I’ve been informed by a lawyer who practices on the side of consumer protection the following; These disclaimers we see concerning an end user voiding a warrenty due to a mod or alteration performed by anyone other than the manufacturer, or without the manufacturer’s permission are actually born out of practicality. In general, they allow for a warrenty provider to not have to spend time and effort researching if the unauthorized work is in fact detrimental to the operation of the product. The example he gave was as it applied to the automotive industry. A pickup truck’s warrenty did not allow for a snow plow to be attached. But the owner installed one anyways. Then his heater fan motor died while under warrenty. It was determined the fan issue was a covered repair because the snow plow could not reasonably be blamed for the fan dying.
He also cautioned the determination in the automotive example could have gone either way. So, in laymen’s terms, if what we do to the product requires a study to determine if it voids the warrenty, it does. An overly simplistic example of swapping out a control knob with another that happens to fit requires no study, it’s common sense that should prevail here, no wannenty viodance has occurred. But once the enclosure is opened, all bets are off. That’s why some manufacturers include a “seal” that if broken is a dead givaway the case has been opened, and therefore an automatic warrenty void is determined. The common sense aspect comes into play when one fights the warrenty... if a lawyer is hired to fight it, what’s cheaper, the lawyer or a new radio? I believe it’s a practical issue... the manufacturer needs to be protected against claims that clearly fall under unauthorized modifications... a blanket policy if you will... because to determine the difference between if a mod proved to be detrimental or not, a study would need to be performed.
And, as with all lawyers, mine threw in this caviat; It’s not that the mod may happen to be deemed unauthorized, it’s the cost of learning if it changed the manufacturers intended use in any way.
Don’t ya just love lawyers?
My workaround to performing a mod is simply to wait until the warrenty runs out. I would love to eliminate or reduce the raised ridge around my antenna connection on my SDS100. It would allow me to use a variety of antennas I have stockpiled over the years without adapters. I can see no voidance of the warranty other than a watertight seal issue at the antenna mount. But if my radio needed a repair under warrenty due to faulty manufacturing workmanship and it had nothing to do with water damage, I’d probably still be arguing it with Uniden... best to wait a year.
