passtime device

painterman2259

hi just need some advice I am disabled I got a car on finance and the had a pastime box fitted to my Mercedes. the box works that every month you make a payment the finance company send you a cone which you put into a keypad to be able to drive the car it disables the car if no payment are made, my payments are up to date. In December 2013 I had to have a operation so I could not drive the car, while the car was standing the device went faulty and I could not start the car I rung the company and spent 30 minutes over the phone with countless codes still no luck. At that point I rung the garage up and they came out and fitted a new battery this still would not work. so the car got towed in for investigation. The result of this ended up being the device that the company had fitted was fitted to the lighting circuit of the car and was shorting out and the result it blew the ECU, I contacted the company and explained what had happened, they said it was not there fault. So I had this put right at my expense which was over £1200 to put right I have only had the car 7 months, I have sent the finance company the bill with a letter but they are still not answering can I pursue this matter further to get my money back I do have all the reports from Mercedes stating it was the box that caused the problem thanks for reading

forgotmyname

If you have 100% proof that the device blew the ECU. And get it in writing with no doubt as to any other fault causing it then take them to court and claim your expenses back.

Personally i think its more than likely that you blew the ECU when the battery died and you tried jump starting it.

Does the lighting circuit go through the engine ECU on that car?

So where is the box fitted to now?

CrazyRed

With most modern Mercs (certainly "since" mine, which is 1998) it is absolutely imperative that the key is NOT in the ignition and the sidelights are switched on before connecting the slave battery to allow a jump start. Failure to observe this can lead to one of the ECU's blowing (I have a feeling it's one of the SAM modules that blows and, judging by your costings from Mercedes it was one of these - one of the 'body' or 'engine' ECU's would have been substantially more than the sum quoted with recoding) - or was it the "EIS" they told you had blown?

(EIS = Electronic Ignition Switch - fitted to almost all Mercs since 1998. Very sensitive to voltage spikes and is known to 'blow' if an attempt is made to jump start a Mercedes vehicle whilst the key is inserted in it. £1200 is about 'right' for an EIS, fitting and coding from Mercedes.)

Just re-read the OP - if this wonderful 'disabling' device IS wired into the lighting circuit and had shorted, as claimed, then for certain the damage was caused to the front SAM - which is a type of ECU and is found in the ECU box under the bonnet - the front SAM normally controls the lighting circuit amongst quite a few other systems around the car. The reason the car would not start is because the SAM unit is linked to every other ECU in the car via the "CANBUS" network (a bit like a number of computers being linked together via a network) and the absence of one unit on the CANBUS will then disable that entire CAN (Car Area Network) - effectively meaning that large parts of the car are 'offline' and cannot be put back 'online' (and thus the car being allowed to start by the EIS and immobiliser) until the fault is corrected. Most modern cars have a large number of ECUs in them, not 'just' an engine ECU, and all are interlinked via the CANBUS. There's very little (in fact, virtually nothing) which isn't controlled via an ECU and CANBUS on a modern car.

So, effectively, this unit sounds like it disables the front SAM - in my opinion that is wrong, on a lot of levels. If that device inadvertently activates whilst you are travelling, then an awful lot of the car's functionality will suddenly disappear - not just the lights, but most likely anything connected to the same CANBUS - which is normally the locking, heating, wipers, blower, demister, radio, seat adjustment, windows, traction control and, because of the need for all systems to be seen at all times on the network, it may well lead to the engine and transmission ECU's being taken offline as well which could be extremely dangerous if the car is being driven at the time.

As already advised, you have the report from Mercedes confirming that this "add on" unit was the root cause of the issue with your car - personally, I'd be going bat-sh*t at the company that supplied and fitted it and demanding my costs, and associated additional expenditure whilst your car was off the road (taxis to hospital appointments etc.) be reimbursed - via legal means if necessary.

Tosh576

Exactly the same issue on my mercedes. The pastime device expired. The. It refused to respond to any nee codes etc.. It has blown the circuit on the computer chip. Ruining the ignition and thus reuqired reprogramming and cost over £1200 at mercedes.

I thus sent my quote and mercedes report informing them it had blown the curcuit board etc they again have have ignored every email ive sent. Promised numerous times a after care manager will call. Its all lies. They never call And do there best to refute all responsibility.
It has ruined my car and im fed up of being treat like an idot by the disgusting fiance company.

So as i write this i have no car. No response for 5 days and they expect me to pay.. They even removed the pass time device on the advice from the mercedes which clearly shows they have some liability. Its very rare they would agree to remove it but they know deep down they have caused the issue.

Im disgusted and totally in dispute with them .. Its very sad how the company thinks its acceptable to to behave in such a manner ive every nightmare reports about thm and its all coming true.

Im refusing point blank to pay any more money and under the miss selling act 1978 im taking legal action. Ive been ripped off and they know it. The car has done nothing but break down 5 times since october. So many promises of we will resolve the problems on the car but never ever do they resolve anything.

AdrianC

Was this box fitted by the insurer, or by a third party? If by a third party, who instructed them?

Johnmcl7

AdrianC wrote: »

Was this box fitted by the insurer, or by a third party? If by a third party, who instructed them?

Fitted by someone on behalf of the finance company I assume, it's to prevent the car being used if it hasn't been paid for.

John

DUTR

Johnmcl7 wrote: »

Fitted by someone on behalf of the finance company I assume, it's to prevent the car being used if it hasn't been paid for.

John

All seems odd, if the finance company authorised the fitment and the car is not driven, then surely the OP just ceases to pay for the use?