Mazda - Life Threatening Defects, My Fault!? Say Mazda

[medievil2003]

It went through a few times, sorry.

Edited June 2, 2010 by medievil2003

[medievil2003]

It went through a few times, sorry.

Edited June 2, 2010 by medievil2003

[heliosuk]

The problem here seems to be that Mazda had what is known in Product Development terms as a "Diesel runaway" which is extreamly serious. This is caused by the engine fueling from it's own lubrication systems and can only happen on diesels. Stripping the engine will show nothing unless it's gone pop and even then the damage caused will not get to the root cause. It won't even show a fault light as the EMC will not recognise that there is a fault.

 

So owner takes it to the garage who claims cannot fault it but know of the symptoms of the oil level rising. Dealer thinks they know the issue and Mazda do as well but the thing is the chances of this scenario happening is rare but it can happen not just to this car but any diesel car in the right circumstances.

 

What medievil should do is ask his solicitor to formally ask Mazda for the DFMEA and the DVP plan for this engine. Whilst not trying to or implying that there is anything wrong with the inspectors work, I don't think they will find anything apart from what is already known.

 

As stated previously, an oil change will fix the issue and it might not happen ever again on this particular car but it could and that is the danger.

[Guest nez69]

HELIOSUK is 100% right on this one.

 

You also have the problem that the engineers doing the strip and investigation are not Mazda trained or authorised and their results will not be taken too seriously by Mazda.

 

I have dealt with one of these cases directly and you will never find the cause which is why Mazda will not pay.

 

This engine has its faults but if the cause cannot be confirmed then no warranty claim can be made by the dealer.

 

The only other option you may have is goodwill. This may sound poor in relation to warranty but if you have been loyal to Mazda and/or the dealer you could get a portion of the costs covered. This could be more than you think and may be worth an avenue exploring if you are not getting anywhere.

 

Have the injector washers that are due at the 1st year or 12500 miles been replaced? Failure of these washers can/will cause blow by and further contaminate the oil.

 

The one I dealth with had oil starvation due to the oil strainer in the gearbox becoming blocked by carbonised oil.

 

There were no signs of a cause and very very rarely are.

[medievil2003]

Heliosuk & Nez thanks for your replies.

 

Firstly, thanks for that good advice i have just now passed it onto my solicitor of whom said she will get straight onto it.

 

The way that mazda have agreed is that the engine strip down will be carried out at one of the dealers, they will use Mazda's machines for testing etc & with mazda engineers there to keep an eye.

 

The injector washers have never been replaced, is this something that should be replaced on the first service? As i mentioned previously, there would have been no need to replace them as i was approx. 600 miles due a service and/or 2 months.

 

You see the only problem i face is what you are saying, proving it. If i cannot prove there is a fault then i will take a different route on why the system is designed like this to allow a over-run. If you picture the amount of cars that have DPF systems fitted now days, the worst problem they will get would be limp home mode or dpf failure..... none of them are as dangerous as the engine over-run that i had, thats the LAST thing any driver would expect to happen. The design is wrong somewhere i know it.

 

Does anyone have any ideas why Mazda changed the 2.0d just after one year of it coming out? to the 2.2d which has a different "loop" system on the DPF whereas if i am correct the diesel & oil mixes differently as in it does not affect the engine oil compartment. Seems odd to me right? is that a cheaper way for them to fix the problems?

 

The result i want is a complete rejection of the car, firstly because the dealer never told me about my driving styles & funny how Mazda's website now says "diesel or petrol? which best suits". Me and my family even if we had it fixed would be too scared to drive it anyway, this means we would be forced to sell it on knowing that others may have the same problem but being less fortunate than me.

 

Its not right, Mazda are so strict on this under warranty why do they not make the customers sign a declaration that they understand the DPF system and the dangers it follows....

 

Also, i am finding it more and more strange that Mazda accept responsibility but in different areas, i.e. one guy had his problem fixed by mazda and didnt pay anything - its the same problem i have!

 

I will keep fighting this and i dont care if it takes years, i will prove this point for the good of the public as Mazda seem to be money grabbers when it suits them.

 

Any further advice guys? what you think i can do next? Everything is with my solicitor but anything i should watch out for, should ask for etc.

 

Thanks again for your continued support.

[heliosuk]

You see the only problem i face is what you are saying, proving it. If i cannot prove there is a fault then i will take a different route on why the system is designed like this to allow a over-run.

 

This is exactly the point of my last post medievil. The DFMEA and DVP should show what steps they have taken to identify that this could be a problem that could happen and what they have done to ensure it won't. The DVP will show what they did to verify that the steps taken work. Forget about Mazda UK customer service or warranty apart from using them as a medium to get to the Mazda Europe Technical Centre. A request for these two items should set alarm bells ringing throughout Mazda and in Japan so might just get them to react in a bit more of a positive light.

 

Mazda UK are not in a position to investigate this I would alledge as essentially it's just a sales and aftersales admin operation. You need to get through to the engineering section at the technical part of Mazda who should be very interested to hear of this.

[scaniaman]

Medievil, I have been following your plight regularly, and your problem is akin to mine, ie exhaust afterburn additions. I have spent over a year fighting Citroen UK and arnold clark to have my car tested, but to no avail.

PLEASE do us all a big favour. Write your MP asking that he reports your story to the Dept. of Transport, suggest you enclose your blog no. 55.

During the last mis government it was Lord Adonis who was gaffer at the DoT and his under secretary of state was a Paul Clark. I do not know who holds these posts in the new mis government, so write your MP.

Also, please send your story to the OFT, and mention to both parties that you know of a recent complaint via Sir Menzies Campbell, MP on a related subject, ie The FAP system.

The OFT will only act when they get a number of complainents on the same subject. They contacted the VCA on my behalf to investigate the effects of these systems on modern diesel cars.

Over this weekend, I shall write Sir Ming again with much more info on these dangerous systems, inc the stories from Honest John. I'm sure if we all act together, some of these guys will sit up and take notice.

In my case, I take exception to cars blasting out carcenogenic compounds into the atmosphere, on the pretence of stopping a bit of soot.

Best wishes .

[ScarletPimpernel]

On the subject of the original solicitor's bad advice, unless you have already come to an agreement about it you should make a formal complaint to the firm. You should not suffer financially because of their bad advice; they should be responsible for putting you back in the position you were in before the effect of the bad advice. If they won't, complain to the Legal Complaints Service (part of the SRA), who will investigate and have powers to order the firm to compensate you, as well as potential discip action.

[medievil2003]

Hello Everyone,

 

For those of you who are aware of the current Mazda problems whether it be the famous DPF problem to tyre wear & valves snapping off - i have waited long enough for a government agency to do something about it after ignoring all of our complaints and stories.

 

I am going down to Watchdog in London tomorrow, so sorry for the short notice but if any of you are interested in supporting me with covering letters from your self then it would make the visit to watchdog a lot stronger.

 

 

If you are interested then please email your letters or points you would like to make to: [email protected]

 

Thank you all again for your support! difficult to do any of this without this forum & your valuable advice.

[medievil2003]

hey guys, been a long time!

 

At the moment, not much has happened but we are real close to the internal inspection. We are currently waiting 1 month for each lettter from Mazda which is annoying in every way.

 

Ok, there are a few things i need to ask you. I know this is more of a legal forum than a technical but do any of you guys know what internal job cards look like? Only reason i ask is because my solicitor has directly requested internal job cards for anytime my car went into them, they have only replied back with what looks like is receipts - the ones i already have from them. That cannot be the job cards right?

 

Also, what are the responsibilities of RAC and Mazda dealer to note down the mileage on every collection or drop off? Do they legally have to write this down on their files?

 

One more question, my argument is with the selling dealer. On the other hand my car has also been into my local Mazda dealer, am i legally entitled to telephone my local dealer and ask them questions about my car? i.e. i wanted to find out what company come to collect the car from them to drop it back to my house.

 

Thanks!

[medievil2003]

to add, have any of you technical heads heard of the bio-diesel problems affecting the broad range of DPF systems across all manufacturers?

[medievil2003]

hey everyone,

 

i have had a few people say that i shouldnt even waste my time aiming on proving the fault of the car i.e. having the internal inspection and wasting more months. They think i should take Mazda straight to court on the fact that i was mis-sold the car due to no-one telling me about the DPF and then on the side-line use my time to prove the fault of the car.

 

Do you think its ok what i am currently doing which is proving the fault and then take mazda to court which could easily take another 6 months - 1 year?

 

Thanks.

[Conniff]

Refering back to your original post, how long after you purchased the car did the problem occur ??

[medievil2003]

Hi Conniff, nice to hear from you.

 

The problem happened about 10 months of owning the car from new.

 

Thanks.

[Conniff]

Shame, I was hoping it was within the first six months and then 'they' have to prove there was no problem.

 

My thinking cap is back on and am reading up more that I hope you can use.

[medievil2003]

This is what i cant understand about the law, why should i prove what the problem is. Isnt it just as simple as getting to court and telling them what happened, because generally speaking with mazda's poor response this just shouldnt have happened. I cant see how the judge would see it as my fault.

 

Am i hoping for a dream? lol Im starting to feel stuck.

[Conniff]

All you have to show is the car is not of 'satisfactory quality' and definately 'not fit for purpose', the purpose of which is to transport you and your family around in safety.

[medievil2003]

So do you think its worth my while to wait for this inspection then? Would i be wasting my time applying for a court date now?

 

I am only saying this because its gone on for too long and nothings happened, also my solicitor has not been giving mazda a time scale to reply. we asked for the job cards and they have not replied yet and this dated back to early June. That's wrong right?

 

I have a meeting with her monday morning - any things you think i should put forward to her? I am sorry to sound so amatuer with this but this is my first legal persuit.

 

as always, thanks for your help - i really appreciate it.

[robmar0se]

I have a 2008 Mazda 3 ts2 35k miles. 10 days ago the car lost power, and when idling rattled and stopped. Oil was over the x mark, and no lights on the dash. On the half mile home I did note the exhaust "smoking".

 

RAC towed into mail dealer. Again its my fault, one injector was out of wack, serviced just 3k miles previous and since been to Venice and back.

 

Dealer said there was a "service" issue which required the DFP to be reprogrammed, which they did, apparently subsequently the DFP light did come on..

 

My warranty claim was rejected. Mazda customer services says it was my responsibility to get the injectors re-calibrated, - of course it has to be done between services, of course silly me! The fact that we are not informed of these service updates, is not a responsibility of Mazda I'm toild, they will only advise customers of safety issues.

 

Clearly from this forum, the DFP issue is potentially a safety issue. I did contact Trading Standards on Friday, who advised me to contact SMMT which I will do on Monday.

[robmar0se]

update

[scaniaman]

robmarose, see my posts re Dpf under "backed into a corner"

[robmar0se]

One learns a lot from these boards. Unfortunately I suspect that as I bought the car before the CPUTP (2008) came in, I doubt it is retrospective. But will give it a go, and see if Mazda jumps. It is unfair that they have these service issues which could have dramatic consequences if not applied. They have no mechanism for advising Mazda users unless they use main dealers, which under UK law customers do not have to use, unless warranty work is carried out.

 

It is also interesting on on the latest model they have changed the DPF , in addition to this service recall on the older model. Sounds to me that they do recognise a problem, but won't pay out on those vehicles that suffer from faults arising.

 

Whats happened to Medievil2003 - no comment since JUly. Has he been paid out on the condition he keeps quiet? Come on meievil2003 don't keep us in suspense.

[scaniaman]

It may interest you to know Robmarose, that nearly all manufacturers are having problems with DPF type systems.

Almost a year ago there was an advert in a professional journal, where a recruitment agency was asking for 7, yes seven, techncians with experience in "After Combustion" technology. Urgently required.

I rather suspect that it was not one company attempting to employ seven men but perhaps several companies!

DPF= Technology taken a step too far????

[heliosuk]

DPF= Technology taken a step too far????

 

Perhaps it ought to be DPF= Technology taken too far too quickly to comply with EU regs not fully understood and then tested on the end user who is expected to pick up the bill!!!

 

It's important to differentiate between soot emissions and gas emissions. DPF's only deal with soot which is why DPF's are perhaps so ridiculous. They don't clean up noxious gasses, only soot.

 

Just off to rollock next door neighbour about the amount of soot he's depositing on my white house from burning coal and where his DPF or equivalent is. LOL

 

Seriously, these DPF's were introduced too quickly which explainsthe number of complaints and manufactuers I don't thin k fully understood the forward implications of them as it's impossible to replicate exact real world conditions when under test.

 

Info I'm seeing is that problem is going away but have to admit I'm a bit sceptical at the moment but obviously this won't help people affected by DPF syndrome!!

[scaniaman]

Spot on Heliosuk, but I'm in a complete dilemma on this whole issue of EU regs. The motor manufacturing industry is possibly one of the most powerful groups in the world, so why didn't they collectively tell the EU to stick their emmission regs where the sun don't shine? Also, if we consider the FAP system which injects a carsinogenic chemical into the atmosphere, why did the UK Govt. allow this to happen? In the case of FAP, what possible benefit is derived from it's use. It gets rid of a little soot, but to achieve this it requires an increase in fuel consumption of approx. 4%, so where's the benefit? Considering the disasterous effects EU regs have had on Vehicles, road haulage, farming and fishing what the hec are we doing being members of such a dictatorial organisation?????