The consumer’s issue:
“I took my car in for a repair as I was having problems changing gear and the clutch assembly was therefore changed. However, approximately two weeks later, the vehicle started experiencing similar problems. Upon inspection, the garage identified that the transmission had to be replaced. Therefore, I believe that the business carried out an unnecessary repair to the clutch.”
The accredited business’ response:
- The manufacturer’s warranty on the clutch is for six months or 6,500 miles.
- The first gearbox and clutch were replaced due to damage caused as a result of an adverse clutch condition. This created excessive heat, which caused part of the clutch mechanism to become deformed, as well as damage to the gearbox, which was beyond economic repair.
- The replacement of the clutch by ourselves was not dis-similar to the clutch and bearing being affected by adverse heat and causing noises under certain operating conditions. There was no evidence to substantiate that this was consequential.
- The requirement for a second gearbox was as a result of an internal bearing failure, which was concluded as catastrophic, and that was consequently addressed under the component warranty.
The adjudication outcome:
- The adjudicator found that the vehicle had suffered from two different issues.
- The business provided sufficient evidence to demonstrate that there was an initial problem with the clutch and the consumer failed to supply adequate information to demonstrate that the garage had failed to correctly identify the issue.
- The adjudicator therefore decided that there was no evidence of wrongdoing by the business.
Conclusion:
- The customer and accredited business accepted the outcome as recommended by The Motor Ombudsman adjudicator and the case was closed.
