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

[Spirittamer]

I am afraid that Mazda are quite correct.

 

These cars with DPF are designed for long distance drivers,the car needs to get hot to work effectively and to burn the soot from the exhaust when it starts to build up otherwise you WILL get problems.

 

It is not just Mazda, VW, Audi, Mercedes and Vauxhall all currently use this system as do (or will) many more.

 

Try to find out exactly how the system works or I can send you the details and that should help.

 

Ultimately if you are only doing short journey's then this is not the car for you.

 

The salesman will never tell you NOT to buy a car, that is only too obvious - "no sir I do not want to earn any money, go buy elsewhere" is not going to happen I am afraid.

 

It is not fit for purpose and if you can prove that then you may get somewhere though it wont be easy.

 

It's funny that in the days of the internet when people search for the best deals they never research the products.

 

This is not a dangerous fault - it is how the system is designed, granted it has flaws but this is most commonly as it is miss sold and not "a fault with the car".

 

If you sold an item and the buyer broke or damaged it it is not the sellers fault if the buyer did not use the item for its intended purpose.

 

Would you then take it back and offer a refund?

 

It sounds harsh but then that is how it is.

 

Mazda are not in the wrong, maybe the sales people are but then lets be honest, when is a sales person ever right?

 

I have a vast amount of knowledge on this subject given my job role and I am the first to admit it is not a great system but let's look at the full picture and not automatically blame Mazda or whoever the manufacturer may be as they only designed it for its intended use.

 

If we do not use it that way then who is to blame?

 

I know this is over a year old but can I just say "what a load of rubbish". If you bought a Hummer and then got home to find it didn't fit in your garage???

Mazda produce a vehicle that is defective but these defects can be hidden by driving in a certain way and having ridiculous service schedules with high cost and don't inform the dealers or salesman but it is still the customers fault? Wow

[Spirittamer]

Hi guys

 

After reading this post with great interest can i point out my issues.

 

In 2008 i went to buy a new van i looked at different vans and the only one that was for me was a MB, thinking this will last the rest of my working life.

So i approached Bell Trucks and enquired about the sprinter and asked them can this van carry the weight of a 600 ltr reach & wash system and ladders and cleaning equipment (basically my job is window cleaner) i work in the newcastle, sunderland areas and i was quite strong what my job was, anyway the reply was that this van will last you for years and is great on fuel around the town (boy they were wrong)

 

 

All started at 6995 miles into my ever long lasting relationship with my beloved mercedes 315 2008 mwb sprinter i was at work and the oil warning light come on saying oil lvl to high, so i phoned bell trucks up they sent an engineer out, he said oil lvl ok needs to go in to garage was in for a day they phoned me saying all done come and collect your vehicle, so when i arrived at the garage, they said that will be £186 please £££ they informed me you put to much oil in so the price was £150 for the call out and £36 to drain the oil.

WHAT A LOAD OF CRAP I SAID Any way got that sorted.

 

Well anyway over the next 2 and a half years the van had been in the garage a number of times getting oil and filter changes and they also changed the injectors last october (or so i am lead to believe) but the problem is still there.

 

I was advised by MBUSA that !!

 

1 Avoid frequent short distance driving. (Window Cleaner)

2 Or large amount of idling. (I not an ice cream van)

3 Preform a major drive on the motorway every 500 kilometers to support DPF regeneration.

4 If this problem occurs, preform a premature oil service (YET MORE MONEY) on top of the £38,000 its costing me to buy this vehicle.

 

How about this Mercedes-Benz Sprinter ECO-START : STOP, START, SPRINTER

they call it the the best van for the urban user. i think that answered the first point MBUSA advised

 

My van has only done 27,571 miles

My job is a self employed window cleaner.

Do any of you guys think we have the RIGHT to be told of this problem before we spend this sort of money and they were informed what i do and where i worked.

 

And to top that all off i had it in garage for some warranty corrosion removal they wanted me to pay 55% and they pay 45% is that because it was the day before my warranty run out i don't know.

 

Thats just a bit among other lies i have been told about changing parts and they did not.

 

Well thats me done for now sorry for me going on a bit.

 

Jim

 

Doesn't the anti-corrosion warranty last longer than the mechanical warranty?

[medievil2003]

Hi Sprittamer, Good Afternoon.

 

"What a load of rubbish" is exactly what i have been trying to tell Mazda Motors UK from the start, they are even now whilst my case is still on-going trying to blame me for numerous reasons which you will see on my first post. I have so far declined all offers they have put forward and am dedicated on taking them to court and making the court case known to all the public which will hopefully dent their sales.

 

They have been fighting with me for over 3 years now when something so serious relates to a defect of their system, the only reasons they have for the run-away i experienced was that i never drove the car correctly and that i did not carry out the additional maintenance oh that i apparantly never check my oil levels...MMUK confirmed that there is an oil dilution monitoring system in these cars which would illuminate a light if the oil levels have been diluted but they failto elaborate on that i.e. figures and % wise.

 

Their additional maintence is basically (taken from the Mazda-campaign post):

 

One thing i would like to make clear to all Mazda diesel drivers.....what the handbook does NOT CLEARLY state is that if you're driving in extreme hot/cold conditions or carry out 'regular' start/stop journeys then you will have to change your oil & oil filter at 6,250 miles or less....

 

How would you know when to change!? beats me. Perhaps Mazda should give us a diary with a table:

 

Day 1 i carried out: X Miles

Day 2 i carried out: X Miles and so on, then when it comes to the end of the month or coming up-to 6,250 miles you can tally up the points to find out if you need it changed!? either that or you try and define how 'Regular' you're driving is!

 

For me, my driving is irregular all the time - god knows where i could decide to drive too one day and then the next.

 

So for the fact that they cannot define, after many letters sent to the manager of MMUK what regular start/stop driving means and how one would know if they are doing regular or irregular driving...is 'regular' going to work and back 5 days per week? stuck in 2 days of "Start/Stop" traffic and 3 days clear or 5 days of heavy traffic.......

 

You have said it in one sentence Spirittamer: "Mazda produce a vehicle that is defective but these defects can be hidden by driving in a certain way and having ridiculous service schedules with high cost and don't inform the dealers or salesman but it is still the customers fault?"

 

That's what i've been trying to put forward for over 3 years.

 

Anywho, there are some documents which i have applied for and these documents will tell me whether Mazda have fully researched into this technology and are aware of the faults before they design a car like this...thanks to the member on here who told me about them.

 

Isn't it funny how after 1 year of the new Mazda 6 coming out Mazda decide the change the engine to a 2.2d which the oil level rising and DPF issues have been fixed to an extent...even the DPF has been constructed in ceramic rather than the 2.0d design.....wow!

 

 

 

 

I know this is over a year old but can I just say "what a load of rubbish". If you bought a Hummer and then got home to find it didn't fit in your garage???

Mazda produce a vehicle that is defective but these defects can be hidden by driving in a certain way and having ridiculous service schedules with high cost and don't inform the dealers or salesman but it is still the customers fault? Wow

[citizenB]

2 posts promoting other forums/websites have been unapproved - please do not restore links.

[medievil2003]

Hi all, for those who are still interested in this thread and for those who have helped, i need to ask yet again another question....

 

I am still fighting this but am very close to either getting an acceptance of an offer from Mazda or going to court, the application for court has already been processed and am just waiting on a date. Now, upon reviewing my files i noticed one from Mazda Motors UK when i had asked them to specify how they define the following in their handbook (in small text in the manual):

 

"If the vehicle is operated primarily under any of the following conditions, replace the engine oil and oil filter at every 10,000 km (6,250 miles) or shorter:

a) Driving in dusty conditions

b) Extended periods of idling or low speed operation

c) Driving for long period in cold temperatures or driving regularly at short distance only

d) Driving in extremely hot conditions

e) Driving in mountainous conditions continuously "

 

Basically, as many of you are aware - Mazda are trying to blame me for the engine run-away because i never stuck to the "Additional Maintenance" as above......now MMUK's response for a definition of the above i.e. if they specify extremely hot conditions, what is extremely hot? are they going by degrees and in my case short distance driving, how many miles are short distances:

 

“I do note your comments regarding the level of technical information contained within your owners’ manual; however the manual is not intended to provide this type of information. It is intended to provide guidance on the functions of equipment and also how to maintain the vehicle”.

 

I just wanted to find out your opinions on this?

[heliosuk]

Medi,

 

You must have in your case a request for the DFMEA.

 

This WILL kill the issue off in your favour.

 

A court can order they supply it. It's an absolute key. (but of course according to a certain member of cag this will be duff info!!)

[medievil2003]

Hi Guys, Good Morning.

 

My problems never stop! I've had to give notice to my solicitor. To keep this short, they have only just given me the N150 form (Allocation Questionnaire) which has to be completed and sent today to the court otherwise the case will be struck off. As i am now acting for myself can i obtain an extension to file the N150 easily? Of course i need to do this today and today only.

 

Many thanks.

[citizenB]

Contact the court to which the AQ has to be returned. Sometimes they allow a little leeway because their own paperwork is usually a few days behind.

 

 

HTH

[medievil2003]

Thank you for your reply. I only need a few days more - i've been trying to ring them for the past hour! The line is always engaged.

 

At this stage if i were to instruct another solicitor would it cause any issues with documents if i have signed them today then a solicitor acts for me when we attend court?

 

Thanks,

[citizenB]

I have had it confirmed that as you are the claimant then it would defintely be the best thing to request permission for late submission.

 

I dont think that it will cause you any grief if you were to instruct another solicitor - you will however have to let the court and I think the oppositionof any changes in legal representation. I will confirm.. and get back to you.

[citizenB]

Here you go ..

 

 

Not really but the Court/Defendant must be informed of Change of Sol

 

CPR 42 http://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part42

[citizenB]

This could be done before

aq

submission/or as a reason to delay AQ

 

[medievil2003]

Hi CitizenB,

 

Thank you for your guidance and help. Its much appreciated.

 

I have submitted the N150 form with anticipation. Now i am acting for myself for the time being, what is the next stage?

 

As Heliosuk has mentioned throughout the posts to obtain a certain set of documents from Mazda - i have requested this which all parties have ignored, do i need to put an application to the courts for this? and what stage does this need to be done.

 

Lastly - if i wanted to make an application to invite another defendant even though 2 are already involved - what is the process of this?

 

I really do appreciate everyones help as always, what ever the outcome of my case i will be donating as much as i can afford to the site.

 

Mehdi

[Conniff]

Is there any update or outcome Mehdi ?

[scaniaman]

Spoke to a gentleman yesterday who is having similar problems with his Mazda6 diesel bought from the infamous Arnold Clark. As usual, clark won't help but this guy has done some research, and says there was a service update / recall saying that the dipstick should be replaced as originals did not give true readings.

This is yet another guy who has rising levels indicated on the dip stick----ingress of diesel.

I have asked him to give a full account of his problems with this car on this site in the hope of helping all concerned. He is another buyer who at no time was informed about the DPF complexities of this engine.

[medievil2003]

Hi Guys, Sorry for the late reply - took my G.F. to greece and proposed! One thing out of the way.....

 

Right, one day before the holiday i had my allocation hearing but to add onto all of the bad luck i've had so far - whilst trying to appoint a new solicitor they needed to see the defence that had been submitted to the courts but my previous solicitor wouldn't provide them to me without me paying :S anyway, so i went to the allocation hearing myself and i was greeted by a lady who was representing the car dealer and Mazda credit which confused the hell out of me because i've got written confirmation from Mazda credit that they sold the debt on a long time ago and have no more say in the matter.... Anyway, after a brief discussion with the defendants rep it came quite clear they were using a tactic of the expert was not known to them to be a "joint expert" even though letters from my previous solicitor states just that and that the experts reports say acting as a "joint expert" for myself and Mazda.

 

So, off we go into the court room (never been to court before) - sat down and i put a plea in for the case to be ajourned, funny the judge seemed to completely ignore that so i decided to ask again but a while later, when the defendants rep spoke and put across about the expert apparantly not being a joint, she requested that the defendant has their own report done on the car aswell as relying on the current experts. The judge asked what i thought about this and i simply asked for 24 to 48 hours to provide me enough time to prove to him that the expert was appointed by all parties, he ignored again.....and granted the defence the chance for their own expert to report on the car. Believe this - i asked again and he ignored so i questioned why are you ignoring my requests and his answer was "I am not, i decided to grant the defence what they asked for" so i shut up from there.

 

Anyway! i've got the list of directions and noticed for some reason the judge decided to move the case from the original applied Multi-Track down to fast track and provided 2 dates for the hearing spread from October this year to Jan next.

 

The case is so disorganised, not in the document side of things but i am lost on what i am entitled to do and request now!

 

As you guys have mentioned before, there are documents that i am entitled to obtain but there is no mention of this anywhere in the court file.

 

A bit of your expert advice, i am sure i'll have plently more questions later anyway so be prepared.

 

My previous solicitor looks like they have really, really messed up the case - i didnt approve most of the items they sent to court and a lot of it is a pile of **** which has put me in this situation, going through my paperwork i see why the defence question the status of the experts report is becuase i only just found out that my solicitor was not sending out all the documents to them, they had only seen one report but were never involved when my questions were put forward etc and in my undertanding that goes against the standard rules of CPR? Anyway, it was the previous solicitors fault for messing up my credit file by advising me not to pay the agreement from the start.

 

As my funds are going to be completely tied up by paying the new solicitor a heafty bit of money (it's a good company by the way in London, unlike the previous - learn from your mistakes right?) how difficult would it be putting a claim in against the previous solicitor for mis-conduct? is there a set time i have to do this in and can i simply complain to the SRA?

 

Many thanks for keeping interest, do fire away with questions which you need to know which in turn will help me.

 

I am still looking now to prove the DPF is what caused the issues which hopefully will help everyone else not go through what i am going through...#

 

Kind Regards,

 

Mehdi

www.mazda-campaign.co.uk

Edited July 17, 2013 by medievil2003

[medievil2003]

Hi Guys,

 

Just wondered if any of you had views on the above last post?

 

Thanks,

 

Mehdi

[medievil2003]

Hi again!

 

Ive got an update on this case but cannot talk on here, i do need some technical advice if anyone is willing to help me? If so, could you PM one of the Site Team & the info will be forwarded.

Many thanks!

[medievil2003]

** STILL GOING STRONG! **

 

Hi Guys! Good Morning. Hope you are all well.

 

Yep, the case is still on-going and have now found my self needing to claim for professional negligence against the solicitor that was appointed! Great right? Not enough time in the day.

 

I need some quick legal advice if you can help, ok - with constant writing to MMUK regarding the set of documents mentioned earlier in this forum, i have had what it seems like to be a final letter from them - do bear in mind that they have no legal status in the whole dispute (even though they are the UK's customer service), either way, with constant requests for the documents their first few responses was basically "we are unaware of these documents and whether they exist or not within the corporation"...My response warned that i have a copy of a DFMEA that was released on the internet from the north american operations side of Mazda and it clearly mentions DFMEA etc etc.

 

Their last response was that if i want to continue writing to them i would have to appoint a solicitor. If they have no legal status in this dispute, why are they asking for me to appoint a solicitor to gain information!? I am presuming they are doing this to play "Hard to get"? How else can i obtain these documents?

 

Now, with the current legal parties!

 

Mazda Finance was never a legal party to the case, throughout the experts reports, original court papers etc it was just myself vs the selling dealer but on the allocation hearing i only found out that Mazda finance was another defendant to the case - when i questioned this Mazda finance are now shut off from talking to me and pointed me to correspond to their solicitors which is conveniently the same firm as the selling dealer are using. I have been asked to submit the list of documents which i am behind on, how can i submit these documents if:

 

1. The solicitor that was appointed hold all of the files and will not hand them back over to me until they get paid (by the legal insurance)

2. I need documents from MMUK but they are not providing them?

 

If the only way to obtain the docs from MMUK is to appoint them as another defendant to the case - how do i go about doing this? and can the court dates be adjourned for the reasons above?

 

I quote a section from the selling dealers & Mazda finance solicitor regarding me trying to obtain documents:

 

"In the meantime, we would point out that Mazda Motors UK are not a party to the proceedings and are under no obligation to provide any disclosure. There is little prospect of the court allowing additional time for you to obtain documents from Mazda Motors UK, particularly where you have already been advised that those documents are unavailable. It will be a matter for you to either proceed with your claim on the basis of the evidence which is in fact available, or to withdraw it".

 

I really need this urgent advice on what to do next! I have lots in mind but need a push in the right direction....

 

Many thanks,

 

Mehdi

[Conniff]

I would say the insistence that you now talk to them via a solicitor is a way of shutting you up. They will probably be thinking that as an individual, you can't afford a solicitor

so that is the end of that.

 

If your name or any other personal information about you is likely to be mentioned in the documents, then you could try an SAR. That is a legal request and must be acted

upon in a regulation set timeframe.

 

Although I've never heard of it before, I see no reason why you can't do the same to your solicitor, it's certainly not a banned thing.

 

I will put an alert in for anyone who might be able to assist with your questions.

[medievil2003]

Hi Conniff, Good Morning.

 

Thanks for your prompt reply!

 

I just don't see it fair why an individual has to have a solicitor! Le'ts say for example i have 20+ years of litigation, that means i cannot fight this myself?

 

I have already tried the SAR route against Mazda Motors UK and they responded with sending the payment back and saying that all files on your car are held by the selling dealer! Now, it seems like i cannot ask again as they need a solicitor.

 

Regarding the previous solicitor, i am currently in the complaints procedure but if they do not resolve the issues they have made then i'll pass it onto the Legal Ombudsman Service.

 

Thank you for putting the alert on, its really appreciated - especially in this sensitive time!

[medievil2003]

P.S. Under the Mazda Campaign, i am posting on twitter to make it known Mazda are hiding something and need assistance to obtain it. i.e. from Watchdog (again), Dominic Littlewood etc.. perhaps some known faces may help.

 

Mazda can try their best with the corporation face that puts many people off but i have not been fighting this for over 4 years and stopping now because i don't have a solicitor.

[Conniff]

You don't 'have' to have a solicitor, and they can't insist on only talking to one. You can be a 'litigant in person'.

 

If this will proceed to court and you are happy to represent yourself, then you can use CPR to obtain all the required documents that will

be needed.

[medievil2003]

Thanks, how can i approach them as a litigant person so they wont ignore my letters?

 

Do you think the best step is to add them as a defendant?

[citizenB]

Does this help....

 

 

Orders for disclosure against a person not a party

 

CPR31.17

 

(1) This rule applies where an application is made to the court under any Act for disclosure by a person who is not a party to the proceedings2.

(2) The application must be supported by evidence.

(3) The court may make an order under this rule only where–

(a) the documents of which disclosure is sought are likely to support the case of the applicant or adversely affect the case of one of the other parties to the proceedings; and

(b) disclosure is necessary in order to dispose fairly of the claim or to save costs.

(4) An order under this rule must –

(a) specify the documents or the classes of documents which the respondent must disclose; and

(b) require the respondent, when making disclosure, to specify any of those documents –

(i) which are no longer in his control; or

(ii) in respect of which he claims a right or duty to withhold inspection.

(5) Such an order may –

(a) require the respondent to indicate what has happened to any documents which are no longer in his control; and

(b) specify the time and place for disclosure and inspection.

 

Rule 78.26 contains rules in relation to the disclosure and inspection of evidence arising out of mediation of certain cross-border disputes.)

 

 

 

ADDITION AND SUBSTITUTION OF PARTIES

 

Change of parties – general

 

CPR19.2

 

(1) This rule applies where a party is to be added or substituted except where the case falls within rule 19.5 (special provisions about changing parties after the end of a relevant limitation period(GL)).

(2) The court may order a person to be added as a new party if –

(a) it is desirable to add the new party so that the court can resolve all the matters in dispute in the proceedings; or

(b) there is an issue involving the new party and an existing party which is connected to the matters in dispute in the proceedings, and it is desirable to add the new party so that the court can resolve that issue.

(3) The court may order any person to cease to be a party if it is not desirable for that person to be a party to the proceedings.

(4) The court may order a new party to be substituted for an existing one if –

(a) the existing party’s interest or liability has passed to the new party; and

(b) it is desirable to substitute the new party so that the court can resolve the matters in dispute in the proceedings.