[elevator]

Hi Everyone,

I'm considering purchasing a Tata Curvv EV, but I've come across some concerning information about their battery warranty. According to a few EV owners in a Telegram group, Tata is rejecting warranty claims for batteries with even minor scratches or dents on the outer protective cover.

I've seen photos of these "minor" damages, such as small scratches and dents. If this is indeed Tata's policy, it's a major deal-breaker for me.

Has anyone else had similar experiences with Tata EV battery warranties? Or do you know of anyone who has faced such an issue?

Please advise.

[psbali]

I totally trust Tata Motors to come with such an innovative reason to reject replacing battery FOC.

So we take comfort in 8 years battery warranty and if this case is indeed true then in reality TM comes with 5 mins battery warranty. You take delivery, drive and encounter a crater outside the showroom maybe "Engineered for destruction" by the showroom itself

I am in two minds about buying another EV from Tata Motors and just when I take a decision about taking the plunge suddenly a gem like this drops. I should stop thinking about getting another Tata Ev as the universe is involved in this decision somehow .

I have seen countless threads on poor service experience with Tata Motors and instead of focusing on making their customers comfortable they come up with such goodwill destroying events.

I really hope MG launches 50Kw variant of Windsor. Otherwise I would wait for Creta EV.

[elevator]

I am sharing this information to expose the unethical behavior of Tata Motors regarding their EV warranty policies. The following images, shared with the consent of the EV owner, depict a vehicle that has suffered minor scratches on its protective bottom cover. Despite the minimal damage, the company has denied a warranty claim for battery pack replacement.

Visual Evidence:







Company Response:



As you can see, the company has denied a warranty claim for battery pack replacement due to minor scratches on the protective cover. Their offered solutions are:

Paid Repair: Pay a significant sum for a new casing, while the battery cells will be repaired under warranty.

Insurance Claim: Attempt to file an insurance claim, which is likely to be denied.

Compromised Warranty: Accept a battery repair (potentially not covered by warranty) but retain the damaged casing, forfeiting future warranty coverage.

I urge prospective EV buyers to be vigilant on warranty terms and conditions. Do not be fooled by promises of long-term peace of mind.

[Cresterk]

Originally Posted by elevator

I am sharing this information to expose the unethical behavior of Tata Motors regarding their EV warranty policies. The following images, shared with the consent of the EV owner, depict a vehicle that has suffered minor scratches on its protective bottom cover. Despite the minimal damage, the company has denied a warranty claim for battery pack replacement.

I’m sorry but I read through the email and it says they they will replace the battery under warranty but the outer cover won’t be covered since it has physical damage from underbody hit. I believe this is rather reasonable especially since they have given the option of claiming insurance for just the cover while the cells are replaced by them. Out of curiousiity, how much does the cover cost?

[elevator]

Originally Posted by Cresterk

I’m sorry but I read through the email and it says they they will replace the battery under warranty but the outer cover won’t be covered since it has physical damage from underbody hit. I believe this is rather reasonable especially since they have given the option of claiming insurance for just the cover while the cells are replaced by them. Out of curiousiity, how much does the cover cost?

For Protective Casing, customer has to pay Rs 150,000.

Another incident from X:

[ferrarirules]

Originally Posted by elevator

I am sharing this information to expose the unethical behavior of Tata Motors regarding their EV warranty policies. The following images, shared with the consent of the EV owner, depict a vehicle that has suffered minor scratches on its protective bottom cover. Despite the minimal damage, the company has denied a warranty claim for battery pack replacement.

Any under body damage be it EV or ICE cars, all manufacturers treat it the same way. In this case Tata is clearly saying battery cells will be replaced under warranty and the protective cover can be paid by owner or insurance. If the cover has a minor crack due to these scuffs and there is water ingress in the battery why will Tata cover for the warranty for this kind of repair? Hence they are asking the cover to be replaced under insurance as it is damaged.

Coming to the price of the cover and any other child parts, this person should take a quotation from Tata for the same and try to claim it under insurance like you do for any other damage.

My opinion - Tata is being supportive and not out rightly denying warranty due to scuffs on the battery. They are providing clear resolution with insurance being the option for the protective cover.

Originally Posted by elevator

For Protective Casing, customer has to pay Rs 150,000.

The image this person has shared is not a minor scuff. And he is saying 1.5 lakh, nobody knows the split up of the 1.5 lakh, what parts and labour are mentioned in the quote.

[Turbanator]

Why does the warranty lapse on the Battery if the old protective cover is reused? (option3 of Tata mail).

I won't mind the scratched cover being reused unless it hampers the operation of the battery in any way. Or am I missing something?

[NomadSK]

Forget about EVs, No physical/accidental damages are covered by a warranty clause for any equipment. That's where the insurance comes into the picture.

I would thank my stars, If I would have accidently damaged my car battery and the OEM is still ready to replace the battery under warranty clause. Thanks to Tata motors for this.

But if I would be you, I will simply go with option-3 mentioned in their response, minus the battery pack warranty clause attached to it. The battery tray doesn't look that damaged to call for full replacement.

Originally Posted by ferrarirules

There could be a possibility of minor cracks which can lead to water ingress which manufacturer is not ready to risk.

Do you mean to say this tray at bottom protects the battery section against water ingress ? What level of IP it has ? Would be interesting to know.

[ferrarirules]

Originally Posted by Turbanator

Why does the warranty lapse on the Battery if the old protective cover is reused? (option3 of Tata mail).

There could be a possibility of minor cracks which can lead to water ingress which manufacturer is not ready to risk.

[SR-71]

Originally Posted by Turbanator

Why does the warranty lapse on the Battery if the old protective cover is reused? (option3 of Tata mail).

I won't mind the scratched cover being reused unless it hampers the operation of the battery in any way. Or am I missing something?

I read it a bit differently - It looks like the first 2 options allow for replacement of the cell under coverage while the tray needs to be paid for either via insurance or owner's pocket whereas the third option is to 'repair' (whatever that means) the battery pack and re-use the tray and warranty lapsing due to the 'repair' option? Are they not confident of their own ability to 'repair' it properly?

In any event if it's just a scratch on the tray with no impact to the battery, I don't think the owner should let such an incompetent team to touch the battery pack.

[Turbanator]

TATA likely any other OEM will have their back covered for all warranty claims from the suppliers. Not only do such vendors have to give a new product but also absorb the costs of replacement of I am not mistaken unless otherwise. Not sure under what terms Tata is sourcing these components and this surely speaks about their own confidence.

So, to answer the question of OP, I will be very careful with a manufacturer like Tata and probably skip unless there is no other option. Not much different than my views with any Tata product- whether it's Airline (Vistara is an exception) or Hotel

[Shreyans_Jain]

I think option 1 is most reasonable here. The battery itself is replaced under warranty, and the cover be done under insurance. The owner effectively gets a brand new battery with full warranty coverage, at only the cost of his no claim bonus.

[psbali]

Originally Posted by Shreyans_Jain

I think option 1 is most reasonable here. The battery itself is replaced under warranty, and the cover be done under insurance. The owner effectively gets a brand new battery with full warranty coverage, at only the cost of his no claim bonus.

I am aware of such a case on telegram.


The insurance company rejected the claim stating that battery cover repair/replacement has to be filed at the time of damage itself. One cannot claim insurance in case one discovers such a damage later on.

Basically they are asking for proof that battery cover was damaged around the time of filling for such a claim. So if you cannot prove that then your claim will be rejected.



Tata Motors and MG BaaS have given me a new found respect for my current ICE vehicle. Better pay for diesel than fall into EV trap.

Not going to lie but I was desperately looking to buy an EV as an impulse purchase.

[Shreyans_Jain]

Originally Posted by psbali

I am aware of such a case on telegram.

Let’s not generalise with one solitary case as an example. There are plenty of variables like the insurance company in question, the surveyor and his relationship with the workshop and how the workshop has presented its case. The standard practice is that pre existing damage is proved through photos of the car, photos taken at the time of the last claim. If this is the first claim or if there are no previous pics of the underside of the battery cover, the claim should not be denied as there is no proof that the damage is ‘old’. I can say the car scrapped 3 days ago and not 3 months ago, and that can’t be disputed without clear proof.

[Nanolover]

I think it is a case of deliberate Tata bashing especially by people who don't own a Tata EV. This forum is not a place for generalised comments. It's up to the insurance company to survey, assess, and reject what is needed. Moreover with the highest ground clearance for Nexon, unless and until a car is driven over a divider or is involved in an accident against a similar object, this case cannot happen.

Most probably driver negligence and blaming Tata for the same is unfair. Don't expect insurance to cover anything and everything damaged on the car without proper reason.