Warranty claim?
Discussion
My boot floor lifts up via a latch to access the spare tyre well. The latch would not operate and I didn’t use any force so I went to the supplying dealer (where the car was purchased new 17months ago) and only after their mechanic used considerable force was he able open the latch.
The car is booked in for further examination this coming week but they were non committal as to whether it would be covered by the warranty.
The car came with a seven year warranty which shows an extensive list of items excluded but no mention of any latches. Would I be right to assume that given the absence of latches from excluded items then it should be covered under the warranty?
Thanks
The car is booked in for further examination this coming week but they were non committal as to whether it would be covered by the warranty.
The car came with a seven year warranty which shows an extensive list of items excluded but no mention of any latches. Would I be right to assume that given the absence of latches from excluded items then it should be covered under the warranty?
Thanks
gardeners26 said:
My boot floor lifts up via a latch to access the spare tyre well. The latch would not operate and I didn’t use any force so I went to the supplying dealer (where the car was purchased new 17months ago) and only after their mechanic used considerable force was he able open the latch.
The car is booked in for further examination this coming week but they were non committal as to whether it would be covered by the warranty.
The car came with a seven year warranty which shows an extensive list of items excluded but no mention of any latches. Would I be right to assume that given the absence of latches from excluded items then it should be covered under the warranty?
Thanks
Ask yourself why latch only used to check the ture pressures of the spare wheel, wouldn't and shouldn't last the life of the vehicle. The car is booked in for further examination this coming week but they were non committal as to whether it would be covered by the warranty.
The car came with a seven year warranty which shows an extensive list of items excluded but no mention of any latches. Would I be right to assume that given the absence of latches from excluded items then it should be covered under the warranty?
Thanks
It's not a brake pad that you'd expect to wear out.
It's a Manufacturing fault.
Once bought an 8 year old cavalier off my father in law with 19K on it, nobody had ever sat in the middle rear seat, and the first time I went to use the seat belt, it turned out the buckle was broken. Which given that the MOT must have tested it 5 times, suggests it was a Manufacturing defect. Probably. Scrap yard yielded one for £1.50
gardeners26 said:
It would only have been damaged by the mechanic using excessive force to lift the latch.
I'll update later this week.
Have you been shifting anything particularly heavy in your boot? Just wondering if the design of your boot floor would cause the latch to get jammed if heavily loaded. I'll update later this week.
I'm sure we've all shifted heavy things in the boot of a car not really suited to it, but that doesn't necessarily mean the engineers specced the boot floor for it.
donkmeister said:
Have you been shifting anything particularly heavy in your boot? Just wondering if the design of your boot floor would cause the latch to get jammed if heavily loaded.
I'm sure we've all shifted heavy things in the boot of a car not really suited to it, but that doesn't necessarily mean the engineers specced the boot floor for it.
No, never. In fact the boot floor has only been opened a couple of times since new. and the boot itself not had anything remotely heavy.I'm sure we've all shifted heavy things in the boot of a car not really suited to it, but that doesn't necessarily mean the engineers specced the boot floor for it.
Edited by gardeners26 on Monday 11th March 12:25
OverSteery said:
I would suggest you direct the dealer to a dictionary and ask them if they really wish to continue to make that statement?
Oxford English Dictionary.amongst numerous other definitions the only relevant would be "Trim, ...the upholstery or interior lining of a car..."
The dealer insists that the boot floor and latch is classified as trim. The warranty exclusion states "cosmetic trim"
The dealer refuses to use the word "cosmetic". They say the latch is part of the floor and cannot be supplied separately.
Edited by gardeners26 on Monday 11th March 17:11
Whether I go through the Motor Ombudsman scheme or a court small claim I've yet to decide - a court may expect me to apply to the former in the first instance.
I believe this will boil down to the interpretation of the exclusion clause "cosmetic trim" In that case I will rely on section 69 (1) of the Consumer Rights Act 2015, viz:
"(1)If a term in a consumer contract, or a consumer notice, could have different meanings, the meaning that is most favourable to the consumer is to prevail."
I will write to the manufacturer as they provided the warranty as well as the dealer and update once their replies are received.
In the meantime thanks for all the input.
I believe this will boil down to the interpretation of the exclusion clause "cosmetic trim" In that case I will rely on section 69 (1) of the Consumer Rights Act 2015, viz:
"(1)If a term in a consumer contract, or a consumer notice, could have different meanings, the meaning that is most favourable to the consumer is to prevail."
I will write to the manufacturer as they provided the warranty as well as the dealer and update once their replies are received.
In the meantime thanks for all the input.
gardeners26 said:
Whether I go through the Motor Ombudsman scheme or a court small claim I've yet to decide - a court may expect me to apply to the former in the first instance.
I believe this will boil down to the interpretation of the exclusion clause "cosmetic trim" In that case I will rely on section 69 (1) of the Consumer Rights Act 2015, viz:
"(1)If a term in a consumer contract, or a consumer notice, could have different meanings, the meaning that is most favourable to the consumer is to prevail."
I will write to the manufacturer as they provided the warranty as well as the dealer and update once their replies are received.
In the meantime thanks for all the input.
You obviously have knowledge of CRA 2015 so know it is entirely separate to using the warranty. I probably don't have to point that one aspect of a product being of satisfactory quality is durability, in other words how long it lasts.I believe this will boil down to the interpretation of the exclusion clause "cosmetic trim" In that case I will rely on section 69 (1) of the Consumer Rights Act 2015, viz:
"(1)If a term in a consumer contract, or a consumer notice, could have different meanings, the meaning that is most favourable to the consumer is to prevail."
I will write to the manufacturer as they provided the warranty as well as the dealer and update once their replies are received.
In the meantime thanks for all the input.
To quote from Which?
"Durability takes into account many different factors like product type, brand reputation, price point and how it is advertised. For example you're unlikely to be able to claim a cheap kettle that's stopped working after four years isn't durable. Whereas a more premium and expensive kettle that's been well looked after and has stopped working after 14 months could be considered to not be durable, and therefore not of satisfactory quality."
I think they would have a hard job arguing a boot latch whch fails to work after 17 months exhibits the durability you would expect.
mcpoot said:
I think they would have a hard job arguing a boot latch whch fails to work after 17 months exhibits the durability you would expect.
They should have an even harder job arguing that a mechanism hidden in the boot, to facilitate to the lifting of the floor to provide access to the spare wheel, is "cosmetic trim"!gardeners26 said:
Whether I go through the Motor Ombudsman scheme or a court small claim I've yet to decide - a court may expect me to apply to the former in the first instance.
They would expect you to have gone through the dealers formal complaints process in the first instance.Who made the decision at the dealer? Possibly this dealer isn't very big but my experience in bigger places is they use a warranty clerk who basically say no to everything that isn't completely black and white. The usual dril is they have a to make a decison and then submit it, so if it gets rejected by the manufacturer then the dealer has to pick up the bill.
If you can get hold of the service manager (in bigger places they'll have often be grandly called "After Sales Director") they are ususally more sensible. Even if it's still contentious they usually have a goodwill budget they can use.
What ballocks is this? I've just been down at the Leyland Daf warranty returns department, and a truck bed came in. 2 wooden slats have been broken by a erm...using it.
You want the haulier to buy more trucks ? You give him the benefit of the doubt. No. The trucker wasn't using it for trampolining. Honest.
You want the haulier to buy more trucks ? You give him the benefit of the doubt. No. The trucker wasn't using it for trampolining. Honest.
It should be covered under the warranty, but so should something like the roof lining falling off which is primarily cosmetic.
However, as others have said, if the stealer is playing silly games about what is and isn't in warranty in a less than 2 year old car, just hit them straight away with a consumer rights act letter. This formally notifies them of the fault and tells them they are required in law to repair or replace the car (plenty of templates available online). Check up how the dealer is structured - if its a large group this may need to go to HQ rather than where you got the car from to get noticed for what it is.
If they don't reply within the required time (most templates suggest 14 days for a simple issue), as well as sending the follow up letter start to give them some bad publicity - most dealers and manufacturers have a Facebook page etc. and there's always the chance of a sadface Daily Wail story if you want one.
It's also worth separately (right now) starting a complaint about the particular dealer with the manufacturer. The manufacturer won't want their name turned into mud over a dealer refusing to fix a simple latch on the spare wheel well......
However, as others have said, if the stealer is playing silly games about what is and isn't in warranty in a less than 2 year old car, just hit them straight away with a consumer rights act letter. This formally notifies them of the fault and tells them they are required in law to repair or replace the car (plenty of templates available online). Check up how the dealer is structured - if its a large group this may need to go to HQ rather than where you got the car from to get noticed for what it is.
If they don't reply within the required time (most templates suggest 14 days for a simple issue), as well as sending the follow up letter start to give them some bad publicity - most dealers and manufacturers have a Facebook page etc. and there's always the chance of a sadface Daily Wail story if you want one.
It's also worth separately (right now) starting a complaint about the particular dealer with the manufacturer. The manufacturer won't want their name turned into mud over a dealer refusing to fix a simple latch on the spare wheel well......
Forums | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff