PistonHeads

Porsche Corrosion Warranty Claims - Page 1 - Porsche General - PistonHeads UK

Add to repair workspace

New repair projectOpen repair workspace

Original source

6 captured repliesPartial discussion capture · Source accounts, not a confirmed diagnosis

THIS DISCUSSION / SOURCE-DERIVED OVERVIEW

Discussion summary

YOUR RESEARCHPorsche Corrosion Warranty Claims - Page 1 - Porsche General - PistonHeads UK

Leading reported evidence

Check over the last 4 years

Suggestion or failed attempt

No successful repair reported for this finding.

0
Reported fixes: 0
Unsuccessful attempts: 1
Discussions

Read evidence and context

Explicit resolution reports before identified causes, performed actions and suggestions. Within each level, matching component labels precede direct query mentions and inherited thread context; successful versus unsuccessful discussion counts, owner confirmations and independent discussion support determine order. This is not a probability of success.

Discussions that contain suggestions: 1

0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.

0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.

Suggestion · Original poster
They then said I hadn’t produced the relevant documents to which I produced and due to the first two bodywork checks not being stamped in the first 2 years they are using this as a loop hole but surely if it was checked over the last 4 years with the stamps that I have then the first two years are irrelevant
Original post Read captured discussion
Porsche Corrosion Warranty Claims - Page 1 - Porsche General - PistonHeads UK

Read full discussion summary

Leading evidence: 'Check over the last 4 years' (no explicit attributable resolution; this is a reported action or suggestion). Across 1 matching discussions, The most frequently discussed action is 'Check over the last 4 years' (1 discussions). For that action, 0 discussions report a resolution and 0 report an unsuccessful attempt. No action has an explicit, attributable resolution report under the current rules. These are forum reports and suggestions, not a confirmed diagnosis.

Source reports, not a diagnosis or a success probability. Counts refer to discussions and can overlap.

Read captured replies

1 matching discussions · 6 captured posts examined · 1 partial discussions

Frequently discussed actions (1)

These are separate views of the same evidence. Frequency alone does not establish a fix, and these counts must not be added together.

Check over the last 4 years

No successful repair reported for this finding.

0
Reported fixes: 0
Unsuccessful attempts: 1
Discussions

Read evidence and context

Discussions that contain suggestions: 1

0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.

0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.

Suggestion · Original poster
They then said I hadn’t produced the relevant documents to which I produced and due to the first two bodywork checks not being stamped in the first 2 years they are using this as a loop hole but surely if it was checked over the last 4 years with the stamps that I have then the first two years are irrelevant
Original post Read captured discussion
Porsche Corrosion Warranty Claims - Page 1 - Porsche General - PistonHeads UK

Coverage and how to read this overview

Counts describe captured discussions, not unique people or a diagnosis. Author identities are not reliably stored. Exact duplicate evidence is counted once across matching discussions; one discussion counts at most once per action/state. Multiple repairs reported together remain a combination. Suggestions and failed attempts do not establish a fix. Matches cover whole discussions and can include related faults, model variants and incomplete threads.

6 eligible posts · 0 unverified posts · 1 discussions match the subject in their title or opening post.

PistonHeads: 1 discussions

0 evidence records excluded for query context · 0 excluded by outcome qualification · 0 adjusted by outcome qualification.

0 acknowledgements have no verified action link; they do not establish a repair result.

Generation: 20261026T220748Z · outcome-qualification-6. Deterministic extraction; no AI model inference. How we use sources

POST 1 / ORIGINAL POSTEROriginal post

I am currently seeking a claim with Porsche for rust bubbles appearing on my 7 year old Porsche Panamera on the drivers door. Porsche seem to be very defensive and look for loop holes to make them exempt from honouring the 10 year corrosion warranty. My car has full Porsche service history. It has the last two Porsche stamps for the body work checks and it has been confirmed that the door is still on its original paintwork and it only has 45k miles so should fall under the Porsche manufacture warranty however they are consistently disputing this. Has anyone else had similar issues with Porsche customer services and their corrosion warranty.

POST 2Original post

Martin.Connelly said: I am currently seeking a claim with Porsche for rust bubbles appearing on my 7 year old Porsche Panamera on the drivers door. Porsche seem to be very defensive and look for loop holes to make them exempt from honouring the 10 year corrosion warranty. My car has full Porsche service history. It has the last two Porsche stamps for the body work checks and it has been confirmed that the door is still on its original paintwork and it only has 45k miles so should fall under the Porsche manufacture warranty however they are consistently disputing this. Has anyone else had similar issues with Porsche customer services and their corrosion warranty. Sorry to hear that, what justification are they giving for refusing the claim?

POST 3 / ORIGINAL POSTEROriginal post

They first said it was an outside influence so a stone chip but there are 3 bubbles on one door with no paintwork broken so I got an independent report who agreed with me that it was a manufacture error in the door. They then said I hadn’t produced the relevant documents to which I produced and due to the first two bodywork checks not being stamped in the first 2 years they are using this as a loop hole but surely if it was checked over the last 4 years with the stamps that I have then the first two years are irrelevant

POST 4Original post

Did Porsche forget to stamp up the bodywork check ? If so, surely their mistake should be their risk ... if any ?

POST 5Original post

What colour is the door? Steel or aluminium? I'm thinking save all the hassle and get it repainted at your cost?

POST 6Original post

Had the same reluctance by Porsche for the steel bonnet catch causing an electrolytic reaction with the aluminium bonnet. Solved with a respray of the area and 50p worth of plastic self adhesive insulation.

This is a source reference. Confirm exact model applicability in the original material.