Hi
Is it acceptable for a dealer to worsen a fault to investigate source of problem?
Our Berlingos full-length fabric sunroof failed to open, so we took it to our local dealer, whose mechanic pulled the offending corner back to see why it wasn't moving.
Having ascertained why not (broken / stripped teeth on the drive mechanism), the roof was pushed back as far as it would go and we were told that we'd need a new roof, because that's how they come, at a cost of c.£2500 +vat. We declined and went on our way.
It quickly became apparent that the roof was now no longer sealed and weather / wind proof. We went back and were told that that was something we'd have to put up with as that was how they'd had to diagnose the problem.
We have spoken to the garages management since and they are adamant they are not liable to make the roof weatherproof ~(as it had been when we went into the dealership). We have asked Consumer Protection who said we should try the garage again as they felt it should not have been left in a worse condition than when we entered the premises. The garage have continued to decline to make good the damage.
Are we being unreasonable to have our car returned to us in a worse condition than when it went in?
How best to proceed?
One solution seems to have the roof sealed by a bodyshop - at our expense it seems.
The fly in the ointment is that we are due to use the car to go on holiday in 10 days time!
We will have a secondhand one fitted, once we find one. Seems it is a rare part...!
Any advice gladly welcome!
Cheers, James
|
|
It's a similar situation to when I wanted an estimate for repair of accident damage to my car and the garage had to cut away parts of panels to see what damage was underneath. Unfortunate though it may be, I don't think your dealer had any alternative to what they did.
|
|
|
If the only diagnostic method available was a destructive one, they should have warned you of this and sought your authorisation.
If you didn't authorise the destructive diagnosis, they are liable -- but can you prove that you didn't authorise it?
|
?Is it acceptable for a dealer to worsen a fault to investigate source of problem??
It clearly depends on the nature of the fault and whether due care was taken to minimise the damage.
Did you pay for the inspection/estimate and the work done? If you did, I think it reasonable that the mechanic should have done his best to make the roof weatherproof. If not and they diagnosed for free, then you can understand their position regarding extra unpaid work. I don't, on this occasion, sympathise with the ?it was working so it?s their liability? brigade.
We don?t know what is required to make the roof seal. Your post seems to infer that the fabric part has been damaged?perhaps an automotive trim specialist could make an acceptable repair? If the mechansim requires dismantling to fully close, what would this cost?
|
Hi
Cheers for the replies....
No, we weren't warned beforehand that to investigate the non-working roof that they would /might make it worse than before.
We were expecting to pay £68 for this investigation, however they didn't charge us for the 5 minute inspection / explanation.
I have been to a bodyshop this morning, who shook their heads and said that other than retrofitting a solid roof (at a cost of c.£2000) there was no way for them to glue down the edge of the roof to make it waterproof.
I hate the litigious society we seem to live in, but I do feel we should have been warned about any procedure which would be likely to worsen the condition of the car - whether we were charged or not is in my mind irrelevant. It is up to the main dealer whether they charge or not, but I do expect them to provide a decent / non-worsening service.
Anyway, any other comments welcome.
Cheers, James
|
I have been to a bodyshop this morning, who shook their heads and said that other than retrofitting a solid roof (at a cost of c.£2000) there was no way for them to glue down the edge of the roof to make it waterproof.
On this point. It does seem a bit limp that the bodyshop should declare it unrepairable to me.
If it was 'glued' in position intially & the dealer mechanic didn't rip or stretch the fabric out of shape, surely it's not beyond wit (esp. of 'professionals') to re-glue in some way?
Maybe worth trying a bodyshop that majors in convertibles (or Google similar locally) who are used to fabric & hood joins.
On the main point of culpability (of whatever degree), a reasonable person might expect a diagnostic exercise not to be destructive or decrease the original functionality. I'd write a letter to the dealership, detailing the story & asking for re-instatement of 'waterproofness'. Letters always stick better than verbal negotiations.
At the very least, in my view, the dealership should have made it absoutely clear that any 'investigation' would worsen the situation or make the fabric top non-weatherproof.
That at least gives you the option to decline in light of your imminent trip.
Not sure why you were expecting a £68 bill? Did they intimate this in some way before the check? If the did, then didn't charge it's quite revealing - without a bill they have more chance of avoiding subsequent liability.
Get a letter to them & a response - this will put the matter on 'paper', consider options when you get a reply. Ask for a new roof quote in the letter, this will further provide evidence of their initial 'investigation'.
|
Cheers, very helpful.
We have contacted Citroen UK who seem concerned that one of their dealers has acted like this, and are promising action within 24 hrs - I think my wife turned on the waterworks.
Good idea about a paper trail, although given the time frame maybe a bit tight for this week - but excellent idea and worth doing.
The £68 hours charge was stated when we booked the car in for the check in the first place, and yes we suspect that we weren't charged this to avoid a paper trail on their part as to what happened. And indeed the service manager I spoke to later said that as we hadn't been charged he felt that that was a sign of their good service!
I have spoken to our insurers / legal helpline who say as it isn't an accident they aren't interested at the moment.
The fabric is still attached to the frame, it is the sunroof frame which is no longer tight against the bodywork frame underneath. It isn't 'locked down' like it was, lifts in the wind and is noisy and lets in water / wind when not desired! You could continue to push the frame back while operating the motor (which is what the garage did) and actually have the roof open as normal, but you can't then close it and make it weatherproof.
So the roof now has lots of duct tape trying to hold it down, and prayers from me!
|
|
|
|
