See post - Dealership failings and liabilities - motco

I am conscious that this is a public forum and do not want to prejudice any future actions by being too specific about make and model - it's not relevant to the question anyway.

A car belonging to a member of my family was involved in a minor damage-only accident requiring it to be repaired at the other driver's insurance company's expense. The bodyshop specified was not a marque specific company so it was decided that it should go to a main dealer's bodyshop instead. The repairs, involving cooling system draining, were carried out and the car returned a day before the owner was due to travel to the continent on holiday in the car.

After a few hundred miles the valvegear started to become noisy. On arrival at the destination a local dealership found that one or more cam lobes were worn and damaged; new camshafts and followers were needed. This was impossible in the place where the car was located so either repatriation or a gentle drive home were the choice.

The car was driven home maintaining sub-3000 revs and the noise did not worsen significantly. A local independent dealer expert in the marque looked at the engine and agreed that new cams and followers were required. Due to a world-wide shortage of the followers the repairs were not started for several weeks after the trip and, therefore, after the body shop work.

At this point there was no reason to link the body shop with the engine problem. When the independent workshop drained the cooling system to carry out the work they discovered that "only about a cupful" was in the engine. No evidence of external leakage was found nor any of coolant in the oil - the expansion tank was still full which meant that the low-coolant warning system had not tripped. A massive airlock in the cooling system had allowed the engine oil to overheat to the point of degradation thus leading to camshaft damage.

The independent workshop recommends that the big end bearings are examined for shell damage whilst the car is in the workshop. The bill for all this work might easily top £3,000 and my family member is understandably aggrieved. How, with the difficulty of proof and the elapsed time between the body shop removing the radiator and the ultimate diagnosis, can we proceed to obtain recompense for the loss?

Edited by Avant on 25/10/2011 at 00:20

See post - Dealership failings and liabilities - focussed

I would have thought that camshaft and follower damage is of a minor consideration if the car has been driven with only a cupful of coolant in the engine. Something's not adding up here-are you sure this is the complete story? For instance, how much oil remained in the engine after driving back from the continent?

See post - Dealership failings and liabilities - motco

The oil level warning lights did not show an oil shortage and I agree that cam and followers are minor comparatively despite there being 24 followers at £22 per piece. The big end bearings will be examined before it leaves the workshop. I do not believe that the coolant fluid was as low for most of the trip as it was on arrival back; it probably was being driven out over a long period. The bodyshop now says they did not drain the cooling system although their estimate document says they would. Apparently the estimate is a worse case forecast so that they don't have to go back to the insurers with cap in hand for more money. In fact the damage was more minor than it might have been once they'd dropped the front apron off and rad removal was unneccessary. This is borne out by the parts listing on the invoice showing no anti-freeze charge. If this is indeed the case then they are not implicated unless the rad was damaged by the accident and they didn't spot it. Facts, accurate ones, are hard to come by it would appear... Thanks for your interest; I'll update as I learn more but this now probably deserves to be in 'Technical Matters'