The consumer’s issue:
“I purchased a 10-plate convertible in June 2013, and in December 2017, the car was making a strange noise, so I took it to the dealership that usually serviced my vehicle. I was advised by the business that the issue was with the power steering pump and that I should leave the car with them, which I did. The car stayed at the dealership, and I was handed a bill for £488, which included labour and diagnostics. The business was not prepared to contribute towards this cost.
In late March 2019, over a year later, the power steering pump failed again, so I went back to the repairing dealership. Further diagnostics were carried out, and it was found that the vehicle needed another new steering pump and that the brake pads were damaged. I was quoted £1,500 for the repairs. I wrote to the general manager, and said that, either the work carried out in December 2017, or the part, must have contributed to the most recent failure.
The next day, I got a call offering me a goodwill gesture in the form of a 60% discount on the cost, bringing it to around £800. There was a delay in sourcing the part, and I was given my car back in May with a bill of £651. The manufacturer also offered me a £200 voucher to spend on their products in compensation, but I rejected this and requested a cheque for the value of £200 or more as an alternative to bring my complaint to a close. However, they did not agree to this.”
The accredited business’ response:
- At the time the consumer’s vehicle first failed, it would have been seven years old. The customer brought the vehicle into our dealership without a booking, but we inspected it and completed an initial diagnosis of the fault.
- We informed the consumer as to what repairs we considered to be necessary and what the costs would be before these were authorised and undertaken.
- The first repair we completed fixed the initial fault. However, the second issue with the vehicle happened 14 months later, and in our view, this was unrelated to our workmanship. Even so, we offered a gesture of goodwill towards the cost of the repair without admission of liability that it was our work which had failed, or that it has caused the problems with the consumer’s vehicle.
- The customer has not provided any evidence to support their views that it was our workmanship which was substandard, and has led to the issues with their vehicle. Therefore, as we believe we have not done anything wrong, we will not honour the £200 goodwill voucher offered by the manufacturer.
The adjudication outcome:
- The Motor Ombudsman adjudicator said that the burden of proof was on the consumer to show that the dealership’s workmanship fell below the standard of reasonable skill and care.
- The adjudicator therefore remarked that they would need to see some form of technical evidence by an independent expert that demonstrated that issues presented in December 2017 and March 2019 were because the business had failed to exercise reasonable care and skill.
- However, due to the fact that this was not provided, this element of the complaint could not be upheld.
- With regards to the request for compensation of £200 in a monetary form rather than as a voucher, the adjudicator pointed out that The Motor Ombudsman is unable to make awards for compensation where it is related to inconvenience and stress. Furthermore, goodwill gestures are at the discretion of a business, and it is their choice as to how they are made.
- Therefore, no breaches of the Service and Repair Code were found in this case, and the consumer’s complaint was not upheld in their favour.
Conclusion:
- The dealership accepted the adjudicator’s decision, and the consumer, whilst disappointed with the outcome, also accepted it, closing the case.
