The consumer’s issue:
“I have been experiencing issues with my car consuming too much oil. I took my vehicle to a franchise dealership, and they conducted a computer update and informed me to monitor the oil levels. The vehicle has been back to the dealer three times before it was established that I needed a new engine. As the car was out of warranty when the fault was eventually found, the vehicle manufacturer only offered to cover 60% of the cost of the repair, but I would like the total cost to be paid by them.”
The accredited business’ response:
- The consumer’s vehicle was three and a half years old when they bought it in 2017.
- The customer got in touch with us in March 2018 to explain that the car was consuming too much oil.
- Also in March 2018, the vehicle was inspected and no oil leaks were found. We therefore advised the owner to monitor the oil level.
- Four months later, the customer got in touch with us again to state that they had only completed 4,000 miles during this time, but had topped up the engine with four litres of oil.
- We therefore recommended that the engine was removed to diagnose the issue, and it was found that the cause of the problem was worn piston rings.
- As a result, a replacement engine was needed and we agreed to cover 60% of the repair cost as the vehicle was outside of the warranty period.
The adjudication outcome:
- The Motor Ombudsman adjudicator confirmed with the vehicle manufacturer that the warranty was valid from June 2014 to June 2018.
- The adjudicator highlighted the fact that the repair was declined under warranty due to the vehicle being outside of the warranty period.
- However, it was deemed unfair to reject the claim on this basis if this was the only reason, as contact was made with the business about the oil leak whilst the car was still under warranty.
- The Motor Ombudsman therefore decided it was not fair and reasonable to decline the consumer’s warranty claim.
- The adjudicator noted that the fault with the injectors may have caused wear damage to the piston rings. They also remarked that the warranty does cover consequential damage to the vehicle resulting from the original defect.
- As a result, the complaint was upheld in the consumer’s favour and the adjudicator recommended that the manufacturer covered the remaining 40% of the repair costs above what was previously proposed (i.e. the entire sum).
Conclusion:
- The vehicle manufacturer agreed to cover the total cost of the engine replacement and the case was closed.
