The consumer’s issue:
“I bought a new hatchback in 2014, and in July 2019, a dashboard warning light came on for the airbag switch. I booked my vehicle into my local dealership for investigation, and they concluded that a part was needed, as the airbags were not working. The business said that it would take seven to 10 days to get a new one, and that my claim under the vehicle’s lifetime warranty was accepted.
I went on holiday and returned at the beginning of August, and when I contacted them, they advised they were still waiting for the required component. I had to chase them every week, but the part was still on back order. I therefore contacted the manufacturer directly to raise a complaint, but I still made no progress. The car is due for its MOT in October, which means that I have been driving around for three months with a faulty airbag.
As a resolution to my complaint, I was looking for a replacement car if the part cannot be sourced to repair my vehicle. Eventually, the business did carry out the work, but used a part from an old vehicle which they had, rather than a new part from the factory. I think the business should ensure that all repairs are carried out with new parts components.”
The accredited business’ response:
- The customer’s vehicle required a new steering Column Integrated Module (CIM) due to a fault with the airbag. We ordered the part, but this was on backorder with the manufacturer.
- We spent many hours chasing the manufacturer, to eventually find out the part had actually been discontinued.
- We supplied the customer with a courtesy vehicle, and we understand that the manufacturer also provided one up until December 2019 when we completed the repair.
- The delays were not in our control, and we believe that we have done everything possible to resolve the situation.
- Eventually the vehicle was repaired and returned to the customer at no cost to themselves and, as a business, we even carried out the overdue MOT free of charge in recognition of the length of time the repair had taken.
The adjudication outcome:
- The adjudicator acknowledged that the required part was not available, that it was on back order from the manufacturer, and that the business tried on several occasions to get updates directly from the manufacturer, and once it was told the part had been discontinued.
- They also noted that neither party had provided evidence to show an old part from a different vehicle was used in the repair.
- The adjudicator also stated that the business was not obligated to provide a courtesy vehicle under the Code of Practice, but this was completed as a gesture of goodwill, which was considered to be a reasonable action.
- The business could not be held responsible for the fact that the manufacturer discontinued the part, and the adjudicator advised that the customer was entitled to raise a complaint directly with the manufacturer, should they wished to do so.
- As the consumer had received courtesy vehicle, as well as a free repair and MOT, the adjudicator deemed this to be a fair and reasonable resolution to their complaint.
- The adjudicator concluded that the business acted in accordance with the Service and Repair Code, and that there was no evidence to demonstrate that the eventual repair was not of satisfactory quality.
- Therefore, the customer’s complaint was not upheld in their favour.
Conclusion:
- Neither party responded to the adjudication outcome, and therefore it was accepted that both parties accepted the decision, and the case was closed.
