The consumer’s issue:
“My two-year-old vehicle lost power on the motorway and the clutch didn’t work. After pulling on to the hard shoulder, there was a loud bang and smoke appeared from under the bonnet. It would seem that the gearbox exploded and there was a small fire which I extinguished. I reported the issue to my insurer who inspected the car and said they thought a mechanical defect had caused the failure, and it should be covered under my warranty. However, the accredited business disagreed with this and refused to pay for the repair. I would like the accredited business to repair my car free of charge under the warranty.”
The accredited business’ response:
- We received contact from the consumer’s insurer and a joint inspection, between us, and the insurer was arranged.
- During this inspection, we found that the consumer had ignored a slipping clutch and the pressure plate showed signs of overheating.
- We concluded that the clutch failed due to wear and tear, and the insurer verbally agreed with us that this was the case.
- The insurer covered the cost of the consequential damage.
- The clutch is a wear and tear item and therefore is only covered under warranty if it fails due to a manufacturing defect.
The adjudication outcome:
- The adjudicator upheld the customer’s complaint.
- Initially, she asked for a further independent inspection because the evidence was evenly balanced – however, the car was no longer available for this.
- On the basis of the evidence she had, she had a formal report from the insurer confirming that they thought the car failed due to a manufacturing defect – there was no evidence to support that the insurer had changed their position.
- The accredited business also didn’t supply their report in full.
- The adjudicator awarded 70% of the cost of repair to the consumer – she reduced this because there was an element of doubt and no further inspection could be completed.
- The consumer accepted the decision, but the accredited business was unhappy, so the case was referred to the ombudsman for a final decision.
The ombudsman’s final decision:
- The ombudsman agreed with the adjudicator.
- No report had been provided, either from the accredited business or the insurer, confirming that an engineer had inspected the vehicle and found the fault to be due to wear and tear or driver misuse.
- The only written report was from the insurer stating that they thought the car failed due to a manufacturing defect.
- Additionally, the correspondence from the time of the breakdown said that the accredited business had submitted a report to the insurer and that the insurer hadn’t commented further, meaning the accredited business assumed they agreed – which was different from their current position.
- As such, the ombudsman felt the resolution proposed by the adjudicator was fair.
Conclusion:
- The accredited business was found to be in breach of the Code of Practice for New Cars and the consumer was awarded 70% of the cost of repairs.
