There are quite a few issues to this post but I will try to keep it as short as possible.
Back in April I bought a 2001 Impreza Turbo 2000, with full service history and 37,000 genuine miles. Part of the service documentation supplied was an invoice which stated the clutch plate, cover and release bearing had been replaced under warranty ten months previous. With just 6,000 miles on the new clutch, some heavy judder is evident when the engine is cold.
The car had 3 owners prior to myself, the first owner kept the car for around 12 months before trading it back in at the dealership where he bought and had the car serviced, the second owner had the car for about 18 months, having it serviced at the same dealership, but he traded the car in at a different dealership. The third owner bought the car two months later, on condition a clutch judder problem was rectified and the car was given its 30,000 in the sale price. He sold the car in a private sale to me ten months later.
The car was due its 37,500 mile service so decided to have a well known local Subaru dealership take on the work and give the car the once over. They had been most helpful and accommodating when I was looking at example motors, prior to buying this car in a private sale they offerd to HPI check it for me, so I felt confident they would offer an objective view of my new car. They kindly provided a written report which drew attention to the fact the clutch was juddering and the pedal felt heavy and the locating bolts on the gearbox bell housing had been removed and replaced with shorter 'ordinary' bolts. Other than that there was nothing to report. They enquired what I had paid for the car and commented that I found an excellent example for the money I paid for it. I asked the service manager if he could come up with a reason why a dealership would remove these bolts, he stated there was no reason or benefit in removing them. On checking Subaru's warranty system he informed me that the warranty clutch replacement had not been done under the Subaru warranty so it must have been under the selling dealerships own warranty. He also commented that Subaru were advising the replacment of the flywheel and a modified clutch.
I contacted all the previous owners of the car and verified with the dealers who had worked on the car before to determine if the gearbox bell housing had been separated from the engine prior to the work on the clutch being replaced. The evidence indicated that it had not. The car had only had routine servicing carried out, and some minor modifications which by way of exhaust and induction kit, which a dealer had completed.
I took the car to the dealer who had done the clutch replacment, the service manager immediatly went defensive then swiftly took up an offensive stance, insisting that the dealer that looked the car over on my behalf put his allegations in writing. I was swift to point out there were no allegations from the other dealer, but that I was seeking an explanation for why the locating bolts had been removed, and why the flywheel had not been replaced as per subarus recommendation. I showed him the other dealers comments in the report provided. He made a number of outrageous comments, that the bolts could have fallen out on the road, and they may have replaced them. Work could have been carried out at another garage, I couldn't prove that they were removed by his mechanics, all the mechanics had been replaced since then so he couldn't check this up, when I enquired about record keeping or job cards, there was no record beyond the warranty invoice etc, etc. I pointed out that on balance of probability, the bolts were removed when the clutch was being changed, I had checked through the vehicles history in sufficient detail to satisfy myself that no work had been done on the vehicle by anyone since the clutch was changed. At this point he told me he would not do anything for me and I should speak with the owner.
I spoke with the owner of the dealership on the same afternoon, and let him drive my car, he said there was no evidence of clutch judder, I told him that was because the car was warmed up, it would be there if the engine were left overnight. Regarding the bolts he made little or no comment. I allowed him to have a copy of my report and he agreed he would have an independent vehicle engineer examine my vehicle, the next day. He offered me a courtesy car, but I was unable to contact my insurance company to arrange insurance. He agreed to have one of his drivers collect my car from my home the next morning. He said that if the engineer found anything wrong with the car in that area they would have to look at it.
Next morning a driver called to collect my car, I left him a not e stuck to the dash to make a mental note of the severity of the clutch judder when the engine was cold, and report this to the owner of the dealership. My car was returned the same day around four hours after it had been collected. I believe someone was thrashing the life out of it, as it had a quarter tank of fuel in it when it left my home, it had covered 24 miles and was now empty with the warning light illuminated.
That was six weeks ago, i recieved a telephone call from the dealerhip yesterday stating the engineer had now submitted his report, he did state the locating bolts were replaced with 'ordinary' bolts, and after test driving the car there was no clutch judder. In concluding his comments which he was passing on from the owner of the dealership, he said they would be happy to replace the bolts, but I would have to bear the cost of that. He went over the same nonsense about bolts falling out or being removed by someone else, etc etc. I countered these points in the same way I have already mentioned above. He suggested that if I was unhappy with this I should take it up with the owner of the dealership. I told him th reason why clutch judder was not evident was because it was only present when the car was cold. The couple of hours which they had it would not have been near long enough for the engine to cool sufficiently. Just to prove he wasn't interested or listening to what I was saying he stated the engineer said there was no clutch judder.
I will be writing to the owner of the dealership and copying my letter to Subaru UK. I consider it extremely sharp practice to do half a job then have the customer pay to have it rectified. The customer focus of the service manager and owner of this outfit in my opinion is both non-existant, and short sighted. There goes another Impreza they will never be paid to work on, ironically they are known to be the most expensive dealership in NI for servicing work.
Besides voting with my wallet by giving my business to another dealer, or engaging a solicitor is there any recourse my informed assiciates in the back room would offer?
I am not bothered about having to replace the clutch, or replace these bolts I saved a lot on this car and had a grand in my back pocket to upgrade the cars security and put right any minor defects that I may not have been happy with. It is more the apathetic approach from the dealer and his service manager that has really ticked me off.
A long post I know, but I wanted to recount all the facts to you. Your comments, criticisms and objective viewpoints are always welcome.
Leon
|
![2018 Citroen C4 Cactus 1.2 PureTech [82] Feel 5dr](http://images.honestjohn.co.uk/imagecache/url/crop/90x60/https/assets.heycar.co.uk/t_default-export/f_auto/application_assets/vehicles/pictures/099f800128594c2a20d12c6d36b52792/6d15b3dc44afd28cf7feb38dc03ad91d.jpg)
