The consumer’s issue:
The customer’s pickup developed issues with the EGR cooler within the manufacturer’s warranty period, and the EGR coolant pump was subsequently replaced. However, 16 months after the repairs were completed under warranty, the engine management light came on, and fault codes that were previously present in relation to the coolant pump, reappeared.
The vehicle, which was still within warranty at this point, was taken to dealerships in the manufacturer’s franchise network on two separate occasions. However, they could not diagnose any faults, and advised the consumer to monitor the problem.
Two months passed, and the vehicle owner returned to one of the dealerships due to the re-occurrence of the same fault codes relating to the EGR coolant pump. On this occasion, the business decided to replace the EGR coolant pump under warranty for the second time to fix the problem.
Nevertheless, eight weeks’ later, the engine suffered a catastrophic failure, and the fault codes relating to the EGR coolant pump were also present again. At this point, the dealership recommended the replacement of the engine, but as the manufacturer’s warranty had now expired, the manufacturer offered to cover only 75% of the costs, leaving the customer to pay the remaining portion.
The customer declined this offer, because from their perspective, the initial fault occurred within the warranty period, therefore making the manufacturer liable for covering the entire cost of repair – the main point of contention considered in this case.
The case outcome:
When looking into the dispute, it was important for the ombudsman to create an accurate timeline of events to show what had happened each time the problem was reported, to determine if the fault to the engine occurred within the warranty period.
It was not disputed that repairs to the EGR coolant system were completed under warranty on two occasions before the engine failed. The EGR coolant pump was replaced, and then was changed for a second time 16 months later. The engine then failed and needed to be replaced. The ombudsman therefore noted that there appeared to be an underlying issue with the vehicle that was causing the EGR coolant pump to stop functioning.
In the first instance, the business believed the issue to be with the EGR coolant pump, which is why this was replaced. However, when this part failed again nearly a year and a half later, and after the vehicle had covered a further 20,000 miles, this should have indicated a deeper problem was present inside the engine.
Instead of replacing this part again, from the ombudsman’s point of view, more should have been done by the business to investigate what the underlying problem was. As the EGR coolant pump had already been replaced, this should have informed the dealership in the manufacturer’s network that this was not the underlying issue. If a deeper investigation into the engine was completed within the warranty period, then this could have prevented the subsequent engine failure that occurred two months outside of the warranty period.
Based on the course of events that were documented within the evidence provided, the complaint was upheld in the consumer’s favour, meaning the manufacturer was responsible for the full cost of replacing the pickup’s engine.
