Home        About       News       Library       Contact
Asset insights

Warranty Review
Also sometimes referred to as an "End-of-Warranty Report".

An assessment of the performance of the warrantable assets during their active warranty period, relative to the warranty requirements, which includes evaluation of numerous things.

A form of physical needs assessment (PNA).


Purpose
The primary objectives of a warranty review are listed below:

  • To provide for consumer protection.
  • To help the owner protect their real estate investment.
  • To mitigate costs to the owners.
The outcome of the warranty review is to enable the owner to make an informed decision regarding risks and stewardship

One of the many decision support tools to assist owners, managers and operators.



Scope of the Review
Listed below are some of the considerations in defining the scope of a warranty review:

       I n c l u d e d:
  • An itemized list of warranty defects - symptoms. The root cause is often not included.
  • Telltale signs of latent defects and patent defects that fall below prudent industry standards.
      O p t i o n a l:
  • The prevalence of each warranty defect at all locations around the building.
  • Clarification of the distinction between warranty defects and maintenance deficiencies.
  • An evaluation of the owners' maintenance practices.
  • Confirmation of the owners' adherence to the maintenance plan.
  • Evaluation of maintenance recordkeeping.
      E x c l u d e d:
  • An estimation of the costs to correct the warranty defects.
  • Assignment of fault for the warranty defects.

Process
Included below are some of the key steps in the warranty review process:
  • Identify the assets that are still covered under warranty and where they are in their respective warranty cycles..
  • Determine the expiration dates of the different types of warranties.See: Schedule of Warranty Expirations (SOWE).
  • Conduct a document review, particularly the maintenance records on the warranted assets.
  • Conduct field review of the warranted assets to identify latent and patent defects.
  • Differentiate between warranty defects and maintenance deficiencies.
  • Submit report to the client and warranty provider.


Methodology & Domain Knowledge 
Listed below are some of the concepts taken into consideration by the consulting team when making evaluations and analysis for the warranty review:Further information on each of these concepts is included in the respective pages of this asset management glossary.


Evaluation
Listed below are some of the merits and advantages of a warranty review:
  • Warranty reviews will typically only include commentary on the condition of assets that are still under warranty. All other assets are not included in the scope.
  • Any deficiencies that are not warranty claims (such as general maintenance items) are not necessarily quantified as part of the warranty review.
Listed below are some of the limitations of a warranty review:



Challenges & Management Principles
Listed below are some of the challenges associated with the procurment and management of warranty reviews:
  • Correlation of warranty to maintenance
  • Intrinsic failures and root cause analysis
1
Fig. Warranty review inspection being carried out an asset in the field.


1
Fig. Document review being carried out as part of the warranty review process.


The four asset management schedules (highlighted in "green") that are necesssary to support a warranty review.
Fig. The four asset management schedules (highlighted in "green") that are necessary to support a warranty review.


Physical needs assessment (PNA) as part of the triad of three classes of assessments
Fig. Physical needs assessment (PNA) as part of the triad of three classes of assessments.


Matrix of assessment tools for vertical assets, linear assets and portable assets
Fig. Matrix of assessment tools for vertical assets, linear assets and portable assets.


Matrix of datas associated with each of the three classes of assessment
Fig. Matrix of datas associated with each of the three classes of assessment


I. Care is using destructive testing to reveal hidden stuff going on in the iceberg under the surface (latent defects, concealed conditions, lagging indicators)
Fig. I. Care is using destructive testing (and other creative means) to reveal the hidden stuff going on in the iceberg under the surface (latent defects, concealed conditions, lagging indicators, legacy problems, root causes, back-of-house, interval censoring, covert failures, and potential failures).



The alignment of the different types of assessments to each asset (the mix) and the register those that have been commissioned to date (the status)
Fig. The alignment of the different types of assessments to each asset (the mix) and the register those that have been commissioned to date (the status)


Cycles of assessments and re-assessments for PNAs, CNAs and FNAs over a 40-year planning horizon
Fig. Cycles of assessments and re-assessments for PNAs, CNAs and FNAs over a 40-year planning horizon.


Read Articles & Blogs:
See also:
    Compare with:
    See the services matrix for an analysis of the integrated deliverables.
    I. Care is figuring out the right balance of assessments for his assets, including: physical needs assessment (PNA), capital needs assessment (CNA) and functional needs assessment (FNA)
    Fig. I. Care is figuring out the right balance of assessments for his assets, including: physical needs assessment (PNA), capital needs assessment (CNA) and functional needs assessment (FNA)

    (c) Copyright Asset Insights, 2000-2013, All Rights Reserved - "Insight, foresight and oversight of assets" Google