UPDATE to exclusions wording on Porsche extended warranty - Page 2 - 911/Carrera GT - PistonHeads UK

Good morning all, I have just picked up a 991.2 4s - Stunning spec 2017 car with low mileage (10500). I purchased from OPC and paid to have extra 1yr warranty on top of the 2yr cover they provide.My reasoning for this was to make sure I was well covered with any potential issues with turbos etc. However I have now noticed the wording to the Porsche extended warranty (effective from 15th September 2025 "whats not covered section" has now been changed to include the following :- i) Corrosion, rust, oxidation or any damage or detection caused by corrosion, regardless of the origin, location or extent of the corrosion. Would the effect claims on 991.2 failed turbos? Thoughts on this would be appreciated. Thanks

That would be a question to your OPC but there's a good chance they wouldn't know either. An email to Porsche GB may help but I was under the impression that the turbo failure on the 991.2 was due to a failed oil return/feed pipe and not corrosion. If this is the case you should be fine.

This seems like a fairly significant change. I wonder what made them want to remove that element of cover.

arcamalpha said: This seems like a fairly significant change. I wonder what made them want to remove that element of cover. Too many claims.

How does this play with the 12 year corrosion warranty on new cars? Presumably this would not be removed for original owners nor any time during the first 3 manufacturers years warranty?

Sorry I should have been clear this stipulation comes under: 2. A claim made under Your Policy for the repair or replacement of a defective system or component shall be invalid to the extent that the defect results from any of the following: various clauses but included is :- i) Corrosion, rust, oxidation or any damage or deterioration caused by corrosion, regardless of the origin, location, or extent of the corrosion.

Link to file - https://assets-v2.porsche.com/gb/-/media/Project/P...

Many failures can be pinned on corrosion, from circuit boards to electronic connectors to bearings to mountings. Would seem like quite a significant exclusion, can’t remember if I’ve see that on Aston and Land Rover warranties that I’ve had previously.

Does anyone know has there been any issues with corrosion of pipes etc leading to the turbo failures? Or is the root cause something different ?

It was my understanding that it was a manufacturing fault with the oil feed pipe, and that debris was present in the pipe. If any body else has heard any thing about it please tell us. I have had 2 new turbos and pipes on my gts done under warranty recently.

This is a major chance to the insurance policy (which it is rather than a warranty per se). Based on past experiences with my OPC and a claim for failed brake shoes / parking brake - let’s just say that they can now more or less pin anything on this exclusion cause Genius on their part. Absolutely shocking for a customer. Specific to the turbos as others have said this is has always been a result of oil feed issues - but all the diagnostic now needs to say is that it is as a result of corrosion. Don’t think for one minute OPCs are not in the least bit disingenuous or indeed suffer from nefarious tendencies to help wiggle out of expenses.

Hmm this is indeed a bit concerning. Does this come in for warranties already in progress?

moneypits said: Hmm this is indeed a bit concerning. Does this come in for warranties already in progress? No there are two version of the warranty on the P site, one for warranties purchased pre 15th Sept 2025 and one warranties purchased post 15th Sept 2025 https://www.porsche.com/uk/accessoriesandservice/p...

Also would appear to mean PSE valve seizures will no longer be covered - that will save them a few quid.

Seems like a manager over there finally totted up how much shop time was spent on replacing rusty wheel bolts.

wow, the PSE is a bit of a deal breaker. I just renewed for 2 years in August however I wouldn't on the new terms as PSE is one of the main concerns I had.....I'll be switching to independent after then!

More cost saving in action given their financial pressures?

AW10 said: Also would appear to mean PSE valve seizures will no longer be covered - that will save them a few quid. happened to me. I ended up DYI'ing the job. Rust solvent, pliers and plenty of elbow grease. Use the PSE at every journey and lube the valves with lithium grease. But I was well pissed off with the OPC for this.

Thanks folks for all the replies on this. Given the car I have purchased is like new including underneath (probably garaged for most of its life) is there any areas especially with the turbos and PSE that I should be using dinitrol ?

The PSE valve seizures exclusion is an interesting one. I've had my 991.1 3RS since Feb, and it's been in for an engine replacement (under extended warranty) since end of May. The engine was due to arrive at the service centre last week (four months at the OPC!). I noticed in the brief time I had it that the loud button didn't seem to do anything, but it wasn't a big concern. The issue is that if they take much longer replacing the engine I'll be into a new warranty period (beginning November), and then they can claim that the probable PSE issue is excluded. My experience to date has been that they only like fixing one issue at a time (the cats were done in April, again under warranty). That said, I'm pleased to have ducked the five or six figure repair costs. Do the valves stick in the quiet or loud position? Quiet presumably. Doesn't sound very quiet to me

Interesting, It was a “when not if” the pricing of the warranty changed…it’s barely changed for the last few years. I guess they’ve decided to change the terms rather than the price… Although I’ve had a few warranty claims (my Cayenne is still under warranty with 185k miles on it ).,,.I can’t think of anything I’ve ever claimed for where corrosion has been present.

HundredthIdiot said: The PSE valve seizures exclusion is an interesting one. I've had my 991.1 3RS since Feb, and it's been in for an engine replacement (under extended warranty) since end of May. The engine was due to arrive at the service centre last week (four months at the OPC!). I noticed in the brief time I had it that the loud button didn't seem to do anything, but it wasn't a big concern. The issue is that if they take much longer replacing the engine I'll be into a new warranty period (beginning November), and then they can claim that the probable PSE issue is excluded. My experience to date has been that they only like fixing one issue at a time (the cats were done in April, again under warranty). That said, I'm pleased to have ducked the five or six figure repair costs. Do the valves stick in the quiet or loud position? Quiet presumably. Doesn't sound very quiet to me Valves are open normally, and close on a vacuum (once fine is running and vacuum is created). So I’d imagine yours are stuck open

I have an S Diesel on 108k miles. Having had the bad fortune of extending my warranty for three years on the 16th of September (just when I could get into the dealer to do so), the concern is the change in wording for wear in tear items from an 'exhaustive list' to a 'non-exhaustive list'. That gives a lot of wiggle room to my mind. Still, having just had an LED headlight replaced and good level of service from the dealer (OPC Perth) I am hopeful that the decision to extend should still be a sensible one. Time will tell....!

I'm tempted to take mine in for a -ahem- free winter check when they come around and get them to inspect around the turbos for corrosion

cseven said: wow, the PSE is a bit of a deal breaker. I just renewed for 2 years in August however I wouldn't on the new terms as PSE is one of the main concerns I had.....I'll be switching to independent after then! I would also imagine PADMs will be excluded as it seems to be moisture corroding the electrical contacts. My 718 will be going Indi and self insuring.

HundredthIdiot said: The PSE valve seizures exclusion is an interesting one. I've had my 991.1 3RS since Feb, and it's been in for an engine replacement (under extended warranty) since end of May. The engine was due to arrive at the service centre last week (four months at the OPC!). I noticed in the brief time I had it that the loud button didn't seem to do anything, but it wasn't a big concern. The issue is that if they take much longer replacing the engine I'll be into a new warranty period (beginning November), and then they can claim that the probable PSE issue is excluded. My experience to date has been that they only like fixing one issue at a time (the cats were done in April, again under warranty). That said, I'm pleased to have ducked the five or six figure repair costs. Do the valves stick in the quiet or loud position? Quiet presumably. Doesn't sound very quiet to me sexy loan car?

JurassicGTS said: I would also imagine PADMs will be excluded as it seems to be moisture corroding the electrical contacts. My 718 will be going Indi and self insuring. https://www.poporacing.com/blogs/%E6%96%B0%E9%97%BB/porsche-padm-sensor-description These guys do a repair for failed PADMs and say almost all failures are due to the measuring chip coming away from its position.

MarkM3Evoplus said: JurassicGTS said: I would also imagine PADMs will be excluded as it seems to be moisture corroding the electrical contacts. My 718 will be going Indi and self insuring. https://www.poporacing.com/blogs/%E6%96%B0%E9%97%BB/porsche-padm-sensor-description These guys do a repair for failed PADMs and say almost all failures are due to the measuring chip coming away from its position. Do people think that Porsche could determine, from their diagnostic data, that the mounts have been altered?

FriedMarsBar said: Do people think that Porsche could determine, from their diagnostic data, that the mounts have been altered? I doubt it...but that opinion is based on a rank amateur knowledge !

andymc said: sexy loan car? I have never been offered a loan car by Porsche. Their attitude seems to be that because I didn't buy the car from them they don't need to look after me. I would actually buy a car from them if they had anything available and worth buying.

FriedMarsBar said: Do people think that Porsche could determine, from their diagnostic data, that the mounts have been altered? I doubt it, but would they even bother checking now that it’s all going to be condemned as corrosion.

Anybody would think that the clever Porsche design engineers could cheaply minimise the risk of corrosion being an expensive issue ... but apparently not ? Or cheese paring the price paid to component suppliers rather than building to a quality ?? So now they have to modify the terms of one of the most impressive extended warranties in the market ... how to dilute a quality brand !

Grantstown said: I doubt it, but would they even bother checking now that it s all going to be condemned as corrosion. the less excuses the better!!!

I'm fairly new to this Porsche Extended warranty, is there a difference between Porsche Retail OPCs and non Porsche Retail OPCs in terms of their approach, or willingness, to perform warranty work?

FriedMarsBar said: I'm fairly new to this Porsche Extended warranty, is there a difference between Porsche Retail OPCs and non Porsche Retail OPCs in terms of their approach, or willingness, to perform warranty work? I'd say the main difference between OPC's is whether they will ignore non OEM parts that have been fitted. In theory if say it is an exhaust and you have an engine fault they could refuse to do the work under warranty. OPC is the gate keeper of that though...so very much down to your relationship and their protocol's.

Here's a comparison of old and new wording. https://draftable.com/compare/whcBpdIdLvRZ This bit is new: "If the repair costs exceed the value of a replacement unit appropriate for its age and wear, the claim shall be limited to the free instillation of such a replacement unit." Presumably by "limited to the free instillation" (sic) they mean free supply and fit? Whose favour is this in?

I'm considering a 991.2 and a bit concerned by this change. I'd only want to run it under Porsche warranty due to the known turbo issues. However, this change now casts doubt on whether it would be covered if they pinned it on corrosion of fuel lines for example. Leaving a very large bill. Is anyone aware of someone who has tried to claim under the revised warranty terms?

JackReacher said: I'm considering a 991.2 and a bit concerned by this change. I'd only want to run it under Porsche warranty due to the known turbo issues. However, this change now casts doubt on whether it would be covered if they pinned it on corrosion of fuel lines for example. Leaving a very large bill. Is anyone aware of someone who has tried to claim under the revised warranty terms? A981 PSE Warranty claim refused due to corrosion https://www.boxa.net/topic/101951-pse-again%E2%80%...

elan362 said: A981 PSE Warranty claim refused due to corrosion https://www.boxa.net/topic/101951-pse-again%E2%80%... Exhausts are often excluded from warranties as wear and tear items and the claim refused in the link was 13 years old.

That is not correct. I had my PSE on my 2013 981 BS replaced in October with the exact same failure last year on the old warranty clauses / conditions. PSE seized valves and broken actuator linkages were routinely replaced on 12/ 13 yr old cars prior to the corrosion clause being added to the warranty wording in the recent update.