Yet another serious problem-Ford washed hands

[MJack]

Hey

 

Ive an issue with my car-

I bought it from a ford dealership 3yrs ago through a finance company.It was 1 year old when i bought it and had 2 yrs left on the warrenty.In this time it has had a list of problems,new steering rack fitted,new parking sensors(still not corrected)new cluster(screen for car computer)new parking sensor "brains"box(not sure what the correct word is)numerous valve defects.

 

The new serious problem is that the Turbo chrager has seized up and Ford dealership are qwuoting 1200.00.plus vat to repair it.

 

The car has only done 66k,is 4 yrs old and apart from when i missed 1 sevice last yr(even though i had full oil change and filters)it has been the the dealership for serviceing.

 

Where do I stand in regards to SOGA in reclaiming my monies due to the fact that the engine cannot be of merchantable quality due to the failure of one of its components in such a short space of time,with not real wear and tear either.

 

I am at a serious crossroads as a recon turbo will cost 700 to fit(but the repair wont be warrentied)or spend the rediculously high figure from the Ford dealers to get them to fix it(which would at least be warrentied)

 

I am fairly confident regarding issueing proceedings if I need to go down the legal route but am feeling very vunerable as not experienced in these cases...

 

please help.

 

MJack

[rebel11]

Hi MJ

 

Here's some info:- http://www.oft.gov.uk/shared_oft/reports/676408/oft1241.pdf

 

http://www.which.co.uk/consumer-rights/sale-of-goods/your-rights-buying-second-hand-cars/second-hand-cars-your-rights/

 

http://www.which.co.uk/consumer-rights/making-a-complaint/taking-a-dispute-to-the-small-claims-court/

[MJack]

thanks..but the part im not sure about is how do I prve the part was faulty/or was deemed to fault at the time of purchase.4 yrs is not a long time for an important component to go wrong?

[belfast4]

thanks..but the part im not sure about is how do I prve the part was faulty/or was deemed to fault at the time of purchase.4 yrs is not a long time for an important component to go wrong?

 

 

 

 

Would this by any chance be a 1.6 td engine?

[rebel11]

You could get an independent report done on it, but wait until the experts advise further.

 

thanks..but the part im not sure about is how do I prve the part was faulty/or was deemed to fault at the time of purchase.4 yrs is not a long time for an important component to go wrong?

[heliosuk]

If the numerous parts that have gone wrong have been fixed under warranty then you could not use this as part of a claim against the supplying dealer. This is who your original contract is with, not Ford.

 

The next thing is that you will have to prove the turbo was faulty at the time of purchase. Given that you have had two years plus use then the odds are it was not. The longer a part is in service the less chance at failure of it being a manufacturing defect.

 

To prove that the part might have been faulty will involve expense probably more than the car is worth.

 

An independant inspection, again one which is worth the paper it is written on will cost a couple of grand and the defence would be easy.

 

Your best bet is to take this up with Ford themselves and ask them how the part fails at 66% of it's designed life on a car with a full service history and ask them for a copy of the DFMEA. There is no way on earth that you will get it but it should start ringing alarm bells and possibly get Ford, via the dealer to start offering some sort of contribution.

 

Contrary to what many of the sue grabbit and run brigade think, even if succesfull in a court you will not get a new turbo at this mileage. The best you could hope for would be a 50% contribution.

[scaniaman]

Yes, perhaps so Heliosuk but the question was asked and so far not answered by the OP, regarding if it is a 1.6tdi.

If it is, then there appears to be rather a lot of people having the same trouble with this engine and i'm very sure Ford is aware of this. This begs two more questions viz: this engine was supposed to be developed in a joint venture between Ford and the PSA (Pug/Cit group),

yet we hear nothing of this same problem from Pug Cit Volvo and Mazda and i think BMW Mini owners. How come??

Secondly, a prominent member in the motor manufacturing fraternity once informed me that it is cheaper for Ford etc. to cough up for repairs to a known defect, IF a claim is made, rather than issue a full model recall which would cost mega bucks.

I don't think that the op has anything to lose by pressing Ford directly on this one especially if he goes the right way about it.

[heliosuk]

Yes you are quite right Scania. Often it is cheaper for a manufactuer to cough up for a fix on fail rather than a re-call. However, re-calls are only generally issued where there is a serious safety issue or that the projected number of claims at an early time in service outweighs a fix on failduring the warranty time.

 

Irrespective of the model of Ford in this case, the car has achieved 66% of the design life of the part in 4 years. This indicates a higher than average mileage per year.

 

The biggest killer of turbos is oil starvation and this is usually due to mis use by the customer i.e. they don't let the engine run on for a minute or two. This is oft detailed in the owners manual but do they use/read them????.........er no. It's easy to prove as well due to the carbon build up.

 

If an engine is used according to the guidelines then in terms of durability the whole thing should last 10 years or 150K miles without a major failure and they are tested to do so.

 

What tends to happen is a series of failures where the owners have not taken heed of the instructions, the manufactuer sees this developing and reacts. Problem is that by the time you see a sensible pattern develop, some prat has started shouting legal action (prevalent on CAG) and then everyone has the problem.

 

If the issue is the 1.6TD then it is not clear cut what the root cause of the failure mode is. Mods have been carried out but need to be taken in context as to why they have been carried out. It does not necessarily follow that a particular mod to one part of an engine is as a result of a failure to another.

 

The development in conjunction with PSA was and is carried out on basic engine architecture i.e. principles employed are similar andor thesame on the baseengine but the top end, emissions strategy is often different.

 

Again, to get a real picture to theextent of any issue on a car you need to normalise the data in terms of repairs/1000 produced.

 

Anything less than 1 is perhaps not financially viable in fixing..........in other words, tis cheaper to repair the cars rather than fix once and for all.

[MJack]

Thank you for the response.

 

I am not however any clearer.

 

The car has had periodical oil and filter changes and services,at regular intervals.There are numerous reasons why the turbo would seize,none of which come up on servicing lists of things to check.

 

Therefore the problem is surely the engine hasnt lived up to expections of a reasonable man.Hence,the issue of not being of merchantable quality.

 

I am not a mechanic and would not know how to "let an engine run on for a min or 2"

[MJack]

Hi...thanks for the respnse

 

What is a DFMEA..?

 

Cheers

[rebel11]

Design Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (DFMEA)

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DFMEA

 

Hi...thanks for the respnse

 

What is a DFMEA..?

 

Cheers

[scaniaman]

I don't know what happened to my last post re turbo and lubricants etc etc.?? MJACK, your post 9 mentions "run on for a minute or two." The old thinking with turbos was that you started the engine from cold and let it tick over for at least a minute. This was to ensure that oil had reached the turbo and some increase in temperature before subjecting the engine to high revs /' stresses. At the end of a journey when the turbo would be very hot, one would allow the engine to idle (tick over) for at least a minute to facilitate a reduction in temperature before switching off. All this was supposed to prevent/ reduce premature failure. i think that this maybe is what Heliosuk is getting at to a degree.

In my missing post i said that with the introduction of high quality fully synthetic oils , the need for warm up / cool down was supposed not to be required.

[Hammy1962]

 

h

[heliosuk]

The need for warm up has never really been an issue. It's the stopping of the engine that gives most grief.There are two issues with this. The first being the lower quality of oil that might have been used where by it doesn't clean properly and also burns leaving a carbon build up thus restricting oil flow to the bearings. Remember that as soon as an engine stops, temperatures actually rise. This is why it is not unusual to turn off a car, get out, lock and walk away only to then hear the fan cut in.

The second issue is with modern engines that have all this fully synthetic oil. Yes it's good but you can't get away from the fact that no oil on a rotating part will lead to problems. The modern turbos of today rely on oil pressure as part of the bearings so they actually float. Cut the pressure and you are running metal to metal.

I have yet to come across an owners handbook which does not say with a turbo equipped car let it run on for a minute or whatever before turning off.

 

As I am pointing out, if the OP wanted to persuit then would have to prove that each and every time they used the car, they let it run on etc etc. which by admission already they say no they don't, whereas Ford would be in a position to prove the use instructions had not been complied with.

 

The key to this issue is to try to negotiate a contribution from Ford via the dealer by asking the question what exists in the DFMEA. Within the DFMEA should be a line rating what would happen to the turbo if the user disregarded the instructions and what the RPN ratings were.

 

By doing this will send signals to Ford that actually you're not going to roll over but again only expect a 44% contribution as you have already had the benefit of 66% of it's design life.

 

Also, don't bother talking to customer services,this is often contracted out to companies thatget bonuses on the number of claims they push away, find CEO of Europe e mail address and send him a snotogram. Never threaten legal action.

 

Don not use "i've read that many people have the problem"either. They have more meaningful data and know if it is actually a design issue or not.

[heliosuk]

 

h

 

LOL...........What do you reckon?

 

Sue, grabbit and run approach with consequences of the jaguar claim guy (please re-post as it makes me smile) or talk sensibly to Ford?

[MJack]

Hi

 

many thanks for the info provided

 

I have started a process with Ford to look into this issue and they are speaking to their "technical"dept to gain advice(prob on reasons why they will not help)

 

I have also contacted Black Horse finance as I purchased the vehicle through them,instantly without even beeen able to find my account they have stated that the onus is on me to provided evidence that the fault was there when the vehicle was purchased.

 

The turbo has been to a turbo company who has stripped it down and it has been advised that no particular reason has been brought up for the fault,and apparently was advised that regulare oil changes(which it has had from the dealer)might keep the new one working better(only a guess though,not a fact)

 

The whole fixing,repairs will prob cost around 900.

 

What i find fustrating is the simple fact that I can spend 20k on a vehicle and within 4 yrs of that vehicle being driven in a reasonable fashion,significant parts can fail and everyone can walk away,and heed no responsibility.

 

I am not accepting this and would appreciate someone with a can -do mind set and discuss ways in which the small guy can face up to huge corporations and seek justice.

 

Im hoping there is someone with my optimism,however many thanks already to folks who have responded.

 

Regards

[heliosuk]

Hi

 

many thanks for the info provided

 

I have started a process with Ford to look into this issue and they are speaking to their "technical"dept to gain advice(prob on reasons why they will not help)

 

I have also contacted Black Horse finance as I purchased the vehicle through them,instantly without even beeen able to find my account they have stated that the onus is on me to provided evidence that the fault was there when the vehicle was purchased.

 

The turbo has been to a turbo company who has stripped it down and it has been advised that no particular reason has been brought up for the fault,and apparently was advised that regulare oil changes(which it has had from the dealer)might keep the new one working better(only a guess though,not a fact)

 

The whole fixing,repairs will prob cost around 900.

 

What i find fustrating is the simple fact that I can spend 20k on a vehicle and within 4 yrs of that vehicle being driven in a reasonable fashion,significant parts can fail and everyone can walk away,and heed no responsibility.

 

I am not accepting this and would appreciate someone with a can -do mind set and discuss ways in which the small guy can face up to huge corporations and seek justice.

 

Im hoping there is someone with my optimism,however many thanks already to folks who have responded.

 

Regards

 

A few interesting observations from this.

 

One that Ford seem to be listening in that that have referred it backwards and two, the turbo company are non committal as to regards the failure mode. The point that seems to be falling on stoney ground at the moment is what the op expects.

 

As pointed out, the chances of a manufacturing defect occuring dimminish with the greater in time of service of the car so given the design life of the compnent the most you can expect is a contribution to the part.

 

I sympathise with what the OP is saying but to move this on the op really needs to state what the car is and what they expect in real terms.

 

I would also like to know why the OP seems to think he has a case.

[MJack]

Hello

 

The vehicle is a Ford S-max.2.0 litre automatic,diesal.

 

I agree that the vehcile has received some enjoyment from myself therefore I am not requesting a full amount to be compensated.

 

But I think Ive made it clear as to the reason I have a case-

 

The vehicle is under 6yrs old

A major component has defected

The vehicle has been serviced at a Ford dealership

The vehicle has completed only 66k

 

can it be any clearer.

 

A warrenty does NOT exsist as my only rights.

 

The SOGA is put in place to specify what rights a consumer has in the event of anybody selling a product that is not fit for the purpose it was built.It has to be of merchantable quality.

 

For the length of time the vehicle has been used,a consumer would NOT expect that a MAJOR component to go faulty.Unless it was a result of inappropiate handling by the consumer.

 

I am a reasonable man and am approaching this situation as seen through the eyes of a reasonable man ,applying the reasonable man test and am somewhat confident the law would to.

 

Regards

[heliosuk]

Ok.

 

Now there is more information. Obviously we can rule out the supposed issue with the 1.6 version.

 

So firstly, who do you think you should be going after? Dealer or Ford?

 

In your first post in this thread you ask " Where do I stand in regards to SOGA in reclaiming my monies due to the fact that the engine cannot be of merchantable quality due to the failure of one of its components in such a short space of time,with not real wear and tear either". And now you state "I agree that the vehcile has received some enjoyment from myself therefore I am not requesting a full amount to be compensated"

 

So what exactly are you after?

 

You then go on to say" For the length of time the vehicle has been used,a consumer would NOT expect that a MAJOR component to go faulty.Unless it was a result of inappropiate handling by the consumer. Yet you post "I am not a mechanic and would not know how to "let an engine run on for a min or 2". I think that the instruction is pretty clear in the owners manual as I understand.

 

You also post

 

"A warrenty does NOT exsist as my only rights.

The SOGA is put in place to specify what rights a consumer has in the event of anybody selling a product that is not fit for the purpose it was built.It has to be of merchantable quality".

 

This is very true but the problem with this site is that it keeps harping on about SOGA etc and your rights without fully explaining the way it is and can be interpreted. There are few cases in this part of the forums where legal action has been succesfull and in nearly all cases it has not. In some cases the problems are so ridiculous it beggars belief.

 

However I think here there might be grounds to go for it but the risk is high. What the SOGA advocates don't point out is that should the case fail over a specific amount you are liable for the costs and I reckon in this one you are sailing a bit close to that mark.

 

Try it by all means but don't come back crying like one poster who was so cock sure of himself with his DPF issue despite being told he was on a sticky wicket.

 

Your best bet is to negotiate this out with ford without resorting to legal threats etc as to do that they will automatically bog down. Reasoned argument can and does work with most manufactuers and it is that approach I think you should be taking.

[MJack]

Ok.

 

Now there is more information. Obviously we can rule out the supposed issue with the 1.6 version.

 

So firstly, who do you think you should be going after? Dealer or Ford?

 

In your first post in this thread you ask " Where do I stand in regards to SOGA in reclaiming my monies due to the fact that the engine cannot be of merchantable quality due to the failure of one of its components in such a short space of time,with not real wear and tear either". And now you state "I agree that the vehcile has received some enjoyment from myself therefore I am not requesting a full amount to be compensated"

 

So what exactly are you after?

 

You then go on to say" For the length of time the vehicle has been used,a consumer would NOT expect that a MAJOR component to go faulty.Unless it was a result of inappropiate handling by the consumer. Yet you post "I am not a mechanic and would not know how to "let an engine run on for a min or 2". I think that the instruction is pretty clear in the owners manual as I understand.

 

You also post

 

"A warrenty does NOT exsist as my only rights.

The SOGA is put in place to specify what rights a consumer has in the event of anybody selling a product that is not fit for the purpose it was built.It has to be of merchantable quality".

 

This is very true but the problem with this site is that it keeps harping on about SOGA etc and your rights without fully explaining the way it is and can be interpreted. There are few cases in this part of the forums where legal action has been succesfull and in nearly all cases it has not. In some cases the problems are so ridiculous it beggars belief.

 

However I think here there might be grounds to go for it but the risk is high. What the SOGA advocates don't point out is that should the case fail over a specific amount you are liable for the costs and I reckon in this one you are sailing a bit close to that mark.

 

Try it by all means but don't come back crying like one poster who was so cock sure of himself with his DPF issue despite being told he was on a sticky wicket.

 

Your best bet is to negotiate this out with ford without resorting to legal threats etc as to do that they will automatically bog down. Reasoned argument can and does work with most manufactuers and it is that approach I think you should be taking.

 

 

Quality reply- i love the directness.Has made me smile at least.

 

Ok back to business.

 

Do you have any legal background-as it feels like you cannot identify what is allowed/what is possible/what is likely.

 

If I went to a prolific solicitor and said theres 5k give me some advice-after furnishing him will all the facts,I would be unhappy if he asked me "what I wanted."

What I would hope for is an evaluation as to what we can feel we have the most likely success in receiving.May it be not merchantable quality etc under SOGA or whatever.That is the reason for my posting on this site.

 

I have spoke to Ford and dealer and asked for an amicable proposal from them to which I have received a response which was firm in the stance of "theres nothing we can do-we are not prepared to give this issue any consideration"

 

I have now had the prob fixed,and have opted for the lesser expensive option and would be happy with a contribution towards this amount.

 

The total price was 1100,I would be content(not happy)with a 3rd.

[heliosuk]

I do not have a legal background but an automotive engineering one. And likewise your response made me laugh. Anything is allowed, anything is possible and the outcome could be anything. It depends how much time and resource you want to put into it.

 

What you hope to get out of it is actually very reasonable and there is potential to screw a bit more with what you have previously posted.

 

If I was you, forget who you have been dealing with as they are a sub contracted arm. You need to ensure you are dealing with the people who can actually make a reasoned decision.

Edited September 7, 2012 by ims21

[MJack]

I do not have a legal background but an automotive engineering one. And likewise your response made me laugh. Anything is allowed, anything is possible and the outcome could be anything. It depends how much time and resource you want to put into it.

 

What you hope to get out of it is actually very reasonable and there is potential to screw a bit more with what you have previously posted.

 

If I was you, forget who you have been dealing with as they are a sub contracted arm. You need to ensure you are dealing with the people who can actually make a reasoned decision.

 

 

such as?

[MJack]

alas...

new problem!!!!

 

I am now experiencing transmission issues.....spoke to ford,they want me to pay for another remote diagnostics .....surley,this cant go on forever..!!!!