Choosing a garage, servicing and warranties

A service is the one thing almost every car owner pays a garage for, year after year. It's also where three questions get muddled together: how often the car really needs work, who is allowed to do it, and whether going anywhere but the dealer puts the warranty at risk. Each has an answer, but the answers come from different places: the handbook for the first, a credential or a register for the second, and the law for the third.

This is general information, not legal advice. The rules differ between England and Wales, Scotland, Northern Ireland and each US state, and they change. Everything below is as read on 26 September 2026.

The schedule is the handbook's

Reading your handbook's schedule is Yours. The servicing itself, beyond the owner's checks of lessons 7 to 10, is Call someone: a garage does it.

Lesson 1 met the figure that most needs unlearning, the 3,000-mile oil change, which CalRecycle, California's waste and recycling agency, says "no longer applies to most cars".²⁷ What replaces it isn't another number. It's your handbook, and a modern handbook often gives you more than one schedule.

Nissan, in the handbook for the 2024 LEAF sold in the US, explains why: "To help ensure smooth, safe and economical driving, NISSAN provides two maintenance schedules that may be used, depending upon the conditions in which you usually drive."¹ It then lists the conditions that call for the second one, the severe schedule, in full: repeated short trips under 5 miles (8 km); repeated short trips under 10 miles (16 km) with the outside temperature staying below freezing; hot weather in stop-and-go "rush hour" traffic; extensive idling or low-speed driving over long distances, "such as police, taxi or door-to-door delivery use"; dusty conditions; rough, muddy or salt-spread roads; and a car-top carrier. The rule is one sentence: "If your vehicle is mainly operated under the severe conditions, follow the severe use maintenance intervals shown in the maintenance schedule."¹

The LEAF has no engine oil, and it still has a severe schedule, because the list changes how often brakes, steering and suspension are inspected. And notice the other half of the rule: "if you drive very little, your vehicle should be serviced at the regular time intervals shown in the schedule."¹ Low miles don't stretch the calendar.

The oil-life monitor, and what it doesn't settle

Some cars replace the fixed interval with a monitor that tells you when the oil is due. Ford, in the handbook for the 2024 Maverick sold in the US and Canada (petrol and hybrid): "Your vehicle comes with the Intelligent Oil-Life Monitor system, a message appears in the instrument cluster display at the proper oil change interval. This interval may be up to one year or 10,000 mi (16,000 km), hybrid vehicles could exceed 10,000 mi (16,000 km)."² It then puts limits round the monitor: do the change "within two weeks or 500 mi (800 km) of the message appearing", and if the display resets early or stops working, change it at six months or 5,000 mi (8,000 km), with, in the same paragraph, "Never exceed one year or 10,000 mi (16,000 km) between oil change intervals."² Ford also names the driving that works against the oil: "frequent short trips that do not allow the engine to get to operating temperature, extended idling and low speed driving for long periods of time", which "dilutes and increases the level of oil".²

AAA, whose clubs sell roadside assistance and run a repair network, puts the monitor more strongly: newer cars drop severe-service recommendations "because the oil-life monitoring system automatically shortens the oil change interval when it detects heavy-duty operation". And the same page hedges its own claim: "Always defer to the maintenance schedule in your owner's manual for oil change intervals. While oil-life indicators are helpful, they are not always accurate."⁴

So is severe use a thing of the past? That's contested. AAA's "newer cars" is a generalisation; Ford's 2024 handbook still names the driving that works against the oil, and Nissan's still prints a severe schedule, though for a car with no engine oil. No source read measured how accurate monitors are. What every source read agrees on is the order of authority: your handbook first, then the monitor if your car has one, and an honest reading of your own driving against the handbook's list.

A garage's own schedule

The FTC, the US federal consumer regulator, gives the warning that follows: "Some repair shops create their own maintenance schedules, which call for more frequent servicing than the manufacturer's recommendations." Its advice is to compare the two and to ask the shop why it recommends service beyond the schedule, and make sure you understand the answer.⁵ In the UK, The Motor Ombudsman's code for accredited garages commits them the other way: "Servicing will be carried out in accordance with the manufacturer’s service specification unless expressly stated".⁹ (The Motor Ombudsman is funded by the garages it accredits; more on that below.)

Dealer or independent: who says what, and why

Is a main dealer better for servicing than an independent garage? That isn't a question of law (the law comes in the next section) or of fact that any source here measured. No source this course read compares dealers and independents on quality or safety; the one price comparison below is of owners' reported spending. It's a question of value and preference, and the voices in it have interests. So here is each side in its own words, with its interest named, and no verdict.

The makers' case. Mazda, in the European handbook for the Mazda3, tells an owner unsure of a maintenance procedure: "we strongly urge you to have a reliable and qualified technician perform the work, we recommend an Authorised Mazda Repairer." Its reason: "Authorised Mazda technicians and genuine Mazda parts are dedicated to your vehicle. Without this expertise and the parts that have been designed and made especially for your Mazda, inadequate, incomplete, and insufficient servicing may result in problems. This could lead to vehicle damage or an accident and injuries."⁶ Ford, in the 2024 Maverick handbook, under the heading "Why Maintain Your Vehicle at Your Dealership?": "Service technicians participate in extensive factory-sponsored certification training to help them become experts on the operation of your vehicle." It adds: "It is important to rely upon your dealership to properly diagnose and repair your vehicle", and it strongly recommends its own genuine parts.² The interest: a maker's dealers do this work and sell these parts, and the maker also answers for the car under its warranty.

The independents' case. The Auto Care Association, the US trade body for the independent aftermarket (the parts makers, sellers and repair shops that aren't the carmakers'), describes its aim: "We fight to secure choice and competition in the auto repair industry to put vehicle maintenance decisions back in the vehicle owners’ hands."⁷ In the UK, YourCar-YourChoice, a campaign by the independent aftermarket administered by its trade body, the Independent Automotive Aftermarket Federation, puts the case to drivers: "Choosing an independent garage or autocentre could save you time and money and provide a fast, efficient, hassle-free and friendly service."²⁸ The interest: both bodies' members sell the parts and the service; Auto Care says it represents "the interests of all drivers, and the independent aftermarket industry that serves them".⁷

Voices with no side in it. Toyota's US handbook for the 2023 Corolla sends a problem to "your Toyota dealer or qualified service shop".³ The FTC's test for any shop is whether it has "experience working on the same make or model vehicle as yours", and it tells you to "Make sure the shop will honor your vehicle's warranty".⁵ In England, Citizens Advice recommends a garage "accredited by The Motor Ombudsman", and The Motor Ombudsman, funded by the garages it accredits, lists franchised dealers and independent garages among them.⁸⁹ Which?, the UK consumer body, which earns commission from some retailer links on its pages, asked 63,334 car owners in 2025 what they had spent in total on servicing, parts included, over the past 12 months: "a service from a franchised dealer costs £361, while a local independent costs just £260 on average." For cars still sold new, it gives "franchised dealer services cost £331, compared with local garages at £262." Those are owners' reported yearly totals, not the same job priced at each. It also makes a point for dealers: "you may be able to take advantage of a fixed-price servicing deal at a main dealer that can give you peace of mind over how much you're going to pay."²⁹³⁰

Where they meet: every voice here agrees the schedule and the right parts matter; they differ on whether the maker's network is the best way to get them. What would settle it is a comparison nobody here has published on quality, the same jobs at both kinds of garage checked independently.

Warranties and servicing outside the dealer

This is general information, not legal advice.

The mechanism is the same in both countries, and it's the thing people miss: the law here binds the warrantor, not the owner. Neither country's law read tells you where to service your car. What each limits is what a maker may do with its warranty when you go elsewhere.

In the US, federal law. The Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act, 15 U.S.C. 2302(c): "No warrantor of a consumer product may condition his written or implied warranty of such product on the consumer's using, in connection with such product, any article or service (other than article or service provided without charge under the terms of the warranty) which is identified by brand, trade, or corporate name", unless the FTC grants a waiver.¹⁰ The FTC's rule, 16 CFR 700.10(c), applies it to servicing: "No warrantor may condition the continued validity of a warranty on the use of only authorized repair service and/or authorized replacement parts for non-warranty service and maintenance", and gives as a prohibited example a warranty that "is void if service is performed by anyone other than an authorized `ABC' dealer".¹¹ The same paragraph ends with the other side: it doesn't stop a warrantor denying liability for damage caused by "unauthorized" parts or service "where the warrantor can demonstrate that the defect or damage was so caused."¹¹

The FTC's consumer page says: "it's illegal for a dealer to deny your warranty coverage because you had routine maintenance or repairs done by someone else." Its exceptions: if the warranty provides work or parts free, the maker can choose where and which. Aftermarket parts don't end the warranty either, but if one is faulty or badly fitted and damages a covered part, coverage for that damage can be refused, and "The manufacturer or dealer must prove the aftermarket or recycled part caused the damage before they can deny warranty coverage."¹² For the separate federal emissions warranty, EPA says the same about who may do the work: "Scheduled maintenance may be performed by anyone who has the knowledge and ability to perform the maintenance and repair", and "the manufacturer can require you to use parts that are of equal quality to the original parts."¹³

In the UK, the route is competition law, and it speaks of what is likely. The Competition and Markets Authority's guidance on motor vehicle agreements explains how the UK's ban on anti-competitive agreements, the "Chapter I prohibition", applies to makers and their dealer networks. It names two warranty restrictions "which are likely to be caught by the Chapter I prohibition": a warranty, "whether standard or extended", made "conditional on the end user having repair and maintenance work that is not covered by warranty carried out only by members of the Authorised Network"; and one requiring the maker's own-brand parts for replacements the warranty doesn't cover (paragraphs 5.35 to 5.37).¹⁴ Then the exception: competition law does not prevent a maker from "legitimately refusing to honour a warranty claim on the grounds that the situation leading to the claim in question is causally linked i) to a failure on the part of a repairer to carry out a particular repair or maintenance operation in the correct manner, or ii) to the failure of a spare part supplied by a third party." And terms that "clearly state the consumer's right to use the services of an independent repairer without losing the benefit of the warranty are unlikely to give rise to competition concerns" (5.41). The guidance also says that where an extended warranty is sold "years after the purchase of the vehicle", independent garages seem less likely to be shut out "even if" it carries servicing or parts restrictions (5.39).¹⁴ Which?, which earns commission from some retailer links, notes that some extended warranties require a main dealer.³⁰ The block exemption order this guidance sits beside "ceases to have effect at the end of 31st May 2029".¹⁵

Read the UK wording as written. It is guidance on competition law between makers and their networks, and it says "likely to be caught" and "may be caught". The US rule forbids the warranty term itself; the CMA's guidance says an agreement between a maker and its network that contains one is likely to be caught by competition law. It speaks of "the consumer's right" to use an independent repairer (5.40, 5.41) without creating one, and this course read no UK consumer statute on the point. The practical line, which is this course's reading of the guidance: servicing by an independent garage to the maker's schedule, with parts of matching quality and a record of the work, shouldn't by itself cost you the warranty, though an extended warranty bought later may require the dealer, so read its terms; and a bad repair or a failed third-party part can still get a claim refused.

Records, and the maker's own conditions

The warranty itself has conditions, and missing them costs real money. Ford's handbook: "Failure to perform scheduled maintenance invalidates warranty coverage on parts affected by the lack of maintenance", and "Keep all receipts for completed maintenance with your vehicle."² The FTC: the warranty company "could ask for your maintenance records", and without them "your claim might be denied."¹² Nissan marks some items with an asterisk as recommended but not needed "in order to maintain the warranties", and adds "Other maintenance items and intervals are required."¹ Toyota warns that "do-it-yourself maintenance may affect warranty coverage".³ Doing the servicing yourself is outside this course anyway: its owner jobs stop at the checks.

What to keep: the date, the mileage, what was done and to which schedule, the parts used (genuine or not, which the code of The Motor Ombudsman, funded by the garages it accredits, says a garage should agree with you in advance), and the invoice.⁹

A hybrid in Ulverston

This is general information, not legal advice.

A hybrid bought new two years ago is garaged in Ulverston, in England, and is still inside the maker's original new-car warranty. The owner has it serviced by an independent garage, to the maker's schedule, with an itemised invoice. A year later a fault appears in a part the warranty covers.

Work it through. The CMA's guidance says a warranty that makes cover conditional on dealer-only servicing of non-warranty work is "likely to be caught" by competition law, so, on this course's reading, the independent service by itself shouldn't be a reason to refuse. The question the maker can legitimately ask is 5.37's: is the fault "causally linked" to the independent garage's work done incorrectly, or to a third-party part that failed?¹⁴ If the answer is no, that exception doesn't reach the claim.

What the owner does: put the claim to the maker's dealer with the service invoices showing the schedule was followed and which parts were fitted; ask for any refusal in writing, with its reason; and read the warranty booklet's own terms, since the guidance is about what makers' agreements may contain, not a promise about any single claim. If the garage is accredited by The Motor Ombudsman, funded by the garages it accredits, its Service and Repair Code applies to the work, and lesson 25 covers the dispute routes.

A refused claim in Scottsdale, with a gap for you

This is general information, not legal advice.

A car in Scottsdale, in the US, is under its maker's warranty. An independent shop has done its oil changes, to the handbook's schedule, using a filter that isn't the maker's brand. The engine develops a fault, and the dealer refuses the warranty claim "because you used an aftermarket oil filter". The owner has every invoice.

Before you open the answer, apply two things you've met: the FTC's line about aftermarket parts, and the last sentence of 16 CFR 700.10(c). Who has to show what?

"Extended warranties", and the call that sells one

This is general information, not legal advice.

The FTC draws a line that the words blur: an auto service contract, sometimes called an "extended warranty", is something you buy separately, and "An auto service contract or extended warranty is not a warranty as defined by federal law, because you buy it separately; it’s not included when you buy a car."¹² Whether one is worth buying is Personal Finance lesson 8's question, "Handing off what you cannot absorb", and this course doesn't answer it.

In the UK the words run differently. The code of The Motor Ombudsman, funded by the garages it accredits, defines an "Extended Warranty" as "Any warranty, excluding the New Vehicle Warranty, that has either been provided free-of-charge or has been bought by you directly."⁹ Neither usage is wrong; read the contract.

Then the call. The FTC: "This is an illegal robocall and likely a scam. The companies behind this type of robocall are not with your car dealer or manufacturer, and the "extended warranty" they're trying to sell you is actually a service contract that often sells for hundreds or thousands of dollars."¹⁶ The messages use headings like "Final Warranty Notice" to seem urgent, and the senders "probably aren’t working with your vehicle dealer or manufacturer".¹² Digital Literacy lesson 11, "Recognising a con, and the ten minutes after you clicked", taught the answer: hang up, and if you want to know your warranty's end date, ring the dealer on a number you found yourself. Personal Finance lesson 10, "Defending it", covers what to do if you've already paid.

Credentials, and how to check one yourself

This is general information, not legal advice.

Checking a garage is Yours, and it costs nothing, but each credential means something different.

The Motor Ombudsman is not a statutory ombudsman. It says it "is funded by annual accreditations and service fees paid for by businesses that meet the strict requirements to be a part of the organisation", and that "The payment of fees by businesses have no influence or bearing on the independent and impartial decisions made by The Motor Ombudsman’s adjudicators and ombudsmen."⁹ Citizens Advice, the national advice charity, recommends searching for "a garage that is accredited by The Motor Ombudsman"; that's Citizens Advice's recommendation of one industry-funded scheme.⁸

The IMI, the motor industry's professional body, also sells the qualifications it recognises. Its page: "IMI TechSafe is a recognition of skills, qualification achievements and a commitment to CPD within the IMI Professional Register." It isn't required by law: at a May 2026 event the IMI hosted, participants called on government to make it so, as lesson 14 described.¹⁷ For a hybrid or electric car, lesson 14 explained why high-voltage work is graded by training and is never owner work; this is where you'd look.

ASE, the US certifying body, describing its own credential: "We certify the service individual so they can offer tangible proof of their technical knowledge." A technician needs "two years of on-the-job-training or one year of on-the-job-training and a two-year degree in automotive repair", and "must retest every five years".¹⁸ It certifies people, not garages; a shop can qualify for a separate recognition programme. The FTC's caution goes with it: "certification alone is no guarantee of good or honest work."⁵

California is the contrast in law: "It is unlawful for any person to be an automotive repair dealer unless that person has registered in accordance with this chapter and unless that registration is currently valid" (Business and Professions Code § 9884.6(a)).¹⁹ BAR, the state regulator, tells owners to check a shop's licence and any disciplinary history on its site.²⁰ Michigan licenses people: "An individual shall not engage or offer to engage in employment as a specialty or master mechanic if he or she has not applied for and received a certificate for that employment from the department" (MCL § 257.1311(1)).²¹ Whether licensing like that should exist is the argument Home Repair lesson 22, "Who may do what: reserved work, and the argument about licensing", set out; this course doesn't reopen it.

How to check. Go to the scheme's or regulator's own site by a route you chose yourself, never a link in a message or a badge on a website: Digital Literacy lesson 11's rule.

Right to repair in Massachusetts: the law, the votes, and each side's case

This is general information, not legal advice.

One US state has passed a law on access to a car's repair information and data, which its supporters call right to repair and the carmakers' complaint calls the "Data Law", and the argument over it went to court.

What the law says

Massachusetts General Laws chapter 93K, section 2, requires carmakers selling there to make available for purchase, to owners and independent repair facilities, "the same diagnostic and repair information, including repair technical updates, that such manufacturer makes available to its dealers" (subsection (a)), and the same diagnostic tools (subsection (c)).²² Subsection (f), added by the 2020 ballot, requires cars from model year 2022 that use telematics (systems that send the car's data wirelessly to the maker) to give owners, and independent repairers they authorise, access to the car's mechanical data. That access "shall include the ability to send commands to in-vehicle components if needed for purposes of maintenance, diagnostics and repair", and a repairer's is "limited to the time to complete the repair or for a period of time agreed to by the vehicle owner".²²

The votes, from the Secretary of the Commonwealth's statistics: in 2012, Question 1 (repair information) passed with 2,353,603 votes yes (85.7%) to 392,562 no (14.3%); in 2020, Question 1 (telematics data) passed with 2,599,182 yes (75.0%) to 867,674 no (25.0%).²³

The court: the carmakers' trade association, the Alliance for Automotive Innovation, sued in 2020 to overturn the 2020 law. The federal district court entered judgment in February 2025, and the Alliance appealed to the First Circuit in March 2025.²⁴ This course read the docket entries, not the decision, and read nothing from the appeal, so the outcome is unknown to this course as of 26 September 2026. Check the court's record before relying on any of this.

The case for the law, in its supporters' own words

The official 2020 voter guide printed 150-word arguments written by each side; the state says it "does not endorse these arguments, and does not certify the truth or accuracy of any statement made in these arguments."²⁵ The ballot committee for the law, Massachusetts Right to Repair, wrote: "We passed the first Right to Repair law in 2012, but as new cars become more computerized auto manufacturers are using a loophole to restrict access to data needed to diagnose problems, make repairs, and perform maintenance." And: "This means car owners are steered toward more expensive dealer repair options. Vote YES to protect independent repair shops and preserve your ability to shop around." On privacy: "Voting YES provides access ONLY to mechanical and repair information, not personal information." And its conclusion: "It’s your car, you paid for it, you should get it fixed where you want."²⁵

The Auto Care Association, the independent aftermarket's trade body, argues the same way today: the law "allows car owners to choose who can access their vehicle's repair and maintenance data while preserving its cybersecurity", and "Without that data, independent shops can't fully service today's connected vehicles." And: "This law means Massachusetts car owners keep deciding where their vehicle gets maintained and repaired, which keeps the state's repair market competitive."⁷ Their interest: independent shops and parts sellers gain the work.

The case against, in its opponents' own words

The 2020 committee against, the Coalition for Safe and Secure Data, wrote in the same guide: "Question 1 has nothing to do with fixing cars. Question 1 is a data grab by third parties who want to gather your personal vehicle information and access it remotely, including location data in real time." It quoted domestic violence advocates on the danger of location data, and ended: "Privacy advocates, cybersecurity experts, and domestic violence advocacy groups urge you to vote NO on Question 1."²⁵

The Alliance for Automotive Innovation, whose members it describes as "The nation’s leading car and light truck manufacturers", made the legal case in its complaint. On security: "Each member recognizes that access to that data, and to the secured vehicle systems that generate that data, could, in the wrong hands, spell disaster." And: "Massachusetts’s new Data Law will reduce the security of these systems, seriously hampering manufacturers’ attempts to keep vehicle data and vehicle systems safe." The complaint leans on the federal vehicle safety regulator, NHTSA, quoting its 2020 testimony to the state legislature that the measure would force "vehicle manufacturers to redesign their vehicles in a manner that necessarily introduces cybersecurity risks, and to do so in a timeframe that makes design, proof, and implementation of any meaningful countermeasure effectively impossible." This course read the complaint's quotation, not NHTSA's letter. On the need for it: "But consumers already enjoy the freedom to have their vehicles repaired at the shops of their choice." And: "There is no evidence that members of Auto Innovators have blocked independent auto repair shops from accessing data necessary to assess vehicle performance and conduct maintenance and repair."²⁶ Their interest: the makers' dealers compete for the work, and the makers answer for the systems' security. This course didn't read who funded either ballot committee, and says nothing about it.

What kind of question this is, and what would settle it

Part of it is contested empirical. Does an open, standardised platform make cars less secure than the makers' own systems, and by how much? Do independents in fact lack data they need? Each side asserts an answer; neither argument quoted here cites a measurement, and this course read none. What would settle it: independent security testing of platforms built to the law, and evidence of which repairs independents can and can't do on connected cars. Part is legal, and that's for the court. And part is a value question: who should control the data a car sends, and how to weigh an owner's choice against a security risk. Voters answered it in 2020 for Massachusetts, by a large margin; that decided what the statute says, not whether it survives the court challenge or whether it is wise, and this course takes no side. Read each side at its strongest before you weigh it, as Logic and Argument lesson 7 asked.

What people get wrong

"An independent garage voids the warranty." Not by itself, in either country, though a claim can still be refused for damage caused by bad work or a failed part, and some extended warranties do require a main dealer. The warranty section above has each country's rule.

"Change the oil every 3,000 miles." Your handbook's schedule, normal or severe, or its monitor within the handbook's limits.

"Certified means honest." The FTC: certification "alone is no guarantee of good or honest work".

"ASE certifies garages." It certifies individuals; a shop can qualify for a separate recognition programme.

"An extended warranty is a warranty." In the US, not under federal law: it's a service contract you buy separately. In the UK, the code of The Motor Ombudsman, funded by the garages it accredits, calls it a warranty. Read the contract.

Practice

For your plan

This lesson fills the service page of your car file: the schedule and where it's printed, normal or severe and your reason, the monitor's limits if there is one, the next items due, the cambelt from lesson 2 or "none given", and where the invoices are kept. Start the garage page too: the garage you checked, how you checked it, and the date. Lesson 25 adds what to ask for before any work, and what to do when a bill goes wrong.

Connections

Lesson 1 made the handbook the authority for every per-car figure. Lesson 23 covered recalls, which are separate from any warranty. Lesson 25, "Quotes, estimates, the bill and disputes", takes you from choosing the garage to paying it.

Go deeper

• FTC, "Auto Warranties and Auto Service Contracts", free. The US rules on warranties and servicing, and the full list of questions to ask about a service contract.
• CMA, "Guidance on motor vehicle agreements" (June 2023), free. This course read paragraphs 5.35 to 5.41 on warranties; the rest covers parts, technical information and repair networks.
• Massachusetts, 2020 "Information for Voters", free. Both sides' arguments side by side, with the full text of the law.

Sources

1. Nissan North America, 2024 LEAF Owner's Manual and Maintenance Information, US market. Read: pp. 9-5 to 9-9 ("Maintenance and schedules") in full, 26 September 2026.
2. Ford Motor Company, 2024 Maverick Owner's Manual, edition 202307, US and Canada. Read: pp. 456 to 458 ("Scheduled Maintenance") from the Internet Archive capture of 5 May 2025 (20250505042038), 26 September 2026. The website it points to for intervals was not read.
3. Toyota, 2023 Corolla Owner's Manual (OM02568U), US market. Read: pp. 295 to 296 ("Maintenance requirements"), 26 September 2026. The separate Scheduled Maintenance Guide was not read.
4. AAA, "How Often Should You Change Your Oil?". US motoring clubs, which sell roadside assistance and run a repair network. Read: in full, 26 September 2026.
5. FTC, "Auto Repair Basics". US federal. Read: in full, 26 September 2026.
6. Mazda, Mazda3 Owner's Manual, online, European English (8GD7-EE-17H). Read: the maintenance chapter's introduction page and the "Scheduled Maintenance" page's notes, 26 September 2026; that page's schedule table did not load and was not read.
7. Auto Care Association, "Massachusetts Right to Repair". US aftermarket trade body. Read: in full, 26 September 2026.
8. Citizens Advice, "Find an approved garage". England. Read: in full, 26 September 2026.
9. The Motor Ombudsman, "The Motor Industry Code of Practice for Service and Repair" (issued 1 June 2025), with its pages "How is The Motor Ombudsman funded?" and "About us". UK; industry-funded, not statutory. Read: the code in full, and both pages, 26 September 2026.
10. 15 U.S.C. § 2302(c). US federal. Read: subsection (c) in full, 26 September 2026.
11. 16 CFR 700.10, "Prohibited tying", eCFR, current. US federal. Read: in full, 26 September 2026.
12. FTC, "Auto Warranties and Auto Service Contracts". US federal. Read: in full, 26 September 2026.
13. EPA, "Emissions Warranties for 1995 and Newer Light-duty Cars and Trucks under 8,500 Pounds GVWR" (EPA-420-F-15-035, October 2015). US federal. Read: in full, 26 September 2026.
14. Competition and Markets Authority, "Guidance on motor vehicle agreements" (5 June 2023). UK. Read: paragraphs 1.1, 2.4 and 5.35 to 5.41, 26 September 2026.
15. The Competition Act 1998 (Motor Vehicle Agreements Block Exemption) Order 2023, article 13. UK. Read: article 13, 26 September 2026.
16. FTC consumer alert, "Hang up on auto warranty robocalls" (19 May 2021). US federal. Read: in full, 26 September 2026.
17. IMI, "IMI TechSafe" and its release on the 14 May 2026 event. UK professional body, which also sells the qualifications. Read: both in full, 26 September 2026.
18. ASE, "About ASE". US certifying body, on its own credential. Read: in full from the Internet Archive capture of 14 June 2026 (20260614094747), 26 September 2026.
19. California Business and Professions Code § 9884.6. California. Read: in full, 26 September 2026.
20. California Bureau of Automotive Repair, "Maintenance and repairs". California. Read: in full, 26 September 2026.
21. Michigan Compiled Laws § 257.1311. Michigan. Read: subsections (1) and (2), 26 September 2026.
22. Massachusetts General Laws chapter 93K, § 2. Massachusetts. Read: in full, 26 September 2026.
23. Secretary of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, election statistics, 2012 and 2020 Question 1. Read: statewide totals, 26 September 2026.
24. Alliance for Automotive Innovation v. Campbell, No. 1:20-cv-12090 (D. Mass.), docket on CourtListener. Read: the docket entries only, not the decision, at Stage 1 (26 September 2026). Nothing from the appeal was read.
25. Secretary of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, 2020 "Information for Voters", Question 1. Read: the Question 1 pages in full, 26 September 2026.
26. Alliance for Automotive Innovation, Complaint, Alliance for Automotive Innovation v. Healey, No. 1:20-cv-12090 (D. Mass.), filed 20 November 2020; the same case as 24, under its earlier caption. Read: pages 1 to 5 (the Introduction), from the Internet Archive capture of 30 May 2026 (20260530044526) of the copy hosted by Repairer Driven News, 26 September 2026.
27. CalRecycle, "Check Your Number, Because 3,000 Miles May Be Too Early to Change Your Oil". California state agency. Read: in full, 26 September 2026.
28. YourCar-YourChoice, home page. UK campaign by the independent aftermarket, administered by the Independent Automotive Aftermarket Federation, a trade body. Read: in full, 26 September 2026. Its statements about the law were not relied on.
29. Which?, "Car servicing and repair costs" (9 June 2026). UK consumer body; earns commission from some retailer links. Read: in full, 26 September 2026. Its statement about the law was not relied on.
30. Which?, "How to find a good garage and get the best service" (28 April 2026). UK consumer body; earns commission from some retailer links. Read: in full, 26 September 2026.