992 Turbo S issues-Right to reject
Discussion
GRD_72 said:
GT4RS said:
You may think that, but it’s not your £200k stuck in a lemon!
If a warning light coming on for the second time qualifies a car as a lemon then I’ve owned & enjoyed loads of lemons. OP, I’ve read your posts a few times and tried to see this from both sides but I think you are being unreasonable.
You haven’t had the 2nd fault identified; just because the message is the same doesn’t mean it’s exactly the same fault. This message could lead to hundreds of different fault codes/errors and would mean Porsche don’t need to honour you request to return if the fault is proven to be different than the first.
The fact the fault did not reoccur immediately car after initial repair supports this.
The fault hasn’t stopped you using the car, limited functionality, safety or put you at any risk so difficult to understand your intentions to return.
You haven’t tried to book in at any other dealers, but instead seem to want to use your home dealers slow response as collateral towards your intention to reject early.
You don’t want to contact HQ as you don’t want to damage the relationship with the Home Dealer, but you want to return a car you’ve used considerably for 5 months as it’s had a warning light on the dash twice?
You need to visit a factory and appreciate how complex these machines are and the technology behind them, you cannot refer to them as a product that should ‘just work without fail’. It is not a hairdryer.
If you buy a new TV and the batteries go flat on the remote twice in 5 months, do you storm back to John Lewis and demand a full refund? Porsche undoubtably make some great cars but like all machines they go wrong, regardless of age and mileage.
If you ever find a vehicle manufacturer who can 100% guarantee their product will never fail, you need to put them in touch with the aviation sector as they spend billions on new aircraft and believe it or not, they still go wrong!
Given your history with returning other nearly new high end cars I would suggest you may have other reasons to return the car.
You haven’t had the 2nd fault identified; just because the message is the same doesn’t mean it’s exactly the same fault. This message could lead to hundreds of different fault codes/errors and would mean Porsche don’t need to honour you request to return if the fault is proven to be different than the first.
The fact the fault did not reoccur immediately car after initial repair supports this.
The fault hasn’t stopped you using the car, limited functionality, safety or put you at any risk so difficult to understand your intentions to return.
You haven’t tried to book in at any other dealers, but instead seem to want to use your home dealers slow response as collateral towards your intention to reject early.
You don’t want to contact HQ as you don’t want to damage the relationship with the Home Dealer, but you want to return a car you’ve used considerably for 5 months as it’s had a warning light on the dash twice?
You need to visit a factory and appreciate how complex these machines are and the technology behind them, you cannot refer to them as a product that should ‘just work without fail’. It is not a hairdryer.
If you buy a new TV and the batteries go flat on the remote twice in 5 months, do you storm back to John Lewis and demand a full refund? Porsche undoubtably make some great cars but like all machines they go wrong, regardless of age and mileage.
If you ever find a vehicle manufacturer who can 100% guarantee their product will never fail, you need to put them in touch with the aviation sector as they spend billions on new aircraft and believe it or not, they still go wrong!
Given your history with returning other nearly new high end cars I would suggest you may have other reasons to return the car.
This thread certainly divides opinions, but my own thoughts do closely align with the post above.
I was in a situation where I had a valid non-merchantable quality / rejection claim - believe it or not on a 964 C2 in 1991 - when values had also dropped, but decided to work with the dealer to get it resolved, which it was.
30+ years and many Porsches later and we still have a good relationship and they will always assist me, inc some of the ‘halo’ models if they can, if I request.
I was in a situation where I had a valid non-merchantable quality / rejection claim - believe it or not on a 964 C2 in 1991 - when values had also dropped, but decided to work with the dealer to get it resolved, which it was.
30+ years and many Porsches later and we still have a good relationship and they will always assist me, inc some of the ‘halo’ models if they can, if I request.
Ella Jean said:
OP, I’ve read your posts a few times and tried to see this from both sides but I think you are being unreasonable.
You haven’t had the 2nd fault identified; just because the message is the same doesn’t mean it’s exactly the same fault. This message could lead to hundreds of different fault codes/errors and would mean Porsche don’t need to honour you request to return if the fault is proven to be different than the first.
The fact the fault did not reoccur immediately car after initial repair supports this.
The fault hasn’t stopped you using the car, limited functionality, safety or put you at any risk so difficult to understand your intentions to return.
You haven’t tried to book in at any other dealers, but instead seem to want to use your home dealers slow response as collateral towards your intention to reject early.
You don’t want to contact HQ as you don’t want to damage the relationship with the Home Dealer, but you want to return a car you’ve used considerably for 5 months as it’s had a warning light on the dash twice?
You need to visit a factory and appreciate how complex these machines are and the technology behind them, you cannot refer to them as a product that should ‘just work without fail’. It is not a hairdryer.
If you buy a new TV and the batteries go flat on the remote twice in 5 months, do you storm back to John Lewis and demand a full refund? Porsche undoubtably make some great cars but like all machines they go wrong, regardless of age and mileage.
If you ever find a vehicle manufacturer who can 100% guarantee their product will never fail, you need to put them in touch with the aviation sector as they spend billions on new aircraft and believe it or not, they still go wrong!
Given your history with returning other nearly new high end cars I would suggest you may have other reasons to return the car.
Exactly. Hit the nail firmly on the head.You haven’t had the 2nd fault identified; just because the message is the same doesn’t mean it’s exactly the same fault. This message could lead to hundreds of different fault codes/errors and would mean Porsche don’t need to honour you request to return if the fault is proven to be different than the first.
The fact the fault did not reoccur immediately car after initial repair supports this.
The fault hasn’t stopped you using the car, limited functionality, safety or put you at any risk so difficult to understand your intentions to return.
You haven’t tried to book in at any other dealers, but instead seem to want to use your home dealers slow response as collateral towards your intention to reject early.
You don’t want to contact HQ as you don’t want to damage the relationship with the Home Dealer, but you want to return a car you’ve used considerably for 5 months as it’s had a warning light on the dash twice?
You need to visit a factory and appreciate how complex these machines are and the technology behind them, you cannot refer to them as a product that should ‘just work without fail’. It is not a hairdryer.
If you buy a new TV and the batteries go flat on the remote twice in 5 months, do you storm back to John Lewis and demand a full refund? Porsche undoubtably make some great cars but like all machines they go wrong, regardless of age and mileage.
If you ever find a vehicle manufacturer who can 100% guarantee their product will never fail, you need to put them in touch with the aviation sector as they spend billions on new aircraft and believe it or not, they still go wrong!
Given your history with returning other nearly new high end cars I would suggest you may have other reasons to return the car.
I couldn't be bothered explain my reason for why I think the OP is unreasonable, but you essentially said what I think.
It looks like buyer remorse / cold feet / a realisation he has been burnt by falling prices and the OP is looking for an excuse to backing out of the deal.
It appears he has previous form on this and he Is exploiting a minor situation. I'm don't believe it is proportionate.
Spoilt brat tantrum comes to mind.
nickfrog said:
^^ good for you. How many of them were £200k?
as a general point - that would then apply to pretty much every Ferrari owner - especially newer models with complex electronics. just because it is expensive, does not mean it is fault free - as a matter of fact it probably is the opposite - a "cheap" Toyota with millions built and less complex tech used will likely have fewer warning lights than a 911 Turbo, McLaren, Ferrari as they will have more thoroughly tested, mass-produced components in them.
my FF had a new price of 330k (I paid less than that) and the warning lights have remained throughout its life - sometimes an entire christmas tree of them - then I disconnect the battery and reconnect it to see if they remain / reoccur after a short drive.
a warning light is really not the same as the engine/gearbox etc self-destructed or it constantly goes into limp mode and the car will be at the shop for the next 6 months while they fix it
The cost is irrelevant.
The dealer will be following a fault tree root analysis to address the problem.
Step one will likely be read any codes, ( there may be multiple ones that result from a singular issue.
The fault tree analysis may suggest 99% of the time, a simple fix such as a software flash or a simple component replacement fixes the problem, so that is what is done first of all.
if it fixes the issue, and faults don't reoccur, then great news.
If it doesn't fix things and the fault reoccurs, then it is time follow the fault tree root analysis further to get dirty with potentially more significant work.
It is unlikely the manufacturer will not be able to fix the problem But it is reasonable to try the easiest solution first.
Imagine the waste of everyone's time and money if a perfectly good gearbox was replaced when a simple software update would have fixed the problem?
The OP has no idea whether the second issue is /is not related to the initial issue.
I believe it is unreasonable to expect a problem with a very complex product to necessarily be resolves on the first attempt (though it would be great if it were) but if the problem repeats itself, there is an escalated remedial response plan to solve the issue.
Ultimately, after repeated attempts and exhausting the fault resolution plan I think the OP would have a case for rejection, I just think at this point, he has an is unreasonable expectation of what the fault finding pathway is.
The dealer will only be following the technical bulletins for fault resolution from the manufacturer
The dealer will be following a fault tree root analysis to address the problem.
Step one will likely be read any codes, ( there may be multiple ones that result from a singular issue.
The fault tree analysis may suggest 99% of the time, a simple fix such as a software flash or a simple component replacement fixes the problem, so that is what is done first of all.
if it fixes the issue, and faults don't reoccur, then great news.
If it doesn't fix things and the fault reoccurs, then it is time follow the fault tree root analysis further to get dirty with potentially more significant work.
It is unlikely the manufacturer will not be able to fix the problem But it is reasonable to try the easiest solution first.
Imagine the waste of everyone's time and money if a perfectly good gearbox was replaced when a simple software update would have fixed the problem?
The OP has no idea whether the second issue is /is not related to the initial issue.
I believe it is unreasonable to expect a problem with a very complex product to necessarily be resolves on the first attempt (though it would be great if it were) but if the problem repeats itself, there is an escalated remedial response plan to solve the issue.
Ultimately, after repeated attempts and exhausting the fault resolution plan I think the OP would have a case for rejection, I just think at this point, he has an is unreasonable expectation of what the fault finding pathway is.
The dealer will only be following the technical bulletins for fault resolution from the manufacturer
nickfrog said:
Yes sure, halo products are probably more likely to go wrong. That still doesn't answer the question however.
Whatever the position, it's quite easy to be judgemental when it's not your £200k.
This thread has multiple posters who’ve owned £200k cars with issues and not rejected them.Whatever the position, it's quite easy to be judgemental when it's not your £200k.
breadvan said:
nickfrog said:
Yes sure, halo products are probably more likely to go wrong. That still doesn't answer the question however.
Whatever the position, it's quite easy to be judgemental when it's not your £200k.
This thread has multiple posters who’ve owned £200k cars with issues and not rejected them.Whatever the position, it's quite easy to be judgemental when it's not your £200k.
And I still think the response of the dealer is poor in terms of timing, they should have immediately opened up a slot in the workshop to take a look at it and give him feedback re the issue / time it will take to fix the issue etc
Some awful moral posturing on this thread.
Consumer law allows for consumers to reject substandard products. It allows the price of the product to factor in the expectation of quality.
You might accept a new product being faulty. Another person may not. That is entirely their prerogative. Criticising a consumer for exercising their statutory rights in response to a substandard product is bulls
t.
Consumer law allows for consumers to reject substandard products. It allows the price of the product to factor in the expectation of quality.
You might accept a new product being faulty. Another person may not. That is entirely their prerogative. Criticising a consumer for exercising their statutory rights in response to a substandard product is bulls
t. breadvan said:
This thread has multiple posters who’ve owned £200k cars with issues and not rejected them.
I have only seen 1 poster in this situation. He was happy to run a FF with warning lights. That's up to him but doesn't mean others spending £200k on a car should do the same.And that still doesn't answer the question.
More people seem to have rejected their Porsche in this thread, if we want to go down that route.
I still hope the OPC gets to the bottom of it promptly and communicate with the OP in a transparent way.
Forester1965 said:
Some awful moral posturing on this thread.
Consumer law allows for consumers to reject substandard products. It allows the price of the product to factor in the expectation of quality.
You might accept a new product being faulty. Another person may not. That is entirely their prerogative. Criticising a consumer for exercising their statutory rights in response to a substandard product is bullst.
We are not an echo chamber, here to reinforce someone's view of right or wrong.Consumer law allows for consumers to reject substandard products. It allows the price of the product to factor in the expectation of quality.
You might accept a new product being faulty. Another person may not. That is entirely their prerogative. Criticising a consumer for exercising their statutory rights in response to a substandard product is bulls
t. Our opinions, favourable or not, are nothing more than a straw poll.
If the OP only wants favourable responses to his opinion / approach, I respectfully suggest this is not the correct forum to have such a discussion.
I think the swingometer of opinion is at best, neutral, and more likely edging towards unreasonable at present. Though this may change if the problem cannot be resolved promptly
Forester1965 said:
Some awful moral posturing on this thread.
Consumer law allows for consumers to reject substandard products. It allows the price of the product to factor in the expectation of quality.
You might accept a new product being faulty. Another person may not. That is entirely their prerogative. Criticising a consumer for exercising their statutory rights in response to a substandard product is bullst.
No moral posturing on my part. Just bemusement that someone would buy a car they clearly want then decide they don’t want it due to minor faults.Consumer law allows for consumers to reject substandard products. It allows the price of the product to factor in the expectation of quality.
You might accept a new product being faulty. Another person may not. That is entirely their prerogative. Criticising a consumer for exercising their statutory rights in response to a substandard product is bulls
t. There’s no such thing as a 100% reliable car.
breadvan said:
Using McLaren as an example, in the early days, if every car with warning lights was rejected, McLaren simply wouldn’t exist today.
That's McLaren's good fortune that that was the case.I'm a little torn on this one.
On the one hand, if it was my £200k, I wouldn't want to take any risks.
On the other, it depends on the fault and the reasoning. If it was the exact same thing that had happened twice and the dealership was shrugging their shoulders as to why, I'd be like the OP.
If it was two different faults and/or carrying a reasonable explanation as to why then I'd be more willing to accept on the basis that modern cars are complex with sensors, etc that can fail. I would want my statutory rights extended in terms of time though.
I'm amazed at some of the responses on here. If I'd spent £200k on a car renowned for its engineering and reliability and it had a fault in the first month that wasn't fixed at the first attempt, I'd be looking to return it to.
I'd also expect the dealership to be bending over backwards to keep me happy.
Talk about taking the glow off of what should be a very special purchase.
I'm nowhere near spending that kind of money at my local Porsche dealership, so have put up with their stty service and chalked it up to being an unimportant customer, but it seems like it runs right through the customer base.
Seems the famed "customer loyalty" only works one way with them.
I'd also expect the dealership to be bending over backwards to keep me happy.
Talk about taking the glow off of what should be a very special purchase.
I'm nowhere near spending that kind of money at my local Porsche dealership, so have put up with their s
tty service and chalked it up to being an unimportant customer, but it seems like it runs right through the customer base.Seems the famed "customer loyalty" only works one way with them.
Gassing Station | 911/Carrera GT | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff