Lease car return standards- uneven wear on tyres

[FWIW]

Would appreciate thoughts on this.
VRS has gone back to Skoda and they want £270 for the rear tyres due to uneven wear.

"The BVRLA believes the photos show evidence that the outside edges are worn to the wear bars, which appear to be worn to a greater degree than the inner wear bars."

I can't see any unusual uneven wear. Yes, they're shot...but they're legal.




Is it worth fighting?

[iphonedyou]

On the basis they look shot, and you admitted they were shot, I'd imagine they could easily have got you to replace the tyres because they're, well, shot. So probably not.

What's the tread minimum for return in your agreement? Is there a stated level?

If they're legal, they're just legal. Suppose lease companies must see a lot of this.

[fatboy b]

I personally wouldn't drive a car with tyres like that, even though they may be just legal.

[jjr1]

No uneven wear, so I would definitely fight that.

If they have sufficient tread depth as stated in the lease agreement, I would tell them to foxtrot off.

[Jasandjules]

I may need to go back to a certain store that sells lenses and frames, but they don't look like they have worn unevenly to me. If they have it is fractional.

[maffski]

Don't thing they're talking about uneven wear between the two tyres, rather wear over the surface of the tyre.

The first picture looks, to me, like you have a bit (not much) of wear left on the inner section of the tyre but the outer is at the indicator.

[Dog Star]

To be honest OP handing a car back with tyres so worn was never going to fly - they're totally done.

[FWIW]

Thanks for the replies!
I agree they need changing and if I was keeping the car obviously I would change them. But...they are legal and vwfs are not disputing that. They want to charge me on the basis of uneven wear which is perhaps subjective? All tyres must have uneven wear to a greater or lesser degree...if you're going to get your micrometer out!

[jon-]

Check the agreement. They need to be above 1.6mm across the centre 75% to be legal.

[Sheepshanks]

FWIW said:

"The BVRLA believes...

Where does that phrase come from - have you queried this already and they've gone to the BVRLA for an opinion?

What happens if you just keep telling them to get stuffed? My brother, who is anal about looking after cars, had a leased Golf and was sent a completely trumped up bill for repairs for a few hundred quid. He told them to sod off and never heard any more. VWFS are legendary for this.

[FWIW]

Yes, that is from the bvrla conciliation service.

The tyres are absolutely legal and over 1.6mm across 100% of the width (just). I checked this with a depth gauge as did the inspector and the collection driver. Neither said they were illegal.

[rallycross]

You should have put a couple of second hand tyres on before you handed it back spending £50 would have saved you £270 sending it back with such worn tyres was never going to work.

[Sheepshanks]

FWIW said:

Yes, that is from the bvrla conciliation service.

The tyres are absolutely legal and over 1.6mm across 100% of the width (just). I checked this with a depth gauge as did the inspector and the collection driver. Neither said they were illegal.

Well, it does say that they should be worn evenly.

I guess you could ask what the spec for "even" is. Your tyres are so worn even if they were even they'd still need replacing before the car could be retailed.

I don't see a problem with this though - you wouldn't get the car serviced if it still had 1000 miles to run.

[jjr1]

Looking at them again I just can't see how they are uneven........

They are just miffed because they need replacing very soon and you have got as close to the limit as possible.

Just keep disputing it !

[Sheepshanks]

jjr1 said:

Looking at them again I just can't see how they are uneven........

It's pretty obvious on the first picture - it's flush to the TWI (usually set at 2mm, so could measure less) on the right and I would guess the one on the left would measure at least 3mm and maybe even 4mm.

It's a right pain getting tyres on leased car changed where they're included in the contract - you can go in with tyres that you think are shot and they'll measure then at 3mm and the lease company won't change them.

[essayer]

Why do you have to replace tyres which aren't worn beyond the legal or contractual limit?

[FWIW]

kapiteinlangzaam said:

Whats the contractual legal limit for min. depth on return?

1.6mm, 2mm, 2.5mm?

Is there anything in the guidelines surrounding 'uneven' wear?

Your answer will be in the contract that you signed.

FWIW: These things can be worth fighting - I had nearly 600gbp worth of 'fees' removed from my last lease car return as they were taking the piss and I wasnt willing to roll over and accept it.

The contract basically repeats mot standards (1.6mm over 75%) but also mentions uneven wear, although isn't specific on this point other than due to over or under inflation
It's the bvrla FW&T standard that needs to be complied with, aiui:

Edited by FWIW on Wednesday 27th April 07:07

[FWIW]

So they appear to be saying the tyres have been over inflated.

[durl]|http://thumbsnap.com/58n94ZTz[/url]

I.e. The centre of the tread is worn more than the sides. That's certainly not true in the first pic and doesn't appear to be evident in the second.

The fight is on.

[Sheepshanks]

FWIW said:

..mentions uneven wear, although isn't specific on this point other than due to over or under inflation

It's really odd they've been specific on those causes of uneven wear - you'd think they'd be more concerned about alignment / suspension damage etc.

[V8RX7]

FWIW said:

"the outside edges are worn to the wear bars, which appear to be worn to a greater degree than the inner wear bars."

If you look at the pic that part of the statement is technically true - they are slightly more worn - so what ?

That's as even tyre wear as you could hope for - I'd fight it.