ill advise repair

[craiul]

My car turbo just blow up. I took the car to the local garage and was advised that the engine is fine after the turbo was removed and will need to just pay for the turbo replacement so it is economically to proceed with it. After replacement was done the garage called to say that the change was done but the problem has escaladed now and it is an engine problem and this is non economical to do it because it would cost at least 3k. They said that they would like me to pay for the turbo and take the car for a part exchange post it on ebay as engine in need of attention. Do I pay for something that is non functional and was wrong advised on the course of action?

Edited September 10, 2013 by craiul

[MissyNA]

Hi Craiul,

 

I used to work for Hpnda - whenever we were diagnosing a problem, it was then out into writing to give the customer a quote for the repair.

 

Did you receive a quote in writing? Was the fault for repair noted on the quote?

 

If the answer is no, it would be hard to prove however it can be questioned as to why they bought the wrong part and as they mis-diagnosed the fault, they simply cannot charge you for the turbo in the first place.

 

As for the engine, they will most likely be quoting you for a new engine when reconditioned engines are available, you just need to look around on the web.

 

I myself had a reconditioned engine put into my car a while back and only paid £600 inc del when a new engine would have cost far much more.

 

I would suggest that you tell the garage they can keep the turbo without charging you and you want the car back.

 

Sounds very suspect to me!!!

 

Take the car to a reputable garage - ask friends and family for referrals, at least that way you know they can be trusted.

 

If the garage argues that you have a bill due to labour costs of fitting the turbo, tell them it is their mistake of misdiagnosis therefore you cannot be held accountable.

 

http://www.adviceguide.org.uk/wales/consumer_w/consumer_cars_and_other_vehicles_e/cars_garage_repairs_and_services_e.htm

 

Go to the link below there is great advice on there and how to complain.

 

Good luck

[craiul]

Cheers fro your answer, do i need legal advise on this or I just stick to my guns and state is their misdiagnosis and it should be their insurance covering the mistake.

[blackknight]

The turbo would have gone first and probably sucked bits into the engine, changing the turbo would have been the cheapest option first unless they stripped the engine down as well. Untill that is done you can't start the engine and see if anything else is wrong

if they had charged you to strip the engine and it was OK is that Misdiagnosis as well??

[MissyNA]

You should have been advised the above could be a possible situation from the technician.

 

What I personally would do, is pay for the turbo and take the car, but also ask for the old turbo to take away with you. You are well within your rights to do so.

 

If you have it in writing about what was required to repair the car and now they are finding fault with another this will help.

 

As the law states, anything foreseeable - ie; the turbo would have sucked debris into the engine causing damage, this should have been explained to you as the turbo may not be the only problem.

 

Any properly qualified mechanic/technician should know this.

 

As a consumer you expect the seller (repairer) to give good sound advice and be knowledgeable on what is required especially as this particular refers to a safety aspect.

 

I am actually away to go out, but when I come back I will track down a case I recently reviewed with similar circumstances and the claimant won their case.

 

Do not involve any legal rep at the mo because if you stick to your guns and sound like you know what your talking about, they may well back down.

 

I will have the info for you sometime this afternoon.

 

Hang tight x

 

PS: If they have stripped both down found no fault, misdiagnosis, I would no pay they obv do not have a clue x

[craiul]

The turbo would have gone first and probably sucked bits into the engine, changing the turbo would have been the cheapest option first unless they stripped the engine down as well. Untill that is done you can't start the engine and see if anything else is wrong

if they had charged you to strip the engine and it was OK is that Misdiagnosis as well??

 

Hi there, they only removed the turbo and restart the engine at which point they stated the engine was in working condition. Based on this advise I said OK I will like the turbo to be changed. I made very clear to them that was not looking to spend money for nothink.

[craiul]

You should have been advised the above could be a possible situation from the technician.

 

What I personally would do, is pay for the turbo and take the car, but also ask for the old turbo to take away with you. You are well within your rights to do so.

 

If you have it in writing about what was required to repair the car and now they are finding fault with another this will help.

 

As the law states, anything foreseeable - ie; the turbo would have sucked debris into the engine causing damage, this should have been explained to you as the turbo may not be the only problem.

 

Any properly qualified mechanic/technician should know this.

 

As a consumer you expect the seller (repairer) to give good sound advice and be knowledgeable on what is required especially as this particular refers to a safety aspect.

 

I am actually away to go out, but when I come back I will track down a case I recently reviewed with similar circumstances and the claimant won their case.

 

Do not involve any legal rep at the mo because if you stick to your guns and sound like you know what your talking about, they may well back down.

 

I will have the info for you sometime this afternoon.

 

Hang tight x

 

PS: If they have stripped both down found no fault, misdiagnosis, I would no pay they obv do not have a clue x

 

The engine was not striped down, the diagnosis was based on starting the engine with out the old Turbo. They stated than is economical to change the turbo. In my opinion the assessment was not carried out with reasonable care and skills and that is was a case of misdiagnosis. I can not see the point of paying 1k for a car working in three cylinders.

 

Any advise will be appreciated

[MissyNA]

I have spoken to my husband who had his own garage as he was a mechanic but is now an engineer offshore.

 

He said that it is their responsibility to inform you that - yes there may be a fault with the turbo, however, they will not know if the engine has sustained damage until investigating.

 

They should should have given you 2 quotes 1- for repair/renewal of the turbo inc labour costs and VAT 2 - repair/renewal of engine inc turbo with labour costs plus VAT.

 

That way - this gives you the information to make an informed decision on whether to proceed.

 

Again - from what you have said, it sounds as if they are trying to make a good profit from your bad situation.

 

I have to go through my law folder for you to find this case study on foreseeability to see if that helps you and I will get back to you ASAP

 

x

[Conniff]

What is the fault with the engine ??

[heliosuk]

Edited due to site crash

Edited September 11, 2013 by heliosuk
Site crashed half way through post

[heliosuk]

I think it's gone "pop" conniff

 

Some choice advice appearing again......now let me foresee...what's that creak coming from my car....I know...I'll go and consult my crystal ball after all as an engineer I should be able to predict an extraordinary event.

 

Anyone want this weeks lottery numbers?

[Conniff]

'Pop' as in debris in the pots? that would have been picked up when he ran it.

 

I'm trying to think what damage could have been done by the turbo that wouldn't have been noticed at run up, (not saying there wasn't any).

Oil return is dumped to the sump so no problem there.

[craiul]

What is the fault with the engine ??

 

it has a lot of smoke still and apparently one of the cylinders reads 400 compared with 650-800 the other three on pressure test

[heliosuk]

This actually might not be as bad as it seems. From the pressure readings it's pretty obvious it's a diesel with a turbo bearing collapse which allows neat oil to be blown into the engine in vast quantities. So as conniff points out it's hard to see that anything has been ingested into the 4 pots such as the swirl flaps which is common on some makes.

 

Given the nature of the fail it is hard to say by any standards that the garage has actually done anything wrong here apart from some processes that perhaps in hindsight could have been followed. I estimate that a 95 percentile would have followed the same process and come to the same conclusion. As regards culpable foreseeability well that's probably total hogwash, certainly from a statistical point of view and would therefore be nigh on impossible to prove.

 

Obviously if the make of car and type of engine plus size were known along with the mileage that would help.

 

The pressure readings are interesting though. Whilst you have a low reading on one cylinder this is not necessarily an issue as it could be a bore wash issue caused by multiple other factors such as poor injector patterns as the engine/turbo assembly inject so much oil it carbonises up and is thus dripping neat fuel which it cannot burn. Were the readings carried out hot or cold?

 

Not unusual either after such a failure is the exhaust to be so saturated in oil that unless this is changed as well it will continue to belch out smoke until it is all burnt off. I have seen such repairs take 12 hours running before they start to clear.

 

In conclusion, I'm not so sure you have and re-dress here.

 

Of course if the bottom end is knocking very badly due to all the oil being pumped into the engine and thus running dry then it is a very different matter.

[Westmead Fan]

when changing a turbo, it is normal for the car to smoke if oil has been trapped in the exhaust.

 

have they done a injector leak off test???

[craiul]

when changing a turbo, it is normal for the car to smoke if oil has been trapped in the exhaust.

 

have they done a injector leak off test???

 

Hi there yes they have and they claim is misfiring and revving a lot the engine

[craiul]

Renault Espace, 2.2dci, 70k miles, 2004 plate

[Westmead Fan]

now i know why the garage are having problems not only its a french vehicle and a pain to work on. a similar vehicle we have helped with the car rentals at my place of work have got a similar type of vehicle Peugeot 807 it needing a engine strip down due to cambelt breaking, now have running problems with injectors or diesel pump which they never touched the pump.

[heliosuk]

Hi there yes they have and they claim is misfiring and revving a lot the engine

 

The PSI figures you previously quoted could be the cause of the misfire but we'd need to see the results of the leak off test as well. If this is significantly lower then it suggests dripping fuel which would explain the bore wash and low PSI readings. In turn this can lead to a dilution of the engine oil and subsequent degradation of lubrication properties thus leading to turbo failure. Does the engine knock (other than routine diesel knock) for example if you hold the RPM at 1200 to 1500RPM is there a loud metallic noise?

 

The diagnosis as to exactly what is wrong is probably outside the capabilities of the garage now and needs more expert evaluation. It does not seem though that the engine has gone pop or bang in industry terms.

 

If we go back to the original question you asked though the reality is that you have to pay. Whether or not the advice they have given about off loading the car though is certainly questionable at this moment in time.

 

Economics about repairing a car is a very subjective thing though. I allow £1500 a year to keep a car worth a grand on the road. The economics might appear odd but if you have a good car it's going to cost you more to replace each year just down to depreciation alone.