Watchdog Tonight
Discussion
Just seen on Twitter:
"Drive a diesel car manufactured in 2009 or after? Don't miss our report, tonight at 8pm, BBC One."
So what aspect of Diesel cars could Watchdog be poking their noses into? DPFs?
No doubt it'll be a wonderfully miss-informed article with Ginger Anne interviewing somebody in the studio, not allowing them to get a word in, and then moaning because they haven't answered her question!
"Drive a diesel car manufactured in 2009 or after? Don't miss our report, tonight at 8pm, BBC One."
So what aspect of Diesel cars could Watchdog be poking their noses into? DPFs?
No doubt it'll be a wonderfully miss-informed article with Ginger Anne interviewing somebody in the studio, not allowing them to get a word in, and then moaning because they haven't answered her question!
Dr Interceptor said:
No doubt it'll be a wonderfully miss-informed article with Ginger Anne interviewing somebody in the studio, not allowing them to get a word in, and then moaning because they haven't answered her question!
I must confess that I do like the Watchdog / Rogue Traders type programmes, including Cowboy Builders one with that cockney hobbit in it.In many cases, I find myself sypathising with the interviewee/rogue/cowboy, as they are subjected to little more than playground bullying and name calling by the presenters who inevitably will use their TV platform to get their final dig in after the camera has finished rolling on the interviewee.
mat205125 said:
I must confess that I do like the Watchdog / Rogue Traders type programmes, including Cowboy Builders one with that cockney hobbit in it.
Dom Littlewood? - with the blonde Messinger there to talk local businesses into 'donating' all the materials to fund their TV show 
Be interesting to hear what Watchdog say tonight... In fairness though, who examines a cars service schedule and future costs before buying?
mat205125 said:
Dr Interceptor said:
No doubt it'll be a wonderfully miss-informed article with Ginger Anne interviewing somebody in the studio, not allowing them to get a word in, and then moaning because they haven't answered her question!
I must confess that I do like the Watchdog / Rogue Traders type programmes, including Cowboy Builders one with that cockney hobbit in it.In many cases, I find myself sypathising with the interviewee/rogue/cowboy, as they are subjected to little more than playground bullying and name calling by the presenters who inevitably will use their TV platform to get their final dig in after the camera has finished rolling on the interviewee.
I couldn't agree more.LeoSayer said:
It's got to be DPFs.
I'm sure we'll hear the word 'misselling' at some point.
To right, DPF were brought in to get past the Euro 5 emissions rules which began n 2009. I'm sure we'll hear the word 'misselling' at some point.
I guess it's going to focus on people who do mainly urban driving or never go over 2000rpm and as a result have had to spend £1000 or more having the DPF replaced whilst others who have used the system and give the engine a good work out are being faced with £2-300 bills to refill the system with the additives it requires.
Either way WD will attempt to argue that you shouldn't have to spend money on a new car and it should be included in the warranty.
dave
One episode of Watchdog a few weeks ago tried to trap a garage over engine rebuilds. They broke a VW Polo engine (or was it a golf?) and the garage they used repaired the engine for a cost of around £1400.00 - car was handed back in working order.
The issue was the way the garage 'described' the work they had done. This is an easy mistake to make. A slip of the tounge or being over familar with the use of an unsuitable term are both reasonable excuses for making this mistake. What they should have called their work was a 'repair' - "an engine repair". What they actually called their work was a 'rebuild' - "an engine rebuild"
The price they charged was for a repair. A rebuild typically costs around £2500.00
So they charged the right price and they did a fair job. Just that they described it wrong. TBH I felt Watchdog were being unfair under these circumstances.
The issue was the way the garage 'described' the work they had done. This is an easy mistake to make. A slip of the tounge or being over familar with the use of an unsuitable term are both reasonable excuses for making this mistake. What they should have called their work was a 'repair' - "an engine repair". What they actually called their work was a 'rebuild' - "an engine rebuild"
The price they charged was for a repair. A rebuild typically costs around £2500.00
So they charged the right price and they did a fair job. Just that they described it wrong. TBH I felt Watchdog were being unfair under these circumstances.
ejenner said:
One episode of Watchdog a few weeks ago tried to trap a garage over engine rebuilds. They broke a VW Polo engine (or was it a golf?) and the garage they used repaired the engine for a cost of around £1400.00 - car was handed back in working order.
The issue was the way the garage 'described' the work they had done. This is an easy mistake to make. A slip of the tounge or being over familar with the use of an unsuitable term are both reasonable excuses for making this mistake. What they should have called their work was a 'repair' - "an engine repair". What they actually called their work was a 'rebuild' - "an engine rebuild"
The price they charged was for a repair. A rebuild typically costs around £2500.00
So they charged the right price and they did a fair job. Just that they described it wrong. TBH I felt Watchdog were being unfair under these circumstances.
...and to be fair you could argue there is a fair amount of rebuilding required in any engine repair The issue was the way the garage 'described' the work they had done. This is an easy mistake to make. A slip of the tounge or being over familar with the use of an unsuitable term are both reasonable excuses for making this mistake. What they should have called their work was a 'repair' - "an engine repair". What they actually called their work was a 'rebuild' - "an engine rebuild"
The price they charged was for a repair. A rebuild typically costs around £2500.00
So they charged the right price and they did a fair job. Just that they described it wrong. TBH I felt Watchdog were being unfair under these circumstances.
aka_kerrly said:
LeoSayer said:
It's got to be DPFs.
I'm sure we'll hear the word 'misselling' at some point.
To right, DPF were brought in to get past the Euro 5 emissions rules which began n 2009. I'm sure we'll hear the word 'misselling' at some point.
I guess it's going to focus on people who do mainly urban driving or never go over 2000rpm and as a result have had to spend £1000 or more having the DPF replaced whilst others who have used the system and give the engine a good work out are being faced with £2-300 bills to refill the system with the additives it requires.
Either way WD will attempt to argue that you shouldn't have to spend money on a new car and it should be included in the warranty.
dave
Absolutely scandalous!
Next week they are keel hauling the MD of Goodyear for having the cheek to sell tyres that cost hundreds per set, however are only likely to last the average user 12 to 18 months.
Annie will emphasise how unreasonable this product durability is by directly comparing the "identical" industry of clay brick manufacturers ...... "You wouldn't want to buy a house where all of the bricks needed to be replaced every other year, would you? CHARLATAN!!!!!"
ejenner said:
One episode of Watchdog a few weeks ago tried to trap a garage over engine rebuilds. They broke a VW Polo engine (or was it a golf?) and the garage they used repaired the engine for a cost of around £1400.00 - car was handed back in working order.
The issue was the way the garage 'described' the work they had done. This is an easy mistake to make. A slip of the tounge or being over familar with the use of an unsuitable term are both reasonable excuses for making this mistake. What they should have called their work was a 'repair' - "an engine repair". What they actually called their work was a 'rebuild' - "an engine rebuild"
The price they charged was for a repair. A rebuild typically costs around £2500.00
So they charged the right price and they did a fair job. Just that they described it wrong. TBH I felt Watchdog were being unfair under these circumstances.
That said, putting the wrong piston in it was never going to be ideal and the film of the so called mechanics at work was "keystone cops" material. The issue was the way the garage 'described' the work they had done. This is an easy mistake to make. A slip of the tounge or being over familar with the use of an unsuitable term are both reasonable excuses for making this mistake. What they should have called their work was a 'repair' - "an engine repair". What they actually called their work was a 'rebuild' - "an engine rebuild"
The price they charged was for a repair. A rebuild typically costs around £2500.00
So they charged the right price and they did a fair job. Just that they described it wrong. TBH I felt Watchdog were being unfair under these circumstances.
Isn't the real issue with most things on cars, regardless of how something may be done badly or advice is given with profit in the mind of the advisor, that despite them being one of the most expensive things the majority of folk own very few of them take the time to look after or learn about the basic elements of it's operation.
It had to work for 12 months or 12,000 miles and if it couldn't manage that then the customer would have been back to them to have it sorted out.
Additionally, as well as misusing the term 'rebuild' they are guilty of not explaining the difference to the customer. They should have given the customer two options. A repair or a rebuild and explained to the customer which was which, what they should expect and what sort of guarantee comes with each option.
Additionally, as well as misusing the term 'rebuild' they are guilty of not explaining the difference to the customer. They should have given the customer two options. A repair or a rebuild and explained to the customer which was which, what they should expect and what sort of guarantee comes with each option.
ejenner said:
One episode of Watchdog a few weeks ago tried to trap a garage over engine rebuilds. They broke a VW Polo engine (or was it a golf?) and the garage they used repaired the engine for a cost of around £1400.00 - car was handed back in working order.
The issue was the way the garage 'described' the work they had done. This is an easy mistake to make. A slip of the tounge or being over familar with the use of an unsuitable term are both reasonable excuses for making this mistake. What they should have called their work was a 'repair' - "an engine repair". What they actually called their work was a 'rebuild' - "an engine rebuild"
The price they charged was for a repair. A rebuild typically costs around £2500.00
So they charged the right price and they did a fair job. Just that they described it wrong. TBH I felt Watchdog were being unfair under these circumstances.
I thought the issue with this was they were quoted for a reconditioned engine yet recieved their own engine back repaired (to a questionable level)The issue was the way the garage 'described' the work they had done. This is an easy mistake to make. A slip of the tounge or being over familar with the use of an unsuitable term are both reasonable excuses for making this mistake. What they should have called their work was a 'repair' - "an engine repair". What they actually called their work was a 'rebuild' - "an engine rebuild"
The price they charged was for a repair. A rebuild typically costs around £2500.00
So they charged the right price and they did a fair job. Just that they described it wrong. TBH I felt Watchdog were being unfair under these circumstances.
tbh their own repair to 'catch out' the garage was very difficult to follow - the one earlier who were sold a swap of their fubar engine for a reconditioned one, yet recieved their own one back repaired had a more justified complaint.
mat205125 said:
Absolutely scandalous!
Next week they are keel hauling the MD of Goodyear for having the cheek to sell tyres that cost hundreds per set, however are only likely to last the average user 12 to 18 months.
Annie will emphasise how unreasonable this product durability is by directly comparing the "identical" industry of clay brick manufacturers ...... "You wouldn't want to buy a house where all of the bricks needed to be replaced every other year, would you? CHARLATAN!!!!!"
aka_kerrly said:
To right, DPF were brought in to get past the Euro 5 emissions rules which began n 2009.
I guess it's going to focus on people who do mainly urban driving or never go over 2000rpm and as a result have had to spend £1000 or more having the DPF replaced whilst others who have used the system and give the engine a good work out are being faced with £2-300 bills to refill the system with the additives it requires.
Either way WD will attempt to argue that you shouldn't have to spend money on a new car and it should be included in the warranty.
dave
Average joe shouldn't be expected to give their new car a 'good wack' every now and then to ensure it runs properly. Thats a piss poor excuse for a system that was designed in a half arsed fashion.I guess it's going to focus on people who do mainly urban driving or never go over 2000rpm and as a result have had to spend £1000 or more having the DPF replaced whilst others who have used the system and give the engine a good work out are being faced with £2-300 bills to refill the system with the additives it requires.
Either way WD will attempt to argue that you shouldn't have to spend money on a new car and it should be included in the warranty.
dave
What's the betting that the owners will all be school mums, who bought a diesel to save themselves some money with ever increasing fuel costs blah blah blah... Who:
A) Didn't really look into what they were buying
B) only do 5 miles a day, to drop the kids off at school and get their nails done
C) And have now been stung with a repair bill because their DPF didn't stand a chance
ETA: It'll be interesting to see which manufacturer sticks their head over the fence to defend it, as all manufacturers are suffering similar issues with early DPF equipped cars, or will it just be someone from the SMMT?
A) Didn't really look into what they were buying
B) only do 5 miles a day, to drop the kids off at school and get their nails done
C) And have now been stung with a repair bill because their DPF didn't stand a chance
ETA: It'll be interesting to see which manufacturer sticks their head over the fence to defend it, as all manufacturers are suffering similar issues with early DPF equipped cars, or will it just be someone from the SMMT?
It's a myth that giving it a good whack on the motorway every now and then sorts them out.
I did 140 miles Monday - Friday from North Manchester to North Wales (M60 - M62 - M56) for two years in a Vauxhall Zafira in which time it needed 6 repair jobs on a combination of EGR valve / DPF / ECU. You could almost set your clock to when either of them was going to break.
I did 140 miles Monday - Friday from North Manchester to North Wales (M60 - M62 - M56) for two years in a Vauxhall Zafira in which time it needed 6 repair jobs on a combination of EGR valve / DPF / ECU. You could almost set your clock to when either of them was going to break.
Superhoop said:
What's the betting that the owners will all be school mums, who bought a diesel to save themselves some money with ever increasing fuel costs blah blah blah... Who:
A) Didn't really look into what they were buying
B) only do 5 miles a day, to drop the kids off at school and get their nails done
C) And have now been stung with a repair bill because their DPF didn't stand a chance
ETA: It'll be interesting to see which manufacturer sticks their head over the fence to defend it, as all manufacturers are suffering similar issues with early DPF equipped cars, or will it just be someone from the SMMT?
Yes, because Watchdog will give them the chance to defend their position won't they?A) Didn't really look into what they were buying
B) only do 5 miles a day, to drop the kids off at school and get their nails done
C) And have now been stung with a repair bill because their DPF didn't stand a chance
ETA: It'll be interesting to see which manufacturer sticks their head over the fence to defend it, as all manufacturers are suffering similar issues with early DPF equipped cars, or will it just be someone from the SMMT?
Watchdog said:
These school mums bought their oversized off roaders (for safety reasons of course) under the impression they were saving money and doing good for the economy/environment - they were told by the manufacturer that the car will do elevnty-million miles to the gallon and save baby seals from being clubbed to death by vagrant 3rd world dictators - how can you defend yourself you evil car manufacturer?
BMW or Whoever said:
But we stated that.....
Watchdog said:
So you admit that you deliberately misled these poor, innocent, well meaning, earth loving, planet saving parents
BMW or Whoever said:
No, our figures clearly stated that.....
Watchdog said:
So you DO admit that your figures were massaged
BMW or Whoever said:
If you would let me finish what I'm saying, what I was trying to say before you rudely interrupte me
Watchdog said:
Oh, have I hit a nerve? You make these cars, charging thousands for technology that doesn't work and rip off these poor parents
BMW or Whoever said:
That's not what I'm trying to say, if they used the cars properly ensuring they get a proper run, then....
Watchdog said:
Oh, so now you're calling the buyers stupid then?
BMW or Whoever said:
No, again, that's not what I said - you know what, you're clearly going to either ignore what I'm saying, edit everything to make me look like the devil incarnate or twist my every word - screw you, I'm off
Watchdog said:
And there you have it viewer, proof that motor manufacturers only want your money and think you're an idiot
Cynical? Me?Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff