If the terms of the warranty state no payout for wear and tear, then I'm not surprised they won't pay out for something that has quite clearly worn out after 107K, and hasn't suffered a 'sudden mechanical failure'.
To be honest, I should think that at that sort of mileage, just about everything is getting near the end of its life.
|
Fair enough Dave, if the car had been Andy's from new.
As he's only had it for a year and 17k though, it has to be fairly predictable that things like that would happen and the warranty has to take that into account to have any substantive meaning at all.
Also it's hard to see how any sudden mechanical failure wouldn't have some element of wear and tear. Is there really anything that is as likely to go wrong on a 10k car as on a 100k car?
For me, wear and tear purely means parts that have an expected service life that wear down through contact or over a predictable time - so things like brake pads and discs, cam belts, oil, tyres, clutch plates and the like. Even then, if they fail early enough in their expected service life it can be a warranty issue.
|
Sorry Andymc, I think you will draw a blank on this one. At 107k miles many Passat suspension components will be worn out. The warranty you have is likely a 'breakdown' warranty and basically covers you against a part suddenly failing (i.e. going 'bang') rather than progressive wear and tear. County Court stuff is likely to be waste of time and money.
As to the MoT issue; well, it could very likely be a fail depending on how bad the wear is - it is down to the judegement of the examiner (impossible to say without inspecting the car).
|
Forget the warranty fair wear and tear etc, what about the Sale of Goods Act?
The item must be of merchantable quality etc etc.
Having skimmed through this thread it appears that Andy has been having problems with this car ever since he bought it.
So a court summonds based on the Sale of Goods act with the help of the CAB or a solicitor and the whole story should have them on the run.
Hugo
|
Small update -
I held off on sending any letters until I could speak to the manager of the dealership where I bought the car. Regardless of anything I pointed out in terms of nothing being caught at the 100-point inspection, the known issue of suspension failure, repeated failure to spot the problem, etc., he still maintained that it wasn't their problem and that they wouldn't do anything even as a goodwill gesture, nor was he willing to contact VW on my behalf.
I still feel like pursuing this, as it's obvious that VW have known about the issue of suspension failure for some time. I'd be prepared to take on the chin the cost of sorting out the axle mounting, but I do think that a car of this type (i.e. aimed at high-mileage fleet users) should not have this suspension problem at this mileage. If the cost and hassle of a court summons aren't too great, I may as well see where it gets me.
If I have to choose between one or the other, I'm not sure whether I should claim off VW UK on the basis of the suspension failure being a known issue, or off the dealer on the basis of selling goods of merchantable quality. Any comments as to whether it's possible/feasible to claim off both?
andymc
|
On mileage of 107,000? There is a huge amount of scope for VW and the dealer to argue a winning case. You need proof (not hearsay - hearsay is inadmissable in law) that VW knew about suspension failure, and then if that is proven that failure at 107,000 miles is unreasonable. You also need to prove that suspension components involved are not a wear and tear item (where a lot of suspension components are clearly wear and tear items - bushes, shocks, etc)
Dont let that put you off, but i think this would be a tough nut to crack.
|
Don't mind if it's a tough nut, it's just that I do think that it's unacceptable in a car clearly designed for higher mileages. I think (but correct me if I'm wrong) that what I would have to prove is unreasonable wear & tear.
As for hearsay, I would have thought the fact that a recall was issued outside the UK for these parts would be proof enough that VW was aware of suspension failure. In fact, even if this didn't affect me directly, I'd still be curious as why the recall wasn't issued in the UK.
andymc
|
Sorry to hear about your probs.
My Passat recently had the O/S/F lower wishbone and suspension guides replaced under warranty at 56K, car is 30 months old.
Front suspension would appear to be a weak point, suspension bushes worn out at 107k - fine, Wishbone worn out at 107k - not!
VW wouldn't even acknowledge the fault even though the thing was knocking consistently - They only dealt with it after I raised it with the lease company.
Dealer service from VW does leave a lot to be desired, I accept that things do go wrong (and so should VW et al) but when the dealer is then unhelpful and even rude I get a tad annoyed.
Best of luck
|
Just another bit of feedback (hopefully the last). Gawd, what a saga. Feel free to click on by, I'm doing this because I promised I'd update!
Firstly, my trusted local mechanic inspected the car on Friday and said that only the left axle mounting needed to be replaced, but that it was just about worn enough to risk failing the MOT. Because of the urgency (MOT due the following day), he did this job himself, at about a quarter of what it would have cost at the main dealer. As I said before, this was something I was willing to accept as reasonable wear & tear anyway (however, starting to get a sneaking suspicion that the dealer was looking to get more work out of me than was necessary ...)
I didn't think the MAF sensor could reasonably be described as a wear & tear item, so I rang the dealer to double-check the warranty claim - and was told that it had actually been approved for replacement after all! (Deep breath, and relax). This is not what I had been told a few days previously, when they said the whole claim was rejected, so I'm glad I followed it up. That means that now only the suspension work is an issue.
I rang another VW dealer in the vicinity, to try & persuade the service manager that rather than replacing the MAF, they could "write off" the approved warranty cost of this against doing the suspension work instead. At least this dealer is willing to do something to help out - he said doing this would leave me with a balance of around £480 to pay, inclusive of VAT and labour. I would then have to forget about claiming against VW UK, and could replace the MAF with a Mercedes part instead for about £50. Total outlay around £530. Not great, but a saving of around £200 against what I'd have faced otherwise.
However, my local guy then called to say he'd sourced a front suspension kit from a Passat that was written off when it rolled after being hit from behind. The front suspension is undamaged, and with less than 2000 miles up is effectively new. Together with brand new rear suspension, it would be £260 fitted. If I do this, I can have the MAF replaced FOC under the warranty, and still have the option of claiming against VW UK if I choose to - although for the sake of £260 it might not be worth the trouble. It may be a small enough price to pay to have a car which shouldn't give any more trouble for a couple of years - with those bits at least.
The car passed the MOT! And Ireland won. All in all, the weekend has turned out not too badly .... 8-D
andymc
|
|
Good to see a resolution, but I cannot believe that a structural part of the suspension should fail before end of the vehicle life, assuming that the VAG franchise is not telling porkies. Is there actually anything wrong, apart from the consumables such as bushes? If there is, perhaps if you keep the parts and invite the Vehicle Inspectorate or CA to have a look, VAG may belatedly take an interest. They won't do until some factual engineering evidence of a fault is provided to wake them up.
|
Yep, I'll do that. Something else has cropped up, by the way - now that the warranty period is over, I didn't use a main dealer but went back to my mechanic for a full service instead. He estimated that the car hadn't had a fuel filter change in over a year - in excess of 20000 miles. Considering a full service was supposed to be part of the deal when I bought the car last March, and the fact that I had paid for a main dealer service in October to keep up the warranty, I am less than happy. He showed me the fuel & air filters and they were both filthy. He also showed me a fuel filter he had taken off a high-mileage car after six months - there was far less grime and road dirt on the outside of that than on my one. I've asked him to hang on to it for me so I can check the part number against the one on the receipt I got at the time of the service. If they are different, #*&%@#!!!!
So far, I'm keeping my cool, but any more deep breaths and I'll be starting to levitate.
andymc
|
|
