Faulty Car Tyre

[ThePhant0m]

I purchased two front tyres for my BMW Z4, Runflats at £165 a piece ...( not cheap tyres) on the 18 Feb 2010 from a Tyre and Exhaust company. On the 16th March 2010 my tyre warning light came on. The tyres were all at the correct pressure but i found that the off side tyre had a small buldge appear.

 

I took it back to the Exhaust center as i felt there was a fault with the tyre as they were practically brand new and had no signs of wear or external damage. The center told me that i had to pay for a new tyre while they send it off for inspection and i have to wait upto 5 weeks for the inspection report to come back before they can issue a refund.!!! if at all.

 

Is this normal practice as i have had to fork out another £165 while they look at the tyre. I thought my dealings were with the retailer and not the manufacturer.?

[pa_broon74]

Hello.

 

Sale of goods act should cover this. Check out the link [ARCHIVED CONTENT] Sale of Goods Act Quick Facts - BERR

 

Salient points are there, I'd print it off and take it along with you. They're just prevaricating, trying to hold onto your money and the sale they made. It nips my head when companies try to make out that their 'company policy' over rides UK law.

 

It doesn't.

 

Cheers

[heliosuk]

The center told me that i had to pay for a new tyre while they send it off for inspection and i have to wait upto 5 weeks for the inspection report to come back before they can issue a refund.!!! if at all.

 

Is this normal practice as i have had to fork out another £165 while they look at the tyre. I thought my dealings were with the retailer and not the manufacturer.?

 

Actually it is. It's a standard warranty claim and is another reason why SOGA is not always clear cut. The reason is because of the nature of the product and the implications of it. Each tyre returned for a warranty claim is closely examined to determine the cause of the fault as it could be others might be affected if there is one. Then it is the operating conditions the tyre works in.

 

Even if you had a brand new car, the procedure is the same, the tyre goes back to the manufacturer for inspection and if found to be faulty then the refund is given.

 

Unless you have kerbed it, which sounds unlikely, then you should get a full refund. Ask the garage for a copy of the tyre submission report just to make sure they have done it and it should be pretty straight forward.

[ThePhant0m]

Thanks. How long is a reasonable amount of time to wait for the inspection report.? 5 weeks sounds a little long.

[heliosuk]

I would say 5 weeks ought to be the maximum. Usually it's a lot quicker.

[ThePhant0m]

Thanks Very much. Fingers crossed.

[c0v0c]

Actually it is. It's a standard warranty claim and is another reason why SOGA is not always clear cut. The reason is because of the nature of the product and the implications of it. Each tyre returned for a warranty claim is closely examined to determine the cause of the fault as it could be others might be affected if there is one. Then it is the operating conditions the tyre works in.

 

Even if you had a brand new car, the procedure is the same, the tyre goes back to the manufacturer for inspection and if found to be faulty then the refund is given.

 

Unless you have kerbed it, which sounds unlikely, then you should get a full refund. Ask the garage for a copy of the tyre submission report just to make sure they have done it and it should be pretty straight forward.

 

Volvo, 1333 Miles, 43 days old, Continental tyre, egg hanging out of the offside front wheel.

 

Orpington dealership "Parkside" emailed me copied pictures for the "warranty" claim they are putting in for me because in the service managers words there is absolutely no evidence of user damage and there may be a faulty line!

 

However even though my solicitor states this is in no doubt a "latent" fault in other words hidden and could not have been detected by me at the point of sale inspection and therefore is not a warranty issue but an issue of statutory rights in relation to a faulty product wold they still maintain I should pay £215 for a new tyre, of which as no doubt an "admission of guilt" they will not be "troubling" me with a labour charge!

 

43 days, 1333 Miles and that was the mileage at the dealership, I found out the day before at around 1300 miles!

 

Supply of Goods Act 1994. The Sale and Supply of Goods to Consumers Regulations 2002.

Key Facts:

 

• Aspects of quality include fitness for purpose, freedom from minor defects, appearance and finish, durability and safety.

• It is the seller, not the manufacturer, who is responsible if goods do not conform to contract.

• If goods do not conform to contract at the time of sale, purchasers can request their money back "within a reasonable time". (This is not defined and will depend on circumstances)

 

How can a dealership side step the act.

 

AND more importantly...

 

I have asked Volvo whom are the so called epitome of safety if they are prepared for my familys safety to freely check the other 3 tyres in case they are part of a faulty line as decribed by the dealer and there further response is no they will not carry this out!

 

Any comments?

[ThePhant0m]

I had a similar problem when buying my Z4 from a car dealer. Car developed a fault which was no fault of my own and the dealer was not interested. I went through the small claims court but took both the dealer and my credit card company to court as i paid a deposit on my credit card so was covered under section 75 consumer credit act.

 

The dealer didnt back down but the credit card company settled on the day of the hearing as the dealer didnt know what he was talking about ( that was the credit card companies words )

 

It was long and drawn out but you will get the result in the end. Dont be fobbed off by dealers especially if you have a report to say there is no way that it was your fault.

 

My original tyre issue on this thread did get refunded .... but took about 2 months of chasing up.

[c0v0c]

Thanks for reply mate,

 

I think I will have to pay tomorrow as I am now running on a space saver!

 

I will pursue this as more than anything the more I read up on SOGA the less the legs they have to stand on.

 

They are telling me I have to deal with Continental, I never contracted Continental I entered a contract of sale with Volvo, I had no idea they use Continental, how can they stand a chance just 43 days later to peddle basically that it is not there issue.

 

The thing that really gets my goat up is the tyre is not £215, the tyre is probably £115 and they are going to profit by way of mark up and potentially leave me with a car that could have 3 other faulty tyres of which I they are happy for me to transfer by 10 month old baby son around in!

[c0v0c]

Just read up on section 75, I did bang £7000 on my credit card for the remaining deposit of which I am shortly to clear!

 

But does that allows me a scatter gun affect on both AMEX Lloyds and Volvo?

[heliosuk]

When you buy a new car you sign up to accepting the terms and conditions of the warranty that is supplied by the manufactuer. Whether SOGA overides this or not I don't know as am not a lawyer however I do know that for example, and have seen this, if the handbook says check the oil level daily and you don't and the engine goes pop then don't try to rely on SOGA for a new engine. This case went against the claimant because they hadn't complied with the terms and conditions of the warranty.

 

Obviously this isn't the same situation that you find yourself in at the moment however the dealer has done exactly what they should have done and you'll find you have signed up to this.

 

As regards the other tyres it is highly unlikey they will have the same fault, in fact because of production processes the chances of them being affected as well will be lower than the odds of winning last weeks Euro lottery by some considerable margin.

 

If you did want the others checked you can request it but would be expected to pay for the replacement tyres and you really wouldn't want to be on the receiving end of the bill for that if there is nothing found to be wrong.

 

As a matter of interest, can you give the type and size of the Continental tyre.

 

To be honest, I'd let the process take it's course at the moment. Tell the dealer you want a refund within the month though as this will give an incentive for them to push Conti for it.

[mightymouse_69]

When you buy a new car you sign up to accepting the terms and conditions of the warranty that is supplied by the manufactuer. Whether SOGA overides this or not I don't know as am not a lawyer however I do know that for example, and have seen this, if the handbook says check the oil level daily and you don't and the engine goes pop then don't try to rely on SOGA for a new engine. This case went against the claimant because they hadn't complied with the terms and conditions of the warranty.

 

In theory no contract term or condition can override a statutory provision and therefore the consumer should always have basic rights stipulated by statute (I.E. SOGA). You will often see on receipts "this does not affect you statutory rights."

 

However, any protection beyond that which statute mandates is between the consumer and the trader. So in the example you gave, the fault occurred in the car due to the claimant's negligence and not due to an inherent fault. If, however, it could have been shown that the engine had a fault when purchased the claimant would still have his statutory (SOGA) rights. I guess the only debate would be whether the claimant could be held contributory negligent due to not checking oil levels etc.

[c0v0c]

In theory no contract term or condition can override a statutory provision and therefore the consumer should always have basic rights stipulated by statute (I.E. SOGA). You will often see on receipts "this does not affect you statutory rights."

 

However, any protection beyond that which statute mandates is between the consumer and the trader. So in the example you gave, the fault occurred in the car due to the claimant's negligence and not due to an inherent fault. If, however, it could have been shown that the engine had a fault when purchased the claimant would still have his statutory (SOGA) rights. I guess the only debate would be whether the claimant could be held contributory negligent due to not checking oil levels etc.

 

So in the example you gave, the fault occurred in the car due to the claimant's negligence and not due to an inherent fault.

 

Struggling to understand where you read my negligence?

 

43 days old, 1300miles and not even a tiny wall scratch and the dealer agrees its probably a manufacturer fault?

[mightymouse_69]

Struggling to understand where you read my negligence?

 

 

So am I.

 

I was referring to the example in Heliosuk's post, hence the next sentence: "If, however, it could have been shown that the engine had a fault..."

[heliosuk]

They are telling me I have to deal with Continental, I never contracted Continental I entered a contract of sale with Volvo, I had no idea they use Continental, how can they stand a chance just 43 days later to peddle basically that it is not there issue.

 

Actually c0v0c having re-read with mouses contribution, I now see what you are saying.

 

What the dealer has told you is wrong big time.

 

Essentially, the warranty terms and conditions will say that tyre claims have to be handled through the tyre manufacturer. There is a reason why as explained before earlier in the post.The dealer also knows this which is why they send the tyre to Continental. It does not mean that it's not Volvo's or the dealers responsibility by any means, just that the claim will be the responsibility of Continental and not Volvo even though the administration will be handled by Volvo and the dealer network.

 

The procedure followed is correct but I don't think it's been too well explained as is generally a very rare occurence.

 

I really would like details of size and type of tyre or which model of Volvo so I can work out exactly what it is.

 

If the claim has been submitted in good time ( the dealer is usually allowed anything between 14 and 28 days) then they should be paid out within 2 weeks I think so keep on to them asking for when they intend to re-imburse.

 

If no joy at the end of the month PM me and I'll see if I can dig out a contact for you to write to which should get you a "rather quick" response.

 

Hope it helps.

[heliosuk]

Is there any update on this? Would be keen to see the outcome.

[scaniaman]

As Heliosuk says, all tyre claims are handled by the makers, or their main agents in UK, if imported tyres. Even in cases where they admit a fault, the compensation is often much less than the retail cost of a new tyre. When this has happened to me, I go to scrappies and get a good used wheel and tyre to keep me going until the tyre makers decision is received. Being in the trade i had a slight advantage in obtaining a better and faster result---I with held further payments to local tyre distributer until matter settled. At that time my tyre bill was well over £1000 / month.