page 102 of the Cannondale owners manual:

UsING BICyCLe TRAINeRs
Potential Damage
CAUTION
Improperly mounting a bike in a trainer, or using
one that is not compatible with your particular
bike frame can cause serious damage.
This kind of damage is not covered by the
Cannondale Limited Warranty.
Ask you dealer for help with trainers, the right
one and the correct way to use it.
If you ride a trainer that requires removal of the front
wheel and clamps the fork dropouts: Be sure your
fork quick release is tight! Relative movement will
wear parts, weaken and damage your bike.
If you ride a trainer that holds the bike up by
clamping the rear quick release between two cones:
Take off the nice, lightweight quick release that came
with your bike. Substitute a heavy, classic all steel
quick release and clamp it tight! Relative movement
will wear parts, weaken and damage your bike. Note
that many modern quick releases will not fit the
clamping cones in this kind of trainer because their
shapes are incompatible.
Be particularly cautious with a carbon frame or fork.
Carbon is relatively soft, not abrasion resistant. If
there is any relative movement, carbon will wear
quickly.
If you ride a trainer a lot, consider using an old bike:
Corrosion from sweat will take it’s toll. Weight is
irrelevant. Save wear on your expensive components.


Sounds like they don't like turbo trainers to me.

southdownswolf

OP- just out of interest, what turbo have you used the bike on? Is it the same make as the Cannondale team?
It looks like they use Elite turbo's...

patrickf

ratsbeyfus wrote:

patrickf wrote:

At the end of the day, if none of the documentation states that the bike was not to be used in a turbo then I'd keep firm with Evans. Don't forget, your contract is with them not the manufacturer or their distributor so it is for Evans to sort out with you.

You could always claim under the Sale of Goods Act 1979 that the bike was not for for purpose or was not of sufficient quality. The fact that even their pro team use the bikes on turbos would suggest to the unsuspecting public that this is an acceptable thing to do on a bike.

I agree... BUT Evans have been great actually! I bought the bike from a Cannondale dealer in Essex (as I bought i through Cyclescheme) but was told by the Cannondale warranty department to return it to my nearest dealer rather than the shop I bought it from... as i live in Brighton, I took it to Evans. The staff there have been great, particularly 'Oli' who has been sympathetic to my case and had to be the 'middle' man in this whole sorry saga. So please don't let this put anyone off shopping in Evans. In fact Oli asked Cannondale which turbo they would recommend to customers and was told 'none', which again goes against the advice given in the Cannondale manual.

Ah apologies, I was under the mistaken presumption that you bought the bike from Evans. I do think you had explained that Evans were not the seller of your bike earlier in this thread.

My points still stand, you just need to get in touch with the original shop.

patrickf

Just looking through the FAQ from Scott and found that they appear to be fine with turbo use.

2.5.2 Is it safe to ride my carbon-bike on an indoor trainer?
Please make sure to use the original clamping and mounting devices delivered with the trainer. In case of doubt please contact your authorized Scott Dealer and take his advices seriously.

http://www.scott-sports.com/us/en/support/faq/BikeFaq/MiscellaneousBike/

flasher

Whatever you do, never put a Cannondale on a turbo!

dieselgeezer

My 2006 CAAD8 frame sheared the DS chainstay in Jan 2014. I reckon it had only done about 18k miles. Everyone I spoke to (including this forum) thought there would be no issues re a replacement because of the " lifetime warranty". What Cannondale told me was that lifetime means the life of the frame which they reckon for aluminium is 5 years. More worryingly they reckon for carbon it is 3 years. They reckoned that a mark on the chainstay from chain slap caused the demise of the frame. They did offer me a new frame for £600 instead of £800 but I decided to steer clear of Cannondale for good. Pity as the frame was always good to ride.

ratsbeyfus

My turbo is also Elite.

Cannondale replied today with the following:

Mr Beyfus,

Whilst I appreciate that you may not be happy with our decision, I can assure you that we have not targets or figures to reach and, as such, our decision is purely based on the evidence we have received and our knowledge and experience of the frame platform.

Whilst our frames come with a lifetime warranty, this does not in turn imply that it will last forever, or indeed that any damage/ breakage is automatically warrantable. As with any other aluminium frame, your CAAD 9 has a finite lifespan, over time and with repeated usage, the frame build material will unavoidably fatigue and weaken. Just like your tyres, brake pads and drive train wear out with use, so does your frame. Whether this is 5, 10, 15 or even 20 years after purchase will be completely dictated by the amount and type of use and maintenance that a bike receives As is explained in your owner’s manual:

‘Material use is optimized to deliver both light weight and specific performance. You must understand that (1) these types of bikes are intended to give an aggressive racer or competitive cyclist a performance advantage over a relatively short product life, (2) a less aggressive rider will enjoy longer frame life, (3) you are choosing light weight (shorter frame life) over more frame weight and a longer frame life, (4) you are choosing light weight over more dent resistant or rugged frames that weigh more. They are not designed to take abuse or be a rugged workhorse’.

With all due respect I feel that you are getting too caught up on whether your turbo trainer usage is ‘excessive’ or ‘abnormal’ and missing the overriding fact that the damage has been caused by using a turbo trainer full stop. By nature of the design of a turbo trainer, it will constrain a frame in a way that is completely unnatural and unlike the ‘normal usage’ that your frame is intended for. With the rear wheel and frame locked in place the frame with not be allowed to move and flex underneath the rider as it would if it were being used on the road, unconstrained. It is the unnatural torsional stress which using a bike in a turbo trainer will cause that has unfortunately resulted in your frame breaking where it has.

In further validation of our decision, it is also worth being aware that, if there was a fault with the welding of the brake bridge to the frame you would expect to have seen failure far earlier in your ownership than now. The nature of the crack itself too is I’m afraid, not symptomatic of a manufacturing fault. Had the crack been running through the weld, as opposed to alongside it, this would tend to indicate that the weld had been overheated or that there are impurities in the material, both of which would make it unnaturally weak and therefore prone to premature failure. However this is not the case with your frame. It has cracked in the area proximal to the weld which, given the processes involved, will always naturally be the weakest point of a frame and where excessive or unusual, un-designed for stress forces will evidence themselves first. Whilst you have said that the crack had been present since you purchased the bike, all the physical evidence on the frame, and why you are only addressing the matter now, would suggest that this is not the case. Had it been there from production, you would see substantial evidence of aluminium oxidisation and lifting of the paint around this area, where environmental factors (moisture and dirt) had been able to get into the crack and under the surrounding paintwork during the past 4 years. On your frame there is none of this evident to support that claim.

Please understand that we take our warranty promise very seriously, and do not, have not and will not abuse it. To these ends we do not make any such judgements lightly or without sufficient physical evidence to back them up. Whilst, I appreciate that our decision on this occasion has not been in your favour, I hope that you can at least see that it is one based on the specific physical evidence of your frame rather than mere conjecture or any cynical attempt to avoid our responsibilities in such instances. As discussed, your frame and parts will be returned to Evans Cycles in Brighton along with a report of our findings. As we have no desire or need to profit from this unfortunate situation, to try and get you back on a bike, whilst we have declined your warranty claim, we have offered Evans several goodwill replacement frame options at cost price. In the end, whilst unfortunate, the damage to your frame is categorically not the result of a manufacturing fault or defect and is purely the result of your personal usage choices. As such the decision taken and resolution offered is firm final and not open to further negotiation or discussion.


Regards

Ed Thomas
Warranty, Technical and Customer Support

So, that's that as far as they are concerned. I've got a banging headache now, so will respond when I'm feeling better.

Party Weirdo

^ Seems fair enough, although not to your liking (and nor mine if it were me, but I don't have 'loss' to cloud judgement).

Be interesting to see what the 'cost' options are and how they stack up against the cost of a complete bike or if they are based on frame only prices which are always on the steep side with Cannondale.

Bar Shaker

The whole lifetime warranty thing on any product always confuses some people.

It is a lifetime warranty against manufacturing defects, not against eventual failure at the end of its life. There is a fundamental difference but the biggest point that catches people out is the point raised here. were the failure caused by a manufacturing defect, it would have failed long before 4 years had past.

Your warranty is that they assembled the bike correctly, not that it is indestructible... forever.

ratsbeyfus

Bar Shaker wrote:

The whole lifetime warranty thing on any product always confuses some people.

It is a lifetime warranty against manufacturing defects, not against eventual failure at the end of its life. There is a fundamental difference but the biggest point that catches people out is the point raised here. were the failure caused by a manufacturing defect, it would have failed long before 4 years had past.

Your warranty is that they assembled the bike correctly, not that it is indestructible... forever.

But their argument is a fallacy.

They seem to be asserting that manufacturing defects lead to cracks that appear early on (let's say within a year for the sake of argument), and seem to suggest that any other cracks which appear later can't be due to defects. Perhaps their tagline should be "Buy a Cannondale - if it hasn't cracked within a year we guarantee that any other cracks that appear in it are bound to be your fault!"

Why not just say it is guaranteed for a year?

mamba80

an equivalent alloy frame from say Thompson, a R7200 (a Belgian brand) that I have ridden, raced and had in turbo for many winters is around the £500 mark, may other brands would be roughly 300 to £500.

you could go down the legal route spend money, time and stress on redress and get no where, I say forget it, buy another bike and tell everyone that cannondale is a shitte product with no backup.

any frame that cant survive time on a turbo isn't a bike I d like to ride down a rough uk road at speed.

ratsbeyfus

mamba80 wrote:

an equivalent alloy frame from say Thompson, a R7200 (a Belgian brand) that I have ridden, raced and had in turbo for many winters is around the £500 mark, may other brands would be roughly 300 to £500.

you could go down the legal route spend money, time and stress on redress and get no where, I say forget it, buy another bike and tell everyone that cannondale is a shitte product with no backup.

any frame that cant survive time on a turbo isn't a bike I d like to ride down a rough uk road at speed.

I've not heard of Thompson - I'll look them up. I won't spend money pursuing this - it can be sorted out by a judge in a small claims court. It is taking up my time though.

I'll probably buy a £100 Dolan frame to race on this summer whilst waiting for this thing to run it's course.