Bought a car from garage, 5 months later try to claim on warranty rejected...thoughts?

GinG

GinG

GinG

Soldato
Joined
22 Jul 2006
Posts
7,719
Evening All,

Just wondering what people think on this situation and what steps people think I should take.

Dual Mass Flywheel failed on a car 5 months after I purchased it from a garage. When I bought the car they chucked in a 5* full of loopholes warranty, which proves to be useless.

The warranty company has rejected on the fact a slight noise can be herd from the bearings in flywheel which has led to the DMF failure so will not pay out.

When I bought the car I asked about a warranty as my main concerns was the Multitronic box and DMF and was told (verbally :rolleyes:) that this warranty is one of the best out there and shouldnt be a problem.

As I needed the car I got the work done (£800) however the garage will not return and calls or emails with me mentioning this happening.

Do you think I could go down the route of a car being sold and miss-selling the warranty?

I have a little bit of a sour taste left in my mouth about this, I do not mind paying as the car is driving superb again but the garage is a well known loca garage and I could have probabally saved £1k on buying private!!

Cheers guys and sorry for the wall of text and any punctuation and gramatical errors!
 
I'm not sure what is meant by the bearings can be heard. Are they saying that because a slight noise can be heard you should have known about the problem and the fact you didn't know has meant you didn't keep to prerequisites of the warranty? Or are they saying the warranty was void all along for that piece of kit because it was sold as seen?
 
Gilly said:
I'm not sure what is meant by the bearings can be heard. Are they saying that because a slight noise can be heard you should have known about the problem and the fact you didn't know has meant you didn't keep to prerequisites of the warranty? Or are they saying the warranty was void all along for that piece of kit because it was sold as seen?
Click to expand...

I will quote from the letter from warranty company:

'The engineer reported that the vehicle was stripped for inspection, and the Dual Mass Flywheel inspected, there was lift noted on he central bearing this had not collapsed and when the two masses were manipulated by hand an audible noise was noted. The engineer confirmed that the central bearing wear is attributed to inservice deterioration. This is not a sudden failure,'

Now the garage I got the work down at say they would class it as a failure & also an engineering company local to me who has looked at it also says it is a failure and not wear & tear,
 
I'm guessing they mean that you failed to address the bearing problem, and as a result the DMF subsequently failed.

They are rejecting the claim on the basis that you should have had the bearings sorted x months ago?

I'd be livid, and I'd definitely be pushing them (the warranty company) hard to sort this out.
 
Essentially they are trying to pass this off as a wear and tear item when you have two other opinions stating they regard it as sudden failure (i.e a fault) - it could be worth getting that in writing from both other parties and presenting this to the warranty co.
 
I have to say, there are several warranty threads here right now... and these warranties aren't worth the paper they are written on, absolutely atrocious service, they can't have many repeat customers.

Sorry to hear.
 
acemastr said:
I have to say, there are several warranty threads here right now... and these warranties aren't worth the paper they are written on, absolutely atrocious service, they can't have many repeat customers.

Sorry to hear.
Click to expand...

and one of theme is an Audi approved used one! :eek:
 
As I said in your thread before you bought it about these warranties..

Mixed. Ranging from no hassle claims to having to fight to get an obviously covered claim through to having a claim outright refused for ridiculous reasons.
Click to expand...

Sorry to hear you are having problems. You need to be very careful with companies like this as it is in their best interest to stonewall you and try not to pay out. They are presumably trying to argue that either:

a) The fault is due to neglect as you should have noticed the DMF wearing because of the noise it was making

or

b) The DMF has failed due to fair wear and tear as would be expected with age and mileage.

I'm guessing this was some sort of crappy warranty from a typical second hand car dealer rather than a WD policy as WD cover wear and tear? Who is the warranty company?

Your plan of action should be as follows:

a) A recorded delivery, well written, factual and non emotive letter to the warranty company disputing the rejection, enclosing your statements from two independant repairers

They will almost certainly still not budge, but because you've done a, you can then move onto..

b) The Financial Ombudsman service. As the warranty is an insurance product, you can complain to the ombudsman who will review your case and act if they feel it's justified.

Don't also forget that you may have redress against the original selling dealer under the terms of SOGA, unless he can demonstrate that there was categorically no excessive wear and/or problems with the DMF when you purchased the car.

Used diesels - a complete PITA, IMHO. Yes, petrol cars have DMF's too but this sort of thing is not nearly as common, its almost a case of when not if with DMF's on cars like this. And you've still got that awful Multitronic box as well so I'd be looking at buying a 'quality' warranty ASAP (If such a thing exists?).
 
Last edited:
Not only are these warranty folks a real pain to deal with as a customer of theirs, its no better when your the garage fixing the car. I once spent half an hour on the phone answering questiion after question, all geared so i'd say the failure was the customers fault due to things like towing etc.
I'd not want a warranty unless it was the manufacturers one from when it was new, and even then, they aren't that great.
 
I just can't believe people buy these warranties. When I bought my first car in 1999, they were **** then and they still are today. I got one "thrown in" with my first car - a second hand french hot hatch (recipe for something failing) - and even then at 17 years young knew that it would be farsical to claim with anything. Low and behold within the first 6 months something major went wrong (I forget what it was) but it wasn't covered and ended up costing me a few hundred.

Since then over the years of growing up I've always been particularly stubborn (girlfriend would call it cheap) with warranties and never paid extra for them on all sorts of household appliances as well. I think compared to repair costs and things breaking over the years I am well up on someone that would have purchased warranties for major purchases.
 
Thanks all for the information so far, I knew the warranty was not worth the paper it was written on so I do have a 'slush' fund for such problems.

The thing is I have 2 other opinions stating it is a sudden failure (as soon as the noise started it was sent into the garage), I am going to fight this and see how I get on.

Fox you have some good points there and I can have a go at both parties, I would be happy even for a 50% payout!!

Will keep you all updated and no doubt be back here for more advise!
 
jaybee said:
I just can't believe people buy these warranties. When I bought my first car in 1999, they were **** then and they still are today. I got one "thrown in" with my first car - a second hand french hot hatch (recipe for something failing) - and even then at 17 years young knew that it would be farsical to claim with anything. Low and behold within the first 6 months something major went wrong (I forget what it was) but it wasn't covered and ended up costing me a few hundred.

Since then over the years of growing up I've always been particularly stubborn (girlfriend would call it cheap) with warranties and never paid extra for them on all sorts of household appliances as well. I think compared to repair costs and things breaking over the years I am well up on someone that would have purchased warranties for major purchases.
Click to expand...

Warranty was chucked in with the car, so I did not pay a penny as from my thread about buying the car Fox kindly pointed out how useless they are.

Am I right in thinking the law is a 3 month minimum rather than a 6 month minimum from the car dealer?

Is it worth pointing out the car dealer is a merc & ford dealership also? Not sure if this adds anything??
 
How old is the car and how many miles?

The fact it's gone crunch just 5 months after purchase must work in your favour, as it must've been on it's way out back then?

And they surely cannot say "you must've heard it", as you plainly did not, nor could they prove it was that audible.
 
Is the warranty not there more for the dealer?

I mean you are covered for 6 months under the SOGA. Something goes wrong after month 5 and the garage need to fix this. The garage are happy as the warranty company will pay out, so they get paid to make money out of a car they've already made money on.

If the warranty company don't pay out then tough, the garage must swallow the cost?

That's how I see it?
 
Guys is there any documentation that states the service life span of a DMF twinned with an auto box?

Car is 6 years old & 70k miles currently.

Cheers
 
I thought the SOGA essentially meant you were covered at least in part, for manufacturing failures for up to at least 5 years.

Our LCD TV failed after 4 years, we contacted the manufacturer (Sony) quoting the SOGA, they had the TV checked out, agreed it was a manufacturing fault and gave us £500, set was £700 new, so only cost us £200 to use that TV for 4 years. Can you not pursue issues with cars in the same fashion?
 
Zillio said:
I thought the SOGA essentially meant you were covered at least in part, for manufacturing failures for up to at least 5 years.

Our LCD TV failed after 4 years, we contacted the manufacturer (Sony) quoting the SOGA, they had the TV checked out, agreed it was a manufacturing fault and gave us £500, set was £700 new, so only cost us £200 to use that TV for 4 years. Can you not pursue issues with cars in the same fashion?
Click to expand...

He has a used car, not a new car.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom