Zafira Woe

moonzero2

In February 2008 I purchased a Vauxhall Zafira 2.2 Design elite, the purchase was financed by Black horse.

In August of that year the vehicle broke down, due to I was told to the fuel pump failing, this took nearly 3 weeks to fix as demand for this part was so high supplies were hard to attain.
The vehicle broke down another 3 times as roughly at 3 month intervals due in each case to the fuel pressure regulator.

During this period I had called Black horse customer complaints department and advised them that I considered the car unfit for purpose

By this time I had lost all faith in the car, and when advised it was ready merely replied “Oh joy”.
I had contacted Consumer direct by this time, and was advised that as the repair had been made there was no breach of contract; but I should write to Black horse and tell them that in the event of another breakdown, I would require a refund.
This was done, however in August 2009 the car left me stranded at the side of the road for the fifth time in 15 months.

Using a template supplied I wrote to black horse repudiating the contract as the vehicle was not fit for purpose.
This lead to their interminable complaints procedure, during which they contacted the dealer to try to source a replacement vehicle; the only vehicle offered was older, and not of the same specification as the Zafira I bought had a navigation system built in which the proposed replacement did not. As the Zafira was priced at £14000 due in part to this feature, I did not consider it a viable alternative.
The dealer did make an offer when I first brought the matter up; this was to purchase a diesel model and effectively lose the payments I had already made on the original vehicle. This was dependant on “if Black horse will take the loss”. I declined as it seemed that the only loser in this would be me.

After Black horse’s procedure had been exhausted, (not that they tried that hard in my opinion), I took the case to the financial ombudsman. I had been researching the problem and had discovered that the recurring fault on my car was known to Vauxhall and reported in the BBC programme watchdog.

I sent the details of the case to them along with a transcript of the watchdog report, and the adjudicator upheld the complaint, as Black horse appealed this I had to wait over a year for it to be reviewed, being advised to keep up my payments; which cost more than £4000 during this period.

The review did not uphold the complaint on the basis that as the car first broke down 6 months after purchase the fault was not there on purchase, this was concurred with by the ombudsman a month later.

This is despite this fault being known by Vauxhall as a design problem, and its being reported on by the Watchdog programme.

I did consult the citizens advice bureau, but they said I had already done what they would have advised, and my only options are to take it to court, small claims court; or try to progress through the trade associations of the dealership.

Due to the length of time taken on this case, and the costs I have already had in keeping up the payments on this; as well as having to purchase and run a replacement vehicle to enable me to get to work, further legal action is beyond my financial abilities.

The irony is that I probably could have afforded to take the case to court, if I had not waited for the ombudsman.

My only option now is to stop payments on this lemon and let Black horse repossess it.

If anyone has further suggestions I would be interested to hear them.

nyreem

Moonzero2,
I have been following your story as we also have a 2.2 Zafira 2008. Its just broken down for the 5th time with the same old fuel pump problem. i am at my wit's end with it. I have been told by the garage we bought it from (brand new). I have been told by the garage that sold it to us that there is a couple who are suing Vauxhall at Bromley County Court. I have contacted teh court to see if we can join them. I've been told to write in and see if our details can be allowed to be passed on to the couple's solicitors. I'll let you know how this goes. Like you, I hate the car, wish we'd never bought it, barely drive it now as I can't face breaking down in it for a 6th time with my three young children in the back. Furious with Vauxhall for allowing a car with a known defect to be sold,
regards,
nyreem

gordikin

Happens all the time.

moonzero2

nyreem wrote: »

Moonzero2,
I have been following your story as we also have a 2.2 Zafira 2008. Its just broken down for the 5th time with the same old fuel pump problem. i am at my wit's end with it. I have been told by the garage we bought it from (brand new). I have been told by the garage that sold it to us that there is a couple who are suing Vauxhall at Bromley County Court. I have contacted teh court to see if we can join them. I've been told to write in and see if our details can be allowed to be passed on to the couple's solicitors. I'll let you know how this goes. Like you, I hate the car, wish we'd never bought it, barely drive it now as I can't face breaking down in it for a 6th time with my three young children in the back. Furious with Vauxhall for allowing a car with a known defect to be sold,
regards,
nyreem

Hi Nyreem

How long did it take for the vehicle to break down after purchase, the ombudsman sems to think 6 months means the fault was not there at the time of purchase.

Your experience appears too similar to be coincidence.

Regards

Moonzero2.

wealdroam

moonzero2 wrote: »

The review did not uphold the complaint on the basis that as the car first broke down 6 months after purchase the fault was not there on purchase, this was concurred with by the ombudsman a month later.

moonzero2 wrote: »

...the ombudsman sems to think 6 months means the fault was not there at the time of purchase.

Moonzero, I don't have an answer for you, but you seem to have missed the significance of six months in all this.

This guide explains how the Sale of Goods Act interprets this concept...

• If a consumer chooses to request a repair or replacement, then for the first six months after purchase it will be for the retailer to prove the goods did conform to contract (e.g. were not inherently faulty)
• After six months and until the end of the six years, it is for the consumer to prove the lack of conformity.

MSE phrases it slightly differently...

When goods are faulty, if you return them within six months then it's up to the shop to prove they weren't faulty when you bought them. After this, the 'burden of proof' shifts and it's up to you to prove they were faulty when you bought them.

But it means the same.

nyreem

Hi moonzero, our zafira first broke down 8 months after we bought it. We bought it in may 2008 and it broke down in jan 2009. It's since broken down with the same fuel pump/fuel pump regulator 4 times. The last time it broke was last month. We had allegedly bee fitted with a modified fuel pump - it lasted 10 months and the manager at the garage seemed to think that I should have been grateful it lasted that long! My teacher training had to be brought into play to prevent me hitting the roof. As it's a known problem that was in existence before we bought our 2.2 zafiras surely it should count as fraudulent selling??? They knew there was this defect but vauxhall continued to sell them. The whole point of buying brand new was to buy piece of mind regarding safety and reliability and these cars provide neither. Bye for now.
Nyreem

moonzero2

Hi wealdroam.

The problem is of course that the first breakdown would be put down to one of those things.

It is the fact that this is happening repeatedly, to many other cars with the same engine; to the point that it get reported on national television, that makes it obvious that something is seriously wrong in the design.

deanos

Im sure there is a recall on the 2.2 fuel pump ?

Or there is a well known fault with them, think it was on Watchdog

moonzero2

deanos wrote: »

Im sure there is a recall on the 2.2 fuel pump ?

Or there is a well known fault with them, think it was on Watchdog

I sent a transcript of the watchdog report to the ombudsman, but they still did not uphold the complaint.