Warranty Dispute - Where do I stand??
Discussion
I have recently had my 1 year old Cayman R in for some warranty work that was done on the Carbon Fibre Bucket Seats at my local OPC.
I purchased the car which was a 8 months old from another OPC and the below problems was already there and when I emailed the pictures to them, they confirmed (from their warranty specialist) that it would be covered under warranty and advised to take it to my local OPC as they were 300+ miles away so I contacted my local OPC.
This was for premature wear on the side bolsters and also some carbon fibre has started to crack as per pictures -
I originally emailed my local OPC service dept. the above pictures and asked if it would be covered under warranty and was asked that they would have to have a look at it before advising.
I drove to the dealer and they inspected the seats themselves and took their own pictures which were sent off to Porsche. I was told at the dealer after their inspection that it should be covered under warranty (verbally) and that they would confirm at a later date.
Approx. 2-3 weeks later I got a phone call from OPC and they informed me that all was OK and the parts have been ordered. Another 2-3 weeks later I was then informed via phone call that the parts have arrived and to book it in.
I had the work done 2 weeks ago and all was OK until today I received a phone call from OPC to say that Porsche have declined the warranty claim and the cost is £2500 which I would have to pay for!! I was rather shocked and a little angry that they have now turned around and said this.... I expressed my disappointment with them... although I didn't make any threats not to pay but he is now going to speak to the Dealer Principal tomorrow to get his opinion on the matter as he is not in today.
I'm hoping that as it's their mistake... they will resolve this internally and I will no longer need to be involved but in the event that they tell me that I owe them £2500... Where do I stand legally?
I did not agree to pay for the work done as I was informed it would be covered under warranty (verbally)
Any advise welcome.
I purchased the car which was a 8 months old from another OPC and the below problems was already there and when I emailed the pictures to them, they confirmed (from their warranty specialist) that it would be covered under warranty and advised to take it to my local OPC as they were 300+ miles away so I contacted my local OPC.
This was for premature wear on the side bolsters and also some carbon fibre has started to crack as per pictures -
I originally emailed my local OPC service dept. the above pictures and asked if it would be covered under warranty and was asked that they would have to have a look at it before advising.
I drove to the dealer and they inspected the seats themselves and took their own pictures which were sent off to Porsche. I was told at the dealer after their inspection that it should be covered under warranty (verbally) and that they would confirm at a later date.
Approx. 2-3 weeks later I got a phone call from OPC and they informed me that all was OK and the parts have been ordered. Another 2-3 weeks later I was then informed via phone call that the parts have arrived and to book it in.
I had the work done 2 weeks ago and all was OK until today I received a phone call from OPC to say that Porsche have declined the warranty claim and the cost is £2500 which I would have to pay for!! I was rather shocked and a little angry that they have now turned around and said this.... I expressed my disappointment with them... although I didn't make any threats not to pay but he is now going to speak to the Dealer Principal tomorrow to get his opinion on the matter as he is not in today.
I'm hoping that as it's their mistake... they will resolve this internally and I will no longer need to be involved but in the event that they tell me that I owe them £2500... Where do I stand legally?
I did not agree to pay for the work done as I was informed it would be covered under warranty (verbally)
Any advise welcome.
You have undertaken the work on the basis of their verbal confirmation that the work would be covered under the warranty.
Had you been told up-front that it was not covered you would have had a choice whether or not to proceed, or whether to do the work elsewhere. However, you were not given this information. You were told on a number of occasions that it would be covered, and on that basis they did the work. At the time the work was completed you were not asked to pay for it, so again you were given the impression that it was a warranty action.
On the basis of these facts I'd say that they have no basis on which to ask you for payment. If they have made a mistake, which it sounds like they (or Porsche GB) have, then it is their issue and their cost. That they are trying to pass this onto you is somewhat poor behaviour in the least.
As a result I would not pay. I would politely but calmly refuse, pointing out that you were informed on many occasions that it was covered by them and completed by them on this basis, and as a result it is now their issue. Should they threaten legal action to recover costs I would say that you would be happy for them to proceed if they believe that they have a valid claim against you, in which case you will pass their claim onto your solicitor to deal with.
(BTW this is not legal advice - I am not a lawyer but I deal with them all day, and I do have a fair bit of experience of contract law).
Had you been told up-front that it was not covered you would have had a choice whether or not to proceed, or whether to do the work elsewhere. However, you were not given this information. You were told on a number of occasions that it would be covered, and on that basis they did the work. At the time the work was completed you were not asked to pay for it, so again you were given the impression that it was a warranty action.
On the basis of these facts I'd say that they have no basis on which to ask you for payment. If they have made a mistake, which it sounds like they (or Porsche GB) have, then it is their issue and their cost. That they are trying to pass this onto you is somewhat poor behaviour in the least.
As a result I would not pay. I would politely but calmly refuse, pointing out that you were informed on many occasions that it was covered by them and completed by them on this basis, and as a result it is now their issue. Should they threaten legal action to recover costs I would say that you would be happy for them to proceed if they believe that they have a valid claim against you, in which case you will pass their claim onto your solicitor to deal with.
(BTW this is not legal advice - I am not a lawyer but I deal with them all day, and I do have a fair bit of experience of contract law).
My initial thoughts with the leather was that someone had caught it and as such it was wear and tear. The carbon is harder to judge. I wonder if someone has knocked it and it has chipped or damaged as a result of a point impact. Again wear and tear.
So I wouldn't be unduly surprised to hear Porsche wouldn't pay out under warranty. However, if the situation has unfolded as per your post; you put in a claim, the dealership looked at it, sent photos off to Porsche AG, came back to you and said yes, the warranty claim has been approved, parts have been ordered and subsequently fitted then I can't see how they can turn round and want to charge you. If they had said they still hadn't heard back from Porsche AG but were optimistic of a successful claim so you went ahead and ordered the parts / had them fitted then it's down to you, but that isn't what has happened from reading your post.
It seems very strange to me.
Henry
So I wouldn't be unduly surprised to hear Porsche wouldn't pay out under warranty. However, if the situation has unfolded as per your post; you put in a claim, the dealership looked at it, sent photos off to Porsche AG, came back to you and said yes, the warranty claim has been approved, parts have been ordered and subsequently fitted then I can't see how they can turn round and want to charge you. If they had said they still hadn't heard back from Porsche AG but were optimistic of a successful claim so you went ahead and ordered the parts / had them fitted then it's down to you, but that isn't what has happened from reading your post.
It seems very strange to me.
Henry
Henry-F said:
My initial thoughts with the leather was that someone had caught it and as such it was wear and tear. The carbon is harder to judge. I wonder if someone has knocked it and it has chipped or damaged as a result of a point impact. Again wear and tear.
So I wouldn't be unduly surprised to hear Porsche wouldn't pay out under warranty. However, if the situation has unfolded as per your post; you put in a claim, the dealership looked at it, sent photos off to Porsche AG, came back to you and said yes, the warranty claim has been approved, parts have been ordered and subsequently fitted then I can't see how they can turn round and want to charge you. If they had said they still hadn't heard back from Porsche AG but were optimistic of a successful claim so you went ahead and ordered the parts / had them fitted then it's down to you, but that isn't what has happened from reading your post.
It seems very strange to me.
Henry
100% agreedSo I wouldn't be unduly surprised to hear Porsche wouldn't pay out under warranty. However, if the situation has unfolded as per your post; you put in a claim, the dealership looked at it, sent photos off to Porsche AG, came back to you and said yes, the warranty claim has been approved, parts have been ordered and subsequently fitted then I can't see how they can turn round and want to charge you. If they had said they still hadn't heard back from Porsche AG but were optimistic of a successful claim so you went ahead and ordered the parts / had them fitted then it's down to you, but that isn't what has happened from reading your post.
It seems very strange to me.
Henry
Go back to the selling OPC and advise them of the situation.
If they have record of the issues when they sold the car and have advised they would be covered under warranty then they are responsible for re-imbursement NOT the repairing OPC.
BUT.... looking at those pictures Im not suprised a warranty claim has been rejected as it looks like an outside influence has caused the issue and not a manufacturing defect.....
HOWEVER..... The selling have said it would be covered and sold the car with the issues and so they are responsible ....not warranty
All IMHO of course
If they have record of the issues when they sold the car and have advised they would be covered under warranty then they are responsible for re-imbursement NOT the repairing OPC.
BUT.... looking at those pictures Im not suprised a warranty claim has been rejected as it looks like an outside influence has caused the issue and not a manufacturing defect.....
HOWEVER..... The selling have said it would be covered and sold the car with the issues and so they are responsible ....not warranty
All IMHO of course
Interesting ,I can't comment on the cf,but I has a similar experience witht he r8,the side bolster on the side wore very quickly,the way the car is designed means getting out of it means its almost unavoidable ,pretty much every r8 suffers from it,I asked for it be repaired under warranty but they would not have it,said it was wear and tear ,despite it occuring on every car,so obviously it is a design issue.
I have to say though ,warranty wise porsche have been by far the worst company I have ever dealt with,I bought a brand new turbo 5 years ago and had huge issues with it and was treated like s
t,and thats the tip of the iceberg.
I have to say though ,warranty wise porsche have been by far the worst company I have ever dealt with,I bought a brand new turbo 5 years ago and had huge issues with it and was treated like s
t,and thats the tip of the iceberg.Based on what you say there is NO justification for the charge. The OPC doing the work should either decline the warranty claim and deal with the issue then, arguing about causation at that point rather than afterwards, or they should stand by their commitment to do the work without cost to you.
If they have fudged up then it is their loss.
The legal principle is that they have made a clear representation to you, you have relied on that to your detriment and therefore they cannot step back from it. The technical legal terms is estoppel. They are also on thin ground trying to sue you because you have commissioned work at a fixed price to you of zero. Even if they were wrong in the warranty assessment that was their call and not yours so you are entitled to rely on it.
Had they not confirmed that it would be a warranty repair you would have had the option to consider other outcomes, including not having the work done at all or seeking a cheaper alternative such as second had parts.
It is also correct to say that they cannot retain your car while they dispute the payment.
Keep the pressure on and they should eventually crack.
If they have fudged up then it is their loss.
The legal principle is that they have made a clear representation to you, you have relied on that to your detriment and therefore they cannot step back from it. The technical legal terms is estoppel. They are also on thin ground trying to sue you because you have commissioned work at a fixed price to you of zero. Even if they were wrong in the warranty assessment that was their call and not yours so you are entitled to rely on it.
Had they not confirmed that it would be a warranty repair you would have had the option to consider other outcomes, including not having the work done at all or seeking a cheaper alternative such as second had parts.
It is also correct to say that they cannot retain your car while they dispute the payment.
Keep the pressure on and they should eventually crack.
Thanks for all the comments so far.
Just to add to this, I did have a previous verbal discussion on the telephone, whith the guy that phoned me today, asking if the problems were covered under warranty then I would like to get it done but if it was chargable, then I could live with the cosmetic issues... Again this was all done verbally.
I am somewhat disappointed how an OPC can inform me that a repair can be done under warranty and then to backtrack to say that it's now chargable!
As I mentioned earlier, the car went in 2 weeks ago and was returned t (delivered) back to me 3 days later, so they are not in possession of my car.
Just to add to this, I did have a previous verbal discussion on the telephone, whith the guy that phoned me today, asking if the problems were covered under warranty then I would like to get it done but if it was chargable, then I could live with the cosmetic issues... Again this was all done verbally.
I am somewhat disappointed how an OPC can inform me that a repair can be done under warranty and then to backtrack to say that it's now chargable!
As I mentioned earlier, the car went in 2 weeks ago and was returned t (delivered) back to me 3 days later, so they are not in possession of my car.
Barry Ashcroft said:
What did it say on the dealer job card you presumably signed when you dropped the car off?
The car was collected from my house and a courtesy car dropped off.I can't remember what it said on the job card as I wasn't given a copy.
As to the supplying dealer. I do have via email this response from them -
"My colleague in our warranty side has suggested that due to the geography involved…you should take your car into you closest Porsche Centre and show the marks on the Leather. They will then order replacement leather parts or have professionally prepared.
This will be put through under the warranty."
I really dont think I should get them involved at this stage. I just think it's not on that I was told (verbally) that something is covered under warranty and for them to turn round weeks later and say it's now chargeable!
What you might find it that this is really an internal dispute between Porsche GB and the supplying dealer. If Porsche GB consider that the defects are down to wear and tear, they will be reluctant to see the cost go against a warranty claim when it should have been the supplying dealer that fixed the problem before sale. Both you and your local dealer then find yourselves stuck in the middle of this argument. Really, Porsche GB and the supplying dealer should sort out paying the repairing garage behind the scenes. I found myself in a similar situation for a while, albeit with my car off the road at my local dealership. I drove around in a loan Boxster for 3 weeks while they sorted it out, and it all ended up OK.
Wow...I'm guessing that at £2500.00 the parts required are 2 new seats? Fwiw, I'd agree that these certainly look like wear and tear and/or in the case of the CF an impact strike by something. But as per your post above you've actually got it in writing that the damage will be sorted out by the warranty...
edited: Just wondering if the supplying dealer made an allowance in the purchase price for these "warranty" defects? I'm suspecting not...though I'm sure they did when the car came into them. Surprises me that an approved used car wouldn't have had this warranty work done before it went on the pitch.
edited: Just wondering if the supplying dealer made an allowance in the purchase price for these "warranty" defects? I'm suspecting not...though I'm sure they did when the car came into them. Surprises me that an approved used car wouldn't have had this warranty work done before it went on the pitch.
Edited by anniesdad on Monday 15th October 14:00
Gassing Station | Porsche General | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff