I bought a full set of tyres from a well known company. When I got home (probaby 0.2 mile) I had a look at the tyres and one of them had a split of about 2cms on the side wall.
So the next morning I went straight back to the dealer and he said it is their company policy to sell the customer another tyre and send the defective tyre back to the supplier for inspection. If the inspection reveals it was a manufacturing fault then I would be reimbursed. It is obvious that the split was there from the start. I wish I had checked while I was still there.
I can see how this is often a sensible policy but as it was clear the tyres had barely been used this seems mad and inflexible. And what is to stop them saying I kerbed it and not reimburse me?
I'm speaking to him tomorrow by which time he will have found out from his boss what they "can do".
Any suggesions as to how I deal with this if he insists I buy another tyre and wait for refund? It seems an unfair policy to apply to everyone.
Thanks.
|
IIRC, the obligation is on them to prove that the tyre was on merchantable quality when they sold it to you. So unless they took photos of it, I would say that the law is clearly on your side, and that you should be giving trading standards a ring to ask their advice.
PS - this is a suggestion dredged up from memory, and may be completely wrong. Suffice to say if this happened to me I wouldn't be leaving the tyre place without one hell of a strop, which would shortly be followed up with a call to my credit card company.
|
|
|
Difficult one as the tyre depot would be stuck with a tyre that had no value if the manufacturer said it had indeed been kerbed etc..........
As far as i am aware all the big boys practise this sending back procedure..........
Any tyres i order at work (from the wholeseller) have to be signed for at point of delivery as good and i would also find it near impossible to return one with a cut in the sidewall if i found one after this time I think they would send it back to the manufacturers and insist i paid for another in the meantime.
|
Thanks for the replies. I think the tyre was as likely to have been damaged when fitting - hopefully the manufacturer will be abe to determine this.
I am not happy driving with this tyre so I think I will pay for another one if they insist and pursue through my credit card company if they refuse to reimburse me. I don't see what choice I have when I need to use the car.
|
Thanks for the replies. I think the tyre was as likely to have been damaged when fitting - hopefully the manufacturer will be abe to determine this.
It's a bit alarming that a 'well known company' has a fitter who is damaging tyres - perhaps they should recall every tyre he's fitted?
|
|
|
If the tyre had been kerbed/abused after fitting there would be more than just a split in it. There would be peripheral damage around the split with evidence of scrape marks, concrete dust or whatever.
If there is none then clearly the tyre was defective at point of sale.
It would seem to be industry procedure in respect of warranty claims of a DIY nature for the customer to purchase new and the old part to be sent for inspection perhaps to frustrate those who are 'trying it on'.
However if the tyre was defective at point of sale then I would suggest that it falls within the Sale of Goods Act - fit for purpose etc. etc. A discussion on the lines of "Is it your policy to fit defective and potentially dangerous tyres to vehicles?" should get them on your wavelength!
Any tyre fitter worth their salt should check for the fit of the tyre and any obvious manufacturing defects whilst fitting and balancing.
Hindsight, I know, but I would have rung them immediatly I found the damage rather than leaving it until the next day.
--
Fullchat
|
|
|
|
|
This does sound very annoying.
Trying to be devil's advocate.
1. We only have your word you drove 0.2 miles before discovering the split.
2. Why did you wait till the next day before contacting the company?
3. You could have caught a piece of glass or a kerb since fitting.
4. We do have a strict company policy that involves you buying a new tyre and the damaged tyre is then returned to the manufacturer for inspection.
5. When we fit tyres we check them and would not have fitted a damaged tyre.
On the other hand.
A. If the split had been under the car I would never have seen it.
B. I never hit the kerb or saw any brocken glass.
C. I could not contact you sooner as you were closing when I left your premises (my assumption).
D. You had a damaged tyre in stock and decided to fit it as you would have lost its value otherwise.
There are probably several other comments that can be added to each side of the argument.
Personally I would do as already stated and contact Trading Standards to see what they say. Also listen to what the tyre company manager has to say and politely demand recompense for wasted time and providing faulty tyre, if need be make sure every potential customer coming in knows of your grievence. Do keep a record of your actions and conversations as this may be useful if it ever went legal as the tyre company would have difficulty disputing your version if they have no records. If you still do not get satisfaction then there is no harm when you credit card statement arrives (assuming you used a CC) and questioning the transaction as this will cause them extra hastle in sortng out.
Hope this helps.
--
Roger
I read frequently, but only post when I have something useful to say.
|
You are right, I cannot prove I only drove 0.2 miles (the fitter lazily asked me the mileage and I gave an approximate one). If they had looked, most of the sticky tyre label was still on them.
What annoys me was his attitude saying that I could have driven a long distance or hit something when you could tell the tyres were barely dirty.
By the time I had inspected them the depot was closed and I was in there by 9.30 the next morning.
|
If the tyre had a cut in excess of 25mm or 10% of the section of the width of the tyre whatever the greater and measured in any direction on the outside of the tyre and deep enough to reach the ply/cords, then it would be illegal to use on a road.
(Reg 27 Con and Use regs 1984.)
Under Road Traffic Act 198 8 Section:
76.?(1) If any person?
(a) fits a vehicle part to a vehicle, or
(b) causes or permits a vehicle part to be fitted to a vehicle,
in such circumstances that the use of the vehicle on a road would, by reason of that part being fitted to the vehicle, constitute a contravention of or failure to comply with any of the construction and use requirements, he is guilty of an offence.
But the whole crux of this is what was the state of the tyre when fitted and vehicle first driven out on the road. To prove one would need to have ones own examination made by a tyre expert at ones own cost. I understand it is the tyre federation that will conduct their own examination in such cases and report back. Such an examination cannot be independent. One can see immediately some difficulty.
As stated before have a word with Trading Standards.
dvd
|
|
What are you tryng to prove by quoting all the rules and regulations?It has no relevance at all
|
What are you tryng to prove by quoting all the rules and regulations?It has no relevance at all
Of course it does. To use a defective tyre on the road is against the law, of which DVD is pointing out and could have been overlooked by the OP in the heat of the moment whilst in dispute with the supplier.
DVD is a well respected member of this forum, and not only knows what he is talking about, but has helped many many people.
|
>>DVD is a well respected member of this forum
Totally agree.
--
Roger
I read frequently, but only post when I have something useful to say.
|
|
|
|
With 20/20 hindsight, photo, photo and photo. Kerb damage would show as bruise marks and possible rim damage. Be firm about the mileage.
Don't buy another tyre from the supplier, reject the damaged tyre and contact your credit card company as suggested by others. Do VOSA know that the establishment is selling dangerous tyres...?
|
Thanks for all of these replies.
My problem with not buying another tyre (if that is what they insist) is that I must use my car this week and am unhappy driving it in the current condition. I don't think that should jeopordise any case against them as I have little alternative if I want to stay safe and legal.
|
Without wishing to take their side.
I don't think you can prove the tyre was in a defective condition when fitted or sold to you.
As such I believe they are taking a correct business approach to sorting the matter.
However, if you are totally sure the damage was not caused by you in anyway then I would advise the company (in writing) that you are paying by credit card for a replacement to get the backing of the credit card company, and that you expect a swift written report from the manufacturer. Also add that you are not paying the bill of the tyre to the credit card company and will expect (or will take further action) to be reimbursed fully including any interest incurred (if) the claim is not upheld. Give them a sensible time limit accordingly and write to your credit card company too.
Also, try to negotiate a lower price on the replacement, encourage them to show goodwill in attempting to sort out a messy problem, to stop you going elsewhere when purchasing next set of tyres.
|
|
@robcars - I think that sounds like good advice. If I produce a letter when paying for the replacement (if that's what they insist) then at least I have documented my intentions. I will also write to their customer services to explain the situation.
|
|
I wouldn't put too much weight on the manufacturer's inspection being of any help, - of course they will say it's not a manufacturing defect, it was caused by an impact with a sharp object. You need to be suggesting this now, and claiming that this impact with a sharp object ocurred prior to you driving home. If you don't agree with what manufacturer will be saying in due course, it will look like they are siding with the fitters/sellers, and you will be outnumbered.
|
|
That is what worries me. The manufacturer can say what they want. I have taken photgraphs of it and it doesn't even look like it has been 'cut' - it looks more like a split (if that makes sense). I think the Trading Standards approach may also be needed but until I am sure they are going to insist on me paying for a new one, I'm holding off doing that. The time for the promised phone call today has now passed...
|
To give an update on this. The manager has come back to me and said they will do a straight exchange for the tyre (I didn't even need to threaten them with Trading Standards!). So, assuming they don't delay ordering the tyre in for me, that should be the issue resolved. I made my feelings clear when I first returned to the depot without *absolutely* blowing my top so maybe that approach worked.
I have learnt never to take for granted that works done on my car have been completed to a satisfactory standard and not to leave a garage without giving any work the once-over. You might look like a bit of fussy customer but it saves a lot of time, hassle and worry if you inspect things before leaving the garage.
Thanks for the advice given. I felt much more informed about what I should do if they had been difficult and I expect the knowledge will also come in useful in the future.
|
|
|
|
|
Always pay by credit card, the guarantee is then the responsibility of the credit card company. We had the drive done a few years back and there were some faults, the drive company promised to come and sort it but never did. I had paid £4,000 of the total on card and was advised by a mate to ring the card Co a ring. Bingo, the drive was done within 2 days and I got £ 250 from the credid Co for ''my trouble''. Apparently the credit card company will spend mega bucks on the legal side and they carry a lot of wieght.
|
|
Credit card co's don't spend mega bucks on legals, they simply take the money back from the vendor, assuming of course, that it hasn't been done through a 3rd party.
|
|
|
|
