Audi warranty denial....

Rroff said:
..
It is annoying how little car manufacturers work to a larger standard in respect to stuff like this - it definitely should be mandated IMO as amongst other things in a larger context can help to reduce waste and hence less impact on the environment, etc.
Click to expand...
And based on the previous threads about the new European standards, it looks like we are taking a step back on what standardisation there was (OBD having 'options' discussed to do something differently with it, including ditching it totally)...

I wonder if 'Right to Repair' applies to cars...
 
wolfie138 said:
nobody i know keeps their car keys on the same ring as other keys lol. what a stupid concept.
Click to expand...
oh dear i hope not a age thing we as a family always keep our car keys on the same ring as the house key otherwise we might drive away not locking the house :) jk . i dont think in over 50 years of driving other than first picking a car up have i ever had the key seperate from others.
 
TheOracle said:
There should be disclaimers saying the device could invalidate your warranty to help protect customers. Not everyone is clued up on such matters. Again, you could argue people should research, research, research.....but has the world really gone so far as to say 'it's everyman for himself'.

Question.....who is actually helping the OP? Sounds like he's fighting this by himself.
Click to expand...

I agree, if Audi are happy to claim that this invalidates the warranty, then it should be easy to get a letter confirming that stance, and a complaint in to the Ghost manufacturer to state that nowhere on their site, or at any point during purchase/installation were you advised that their device would void your manufacturer warranty. Had you been made aware of that being the case you obviously would not have proceeded with the purchase/installation of said 3rd party device.

dLockers said:
And based on the previous threads about the new European standards, it looks like we are taking a step back on what standardisation there was (OBD having 'options' discussed to do something differently with it, including ditching it totally)...

I wonder if 'Right to Repair' applies to cars...
Click to expand...

Right to repair technically already exists for cars. There are various shops/companies you can purchase pretty much every component that makes up the car. The tricky part is a) having the mechanical knowledge to repair it, and b) in most cases having the correct tools, and that's not just a set of spanners, but also the correct OBD equipment that can connect to the cars ECU. You're perfectly welcome to purchase the OBD equipment, but the majority of people repairing their own cars won't have or want to spend thousands/tens of thousands on the scanning equipment.
 
i fear the ultimate solution here is to get a good independent v/w audi specialist or a good independent auto electrician involved to find and rectify the problem.

otherwise this is just going to develop into ...audi blaming anyone else for the break down , and ghost washing there hands (sounds like they have) with rac ultimatly saying well it was broken down with said fault when we recovered it.

when the fault has been found and sorted then you will have a clear path to proceed, but make sure the independent is impartial and prepared /qualified to back up any findings he may find.


by the way if they have already changed the power steering rack without authorisation they should refit it , as this may be part of the fault, i cant see them giving you the old part and leaving the new one on the vehicle unless you pay for the new one , so no warranty no pay , .


oh and unless i missed it what was the outcome with your insurance company as in i was driving along and the vehicle stopped and now appears to be non repairable.....
 
Last edited:
This report is interesting too, as they actually contacted manufacturers for their view (it's from an Australian research company):

https://carsafe.com.au/assets/NMVTRC_Ghost_Immobiliser_Report_FINAL_.pdf

11. Other Considerations
Manufacturer Warranties
During our investigations, we came across claims that guaranteed the product would not void the manufacturer warranty.
We therefore sought the car manufacturer’s viewpoint on the installation of aftermarket devices regarding warranties. We
posed the following questions:
1. Does installation of aftermarket immobilisers void the manufacturer warranty?
2. Does it make a difference if it has been installed by an authorised installer?
3. If something with the electrics broke, would the aftermarket device likely be blamed for the fault?
The manufacturer responses were unanimous that:
• Yes, the warranty will be voided;
• No, it does not make any difference if they were an authorised installer; and
• Yes, any aftermarket installation would likely be looked at as the source of a fault.
“Just the introduction on a non-manufacturer electrical / electronic component into the vehicle’s electrical system can cause
disturbance to the BUS / CAN systems, let alone physical damage to various electronic control units”.
There was also comment made regarding non-electrical components, “(as the manufacturer) we couldn’t not pay for a faulty
door trim if it has a non-genuine immobiliser fitted but if they removed the door trim to install – we wouldn’t cover it.”
Any addition to the electrical system of a vehicle has potential to cause issues. In fairness, this may not be a major concern
for those vehicles that are already out of warranty or several years old, but caution should still be taken from a safety (and
financial) perspective as it could adversely affect other systems within the vehicle.
Our advice to the consumer is if voiding the manufacturer warranty is of concern to you, we suggest contacting your
manufacturer or local dealer and get their advice before installing any aftermarket equipment.
Click to expand...
 
wolfie138 said:
nobody i know keeps their car keys on the same ring as other keys lol. what a stupid concept.
Click to expand...

Kenai said:
Sounds like a poll is needed.

Are you a weirdo who carries all your keys together all the time even when you don't need them all or are you sensible and keep them separate, carrying only the keys you need? :p
Click to expand...

GOGOmt0.jpg


All tend to get used at least once every day.
 
it almost comical (not for the original op i agree) , but if a warranty is going to be invalid , just because a item is fitted ,( atm not proved to have actually caused a fault) without any idea of what the actual fault is we almost go in a full circle.

speaking from a standpoint of having fitted thousands of security systems on vehicles ranging from motorbikes to hgvs . all on the instruction of owners mostly because it was a insurance requirement, what happens when said insurance companies decide ...hmm the products that are approved are now voiding warranties , lets now decide to not offer insurance , or increase beyond reasonable the insurance on said vehicles.

bet the manufactures start approving the products very quickly or loose there sales. if you cant insure a bmw/audi etc because a set product scraps the warranty then you dont sell many.
 
Audi have an approved tracker and remote immobilizer that the dealers will fit. In the UK I believe it’s a Cobra/Vodafone system with a 3 or 5-year subscription.

On the latest model you can stop the car and lock the doors with the thief inside it apparently.

I believe this is the only option that doesn’t impact your warranty.
 
gc123 said:
it used to be if thatchams had approved it then it was pretty much done and dusted. unless the standards have dropped.
Click to expand...
I dunno man, Thatcham really let themselves down if that was the case during the hot hatch era of the early 2000's. The amount of dodgy Cliffords fitted is enough to put anyone off :p
 
So the RAC emailed me this morning...

Dear Mr ****

Following my previous correspondence, I have now completed my investigation into your concerns and welcome this opportunity to explain my findings.

Our partner Burke Bros who attended your vehicle on 17 February 2021 has issued a report to me detailing what actions he carried out at the time. I have forwarded this to our National Technical Centre (NTC) for advice.

Our partner Burke Bros advised on arrival you mention you required recovery to Audi as the Alternator had failed. Their technician put the battery pack on the vehicle and the vehicle started, he removed the batter pack and the vehicle cut out. He then loaded the vehicle to take in to storage and delivered to dealer. Burke Bros advised they only operate 12v battery packs and could not have caused the damage claimed.

NTC have considered your comments but they believe the if the engine cut out when the leads were disconnected, this should not be damage from the alternator if the charging system is not working correctly. The engine has cut out due to the battery not being able to support the electrics with no power from the charging system. At present there is insufficient evidence to suggest our partner Burke Bros were negligent whilst working on your vehicle or enhanced the repair costs.

In view of this, I regret that I am unable to accept liability for the costs you have claimed. I appreciate this is not the response you was hoping for, but trust this email explains the reasons for this decision.

Although I recognise that your overall experience was not a positive one, I hope you will remain confident in our ability to provide a first class service to you in the future.

Yours sincerely

***
Customer Care Executive

Apart from it being written by someone who is illiterate I will say the following...

The first issue I would raise with this response is that it was is the recovery guy that said about the alternator being the cause not me???

They have not addressed the other multiple times it has been jump started outside of my presence due to it going to storage or the fact that the main dealer is stating that an external influence is the cause of the damage to the fuses?

Don't really know how to reply to this either??
 
Last edited:
It's going to be extremely difficult to prove the RAC are at fault, especially as they've used a contractor, they'll close ranks etc too.

Tough situation. I also thought Ghost's reply was a bit of a cop-out, but nobody is going to say anything that may put them on the hook for the damage.
 
Robbo said:
It's going to be extremely difficult to prove the RAC are at fault, especially as they've used a contractor, they'll close ranks etc too.

Tough situation. I also thought Ghost's reply was a bit of a cop-out, but nobody is going to say anything that may put them on the hook for the damage.
Click to expand...
Pretty much this. You can't prove it was the RAC and they know that - so their response is exactly as you'd expect.
 
OP, I think you'll have to chalk this one up to experience and see what Audi can do to fix it as cheaply as possible. There's seemingly too many variables to contend with, in the mean time you're paying for a car you can't drive. (I'm sure you said you're leasing)
 
Really feel sorry for you, dreadful situation to be in.
Seems like all parties (Ghost, Audi and RAC) have said "not our problem, sorry" which I kind of expected when I read the thread.

I suggest you appoint an independent auto-electrician/garage to diagnose the fault and produce proof of the cause. Unless you have some evidence, none of the other companies will entertain paying/support anything.

Your only anomaly here is Audi have started changing parts from what you have said? That might be a leverage point to use, but suspect your best option is to get it diagnosed by a independent/reputable firm to ascertain the faulty items and the cause.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom