992 Turbo S issues-Right to reject

[MDL111]

funboxster said:

David W. said:

I’d kill to have a bit more detail on the chassis system fault. Is it a warning light, does the car go into limphome mode, is it underivable and needed roadside recovery? Ordinarily it sounds like it should be fixable and in my 16+year experience the Porsche warranty system works very well resetting back to zero on a replacement part. Can’t see how you have lost confidence.

It just says chassis system fault, then adapted driving required. It doesn't go into limp mode, not undriveable or needs recovery. They couldn't fix it after one go, why will they be able to sort at second attempt? As I've stated, emotion is taken out of this. It's a product that, imo, is not of satisfactory build quality, hence loss of confidence in car/brand. I've had two Boxsters from new, with no issues during ownership.
I'm not rejecting because of depreciation issues, but perceived reliabilty of a premium product.. My Audi RS3 is one year old, with no issues from new. My wife had three Mini Cooper S' from new, each for three years. No problem again with them.

My FF has had an engine control warning light and a parking sensor warning light on pretty much from new. They never managed to fix it, but it also does not impact how the car drives (well the parking sensors do not work and never really have worked - uselss anyway) ... I have now done more than 90k km in it, never thought about rejecting the car just because of some warning lights...

I wish you good luck, but to me it sounds like you should just let them fix it - give you a nice loaner while the car is with them plus as somebody else pointed out maybe move you up the list for a GT allocation - and then continue to enjoy it.

[hunter 66]

That is normal for a Ferrari , warning lights need ignoring . Maybe this is the way to get onto the Hallowed GT gravy train , good thinking

[Pit Pony]

Not that I'd ever be in the market to buy a brand new car, let alone a porsche, but one thing occurs to me.

This free track day at Silverstone, which the OP hasn't got.

You'd not want to be risking your own car on a track. Are they offering the use of something from their own stock with zero financial risk if you crash it, or fk the gearbox?
Thought not. And taking your own car would presumably invalidate the warranty ?

[funboxster]

Again, a big thanks to all for the varied replies, some sympathetic, others not. If I was a serial rejector having realised very quickly the TS wasn't for me, I would have thought my prayers were answered when the fault light occurred within 30 days.

I could have just rejected it and got a full refund. But I didn't. I gave them a chance to fix and just thought, well I'm unlucky, let's hope it doesn't reoccur.

I'm happy to work with the DP on a solution, equitable to both and said same in my letter. Another car, same or acceptable colour and spec, that's fine. If not, I expect them to reduce the refund via an allowance for mileage, but pursued the rejection option, in case they can't fix this.

[M11rph]

Pit Pony said:

Not that I'd ever be in the market to buy a brand new car, let alone a porsche, but one thing occurs to me.

This free track day at Silverstone, which the OP hasn't got.

You'd not want to be risking your own car on a track. Are they offering the use of something from their own stock with zero financial risk if you crash it, or fk the gearbox?
Thought not. And taking your own car would presumably invalidate the warranty ?

PEC (Silverstone- Porsche Experience Centre) has a fleet of cars for customers to use.

You can take your own with prior permission and if suitably insured.

[funboxster]

Pit Pony said:

Not that I'd ever be in the market to buy a brand new car, let alone a porsche, but one thing occurs to me.

This free track day at Silverstone, which the OP hasn't got.

You'd not want to be risking your own car on a track. Are they offering the use of something from their own stock with zero financial risk if you crash it, or fk the gearbox?
Thought not. And taking your own car would presumably invalidate the warranty ?

I probably didn't make myself clear. The track day offered (but not received) was at their experience centre, using their cars. I'd never track my own car.

[GT4RS]

Forester1965 said:

There is a pattern emerging, you're right. Manufacturers are building £200k cars that aren't as reliable as £30k ones. That's the problem that needs removing, not consumer rights.

There’s also another pattern emerging due to the volume of new porches sold within the Uk nowadays, they don’t have enough fully trained people to fix them when they fail!

[Pit Pony]

M11rph said:

PEC (Silverstone- Porsche Experience Centre) has a fleet of cars for customers to use.

You can take your own with prior permission and if suitably insured.

I'd definately use thiers.

[Cheib]

M11rph said:

Pit Pony said:

Not that I'd ever be in the market to buy a brand new car, let alone a porsche, but one thing occurs to me.

This free track day at Silverstone, which the OP hasn't got.

You'd not want to be risking your own car on a track. Are they offering the use of something from their own stock with zero financial risk if you crash it, or fk the gearbox?
Thought not. And taking your own car would presumably invalidate the warranty ?

PEC (Silverstone- Porsche Experience Centre) has a fleet of cars for customers to use.

You can take your own with prior permission and if suitably insured.

Your car doesn’t need to be insured to use it at the PEC, I decided not to when doing a Precision Day there. Having driven there a few times I was aware of the risks.

[Discombobulate]

funboxster said:

Again, a big thanks to all for the varied replies, some sympathetic, others not. If I was a serial rejector having realised very quickly the TS wasn't for me, I would have thought my prayers were answered when the fault light occurred within 30 days.

I could have just rejected it and got a full refund. But I didn't. I gave them a chance to fix and just thought, well I'm unlucky, let's hope it doesn't reoccur.

I'm happy to work with the DP on a solution, equitable to both and said same in my letter. Another car, same or acceptable colour and spec, that's fine. If not, I expect them to reduce the refund via an allowance for mileage, but pursued the rejection option, in case they can't fix this.

I think short term rejection (within 30 days) only applies to faults / damage etc present when you take delivery.

[nickfrog]

ChocolateFrog said:

nickfrog said:

I agree, as consumers we should be even more naive and accept the salesman line that the car is complex.
It doesn't really matter if there is a light on the dashboard as the MOT is not due anyway.

I hate dealers more than most but they should be given more than 1 opportunity to fix a fault.

No doubt all they did the first time was clear the codes anyway.

Would be interesting to hear more on the actual fault.

Fair comment. I would want to know more too.

[maz8062]

nickfrog said:

ChocolateFrog said:

nickfrog said:

I agree, as consumers we should be even more naive and accept the salesman line that the car is complex.
It doesn't really matter if there is a light on the dashboard as the MOT is not due anyway.

I hate dealers more than most but they should be given more than 1 opportunity to fix a fault.

No doubt all they did the first time was clear the codes anyway.

Would be interesting to hear more on the actual fault.

Fair comment. I would want to know more too.

The op has been asked several times to describe the fault on the car that has now persuaded him to reject the car after 6 months and 2500 miles of enjoyment. We’re still waiting to find out what this chassis fault is.

Look, the op and others are entitled to apply the law to the letter when it comes to this lemon law entitlement, but would the op want to reject it if the value of the car had gone up? I guess not. The OP paid cash for it and the values have tanked - is this a motivation for wanting to limit the downside? Who knows, but given that this is the 2nd type incident I’d argue that there is an element of playing the system to one’s own benefit.

Oh well, I guess if you have the means to buy the car in the first place, you have the means to wiggle out of it on a technicality. Is it fair? Some think it is - I think it is playing the system.

Just my view folks..

[Jeremy-75qq8]

Many on here are speculating as to Porsche response


I have just rejected a new 911 and I cannot praise the dealer enough.

I won't post any details on a public forum as given the way the dealer ( Porsche Retail ) has handled things to do so would be in my view unacceptable.

Porsche don't want supply a lemon any more than you want to buy one.

My issue involved the factory and they still could not solve it.

OP if you wish to PM me I am happy to have a private discussion, but if you are legally in the right I don't see you haveing any issues.

I appreciate all and sundry say there will be but they have not rejected a new 911 they waited 2 years for !

Mine went back to the dealer an hour after collection and was rejected on day 28.

[ags11]

What actually was the first fault?
I think you need to clarify if the second one is the same?
It’s perhaps a tad extreme to reject on only the second attempt, that’s what the warranty is for.

On the flip side, l get the 6 month dilemma, especially if you are unfortunate enough to have a Friday afternoon build - it does and can happen.

Probably on balance though one fault isn’t enough to suggest so. I guess that’s why it’s essential to know what the faults diagnosed as.
If they don’t actually know, that’s different gravy, I’d probably agree with your stance at that point…

Edited by ags11 on Sunday 14th April 19:19

[POORCARDEALER]

Friend is going through rejection process at the minute on a small electric runabout leased new for his business - car is 5 months old , 2000 miles and been in the dealership 14 times now , for a total of 3 months ….. courtesy car only given in last week .

Leasing co fighting now to have it returned to them

[David W.]

funboxster said:

It just says chassis system fault, then adapted driving required. It doesn't go into limp mode, not undriveable or needs recovery. They couldn't fix it after one go, why will they be able to sort at second attempt? As I've stated, emotion is taken out of this. It's a product that, imo, is not of satisfactory build quality, hence loss of confidence in car/brand. I've had two Boxsters from new, with no issues during ownership.
I'm not rejecting because of depreciation issues, but perceived reliabilty of a premium product.. My Audi RS3 is one year old, with no issues from new. My wife had three Mini Cooper S' from new, each for three years. No problem again with them.

That’s helpful. Let them fix it again, enjoy a hopefully nice loaner while they do, sell it as now working and move on. Anything else will prolong your pain. The next owner may enjoy 100k trouble free miles or they may not and find it’s a Friday lemon.
PS sorry about dreadful spelling in my 1st reply.

[moonigan]

Discombobulate said:

I think short term rejection (within 30 days) only applies to faults / damage etc present when you take delivery.

Nope this isn't the case. Any fault that occurs within the first 30 days is deemed to have been present when you took delivery so by rights you can reject without giving them an opportunity to fix it. In my case I had 3 separate issues within the first 30 days. The first was a misaligned panel, which was fixed. The second was a fuel gauge that would drop from 50% to zero without warning, this was also fixed. The last was when the turbo started spewing oil all over the engine when I was on my way to a meeting. At this point I'd had enough and rejected it. The car sat on my drive for 3 months whilst Renault UK and Lookers did everything possible to wriggle out of taking the car back. Awful experience and one I wouldn't want to go through again.

On the flip side my experience with Porsche and Bolton OPC was exceptional. I bought a new Macan Diesel in 2017. Within 3 weeks it was in the dealer with a DPF fault. Got the car back only for the same issue to occur 3 times in 6 weeks. Each time car back in. After the 3rd time they offered me a full refund. I ordered a new Cayenne and was given a Macan 2.0 for 6 months whilst the new car was built.

[funboxster]

ags11 said:

What actually was the first fault?
I think you need to clarify if the second one is the same?
It’s perhaps a tad extreme to reject on only the second attempt, that’s what the warranty is for.

On the flip side, l get the 6 month dilemma, especially if you are unfortunate enough to have a Friday afternoon build - it does and can happen.

Probably on balance though one fault isn’t enough to suggest so. I guess that’s why it’s essential to know what the faults diagnosed as.
If they don’t actually know, that’s different gravy, I’d probably agree with your stance at that point…

Edited by ags11 on Sunday 14th April 19:19

The fault is presenting exactly the same as the first time- Chassis system fault, adapted driving required, along with, now, PADM and engine control faults, so additional ones. The manual doesn't advise what ADR means, just contact the dealer.

I've dug out the service docket for the first fault. It says C125193 Roll stabilisation system failure and C104400-Basic setting active faults stored, calibration required and a cost of £285 to fix, which obviously I didn't get charged for.

The service advisor, when asked what that meant, said it's probably a sensor issue.

I think cars are very emotive subjects, especially to us petrolheads, but they're still products. Whether you believe me or not, I do love cars. Before buying the TS, I had an Aston Martin DB 11 for over five years. I had no problems with it, loved it and kept it. I only sold it as I was worried it would start costing a lot in repairs.

If this was a £200k watch I'd bought that wasn't working correctly, I'd be querying my purchase decision. Emotion has to stay out of it. If I let them have another go at resolving, I'll be then getting in the car, turning the ignition and keeping my fingers crossed no more occur.

As some have said, let's see what the DP/dealer says.

[15HN]

I went through what you went through on my new Porsche i.e. fault in first 3 months, then again and again. They did not know how to fix it so it kept reoccurring, moreover it was dangerous. The dealer eventually accepted a rejection but it helped that I was a lawyer as initially they wanted to treat it as a trade in.


To answer your question about the usage figure. This was a point of contention as this figure hasn't really been defined. To be clear the law says this is a usage figure not a depreciation figure. My matter came down to money (as most things do) hence the dealer wanted to use a higher figure and I naturally wanted to use a lower figure. The 45p comes from HMRC and it's difficult to argue against this as this is most HMRC will allow for usage. In my case I received various finance quotes before purchasing the car. All the quotes had the same Porsche pence per mile figure irrespective of the mileage allowance/terms hence it was difficult to argue against this. If you go to the Porsche website you should be able to see what Porsche finance use as additional pence per mile on a Turbo S. If you also look at Ombudsman decisions they rarely go over 45p per mile. In my view it should not be any higher than the 45p and other manufacturers use a much lower figure e.g. BMW and consider they have some £150k+ highly depreciating EVs for sale.

The other thing you should consider is how dealers/manufacturers work. Porsche GB will make a contribution to the dealer to help them take the car back as ultimately they are responsible. If you've only done 2500 miles then even if it's £1 you're probably not worried.

What you need to consider is that its you that will have to live with the fault when the car is out of warranty and its you that will have to live with the fact that the fault may still be present when its time to sell the vehicle.

[funboxster]

15HN said:

I went through what you went through on my new Porsche i.e. fault in first 3 months, then again and again. They did not know how to fix it so it kept reoccurring, moreover it was dangerous. The dealer eventually accepted a rejection but it helped that I was a lawyer as initially they wanted to treat it as a trade in.


To answer your question about the usage figure. This was a point of contention as this figure hasn't really been defined. To be clear the law says this is a usage figure not a depreciation figure. My matter came down to money (as most things do) hence the dealer wanted to use a higher figure and I naturally wanted to use a lower figure. The 45p comes from HMRC and it's difficult to argue against this as this is most HMRC will allow for usage. In my case I received various finance quotes before purchasing the car. All the quotes had the same Porsche pence per mile figure irrespective of the mileage allowance/terms hence it was difficult to argue against this. If you go to the Porsche website you should be able to see what Porsche finance use as additional pence per mile on a Turbo S. If you also look at Ombudsman decisions they rarely go over 45p per mile. In my view it should not be any higher than the 45p and other manufacturers use a much lower figure e.g. BMW and consider they have some £150k+ highly depreciating EVs for sale.

The other thing you should consider is how dealers/manufacturers work. Porsche GB will make a contribution to the dealer to help them take the car back as ultimately they are responsible. If you've only done 2500 miles then even if it's £1 you're probably not worried.

What you need to consider is that its you that will have to live with the fault when the car is out of warranty and its you that will have to live with the fact that the fault may still be present when its time to sell the vehicle.

Thanks so much for your informative post 15HN, much appreciated. As you say, the allowance figure a dealer can deduct for usage is not defined in the CRA 2015, so a mutually agreed figure would need to be settled upon. I had the HMRC figure in the back of my mind, when if you use your own car for work purposes, that's the max you will get paid per mile.