Help - WH Claims

[fish]

I've just suffered a sudden mechanical failure of one rear damper. Which I will be claiming for under WH. Obviously both will need replacing, my feeling is they will try to avoid paying for both as the other is servicable. Has anyone got both out of them and what were the cercumstances? or has anyione had a disc brake fail and manage to claim for both replacements?

Qucik replies would be appreciated. Cheers

[bilton_d]

Brahe disc .... can't help you on that one. Shock absorber i had a front failure that WH paid for but couldn't get them to pay for the other, even tried saying undue load put onto the other due to the failure no joy

[NICE EH]

Ask the repairing dealer to be a little creative when he puts the claim in. If they have a good relationship with WH then you should be OK. I have always found Team Pro-active to be particularly efficient at extracting money off warranty companies.

[TheLemming]

You might have problems claiming for brake discs...

The standard response to claims on these is that they are "wear and tear" items and as such, not covered under the warranty.

Even if the dealer goes on record as stating that these are defective, or have been damaged by a defective component, then you may still end up with the claim being dismissed, or perhaps a contribution towards the repair costs.

Good luck!

[RichardR]

Surely you can insist on them paying for the other one on safety grounds. It's an acknowledged fact that dampers should be replaced in pairs so as not to unbalance the handling of the car.

You could take the line with them that if they were to only pay for one replacement they would be compromising the roadworthiness of the car and would be financially liable for any resulting injury or damage.

Worth a shot

[cerbera8]

Suffered similar problem with my cerb. WH would only pay for the broken one.

[rocket]

Same for me....I was unfortunate enough to have both the front and rear nearside shocks blow on my Cerb. This meant I had to have all 4. Initially WH only wanted to pay for 1, but after a lengthy 'debate' on the phone the dealers managed to convince them that the claim was genuine and that 2 really had failed. Still cost me the price of 2 plus fitting though!!!

[johno]

As the warranty company see it the other damper is not defective or failed and therefor there is no necessity to replace. Regardless of common practice or safe operating systems of replacing 2 at a time. No failure = no payout.

Bless 'em !