Rear brake disc wear

The consumer’s issue:

I took my 13-plate car for a routine service in 2019 and was told the rear brake discs needed to be replaced as they had corroded. I’ve owned the car from new and I’ve only covered 14,000 miles since I bought it. The manufacturer refused my claim, as the car was three years outside of the new car warranty, but I believe they should cover the cost of the repair under warranty (around £300), as the brake discs are clearly suffering from a manufacturing defect.”

The accredited business’ response:

  • The vehicle was registered in June 2013, and the new warranty expired three years later.
  • Having heard back from our technicians, we can confirm that the brake discs on the customer’s car are showing signs of corrosion, and as such, we have a duty of care to our customers to advise when they need to be replaced.
  • The corrosion is potentially due to the low mileage that the vehicle has completed.
  • The reason it appears that only the rear brake discs are affected would be due to the weight transfer being predominantly towards the front of the vehicle, meaning the front discs are used more often, and are subject to greater braking forces.
  • As this is a wear and tear component, we do not give a lifetime expectancy for any part that is exposed to external influences. It is also the view of our technicians that the issue with the discs would not be classed as a manufacturing defect.
  • As a result of the above, we would not be able to assist the consumer with the cost of replacing the brake discs.

The adjudication outcome:

  • The adjudicator remarked that the consumer’s new car warranty had expired some time before the issue with the brake discs was discovered.
  • Also there was no evidence showing the issue with the discs was the result of poor workmanship or materials used during the manufacturing process.
  • Therefore, the consumer’s complaint was not upheld and the manufacturer wasn’t liable for paying for the repairs.
  • However, the customer disagreed with the outcome, and requested a final decision from the ombudsman.

The ombudsman’s final decision:

  • The ombudsman could appreciate why the consumer would be disappointed to find out that the rear discs had corroded after such low mileage.
  • The vehicle manufacturer explained that lack of usage can cause corrosion, and why the rear discs were impacted differently to those at the front.
  • Brake discs are considered to be a wear and tear component, meaning the vehicle manufacturer would not be liable for replacing them, even when within the warranty period.
  • As the consumer raised their concerns three years after the manufacturer’s warranty expired, the vehicle manufacturer had no further obligations towards them.
  • Also, the customer’s complaint about the quality and durability of the brake discs couldn’t be pursued against the manufacturer, as they hadn’t sold the car directly to the consumer.
  • Therefore, the ombudsman agreed with the adjudicator’s decision and didn’t uphold the customer’s complaint.

Conclusion:

  • Neither party contested the final decision, and the case was closed.