Problems with brand new Vauxhall Corsa

IanMSpencer

glauber_berti wrote: »

This the reply I have received from Vauxhall:

Dear XXXXXXXXXX,

Thank you for your recent email regarding your new Vauxhall Corsa, although we are sorry for the circumstances which have caused you to contact us.

We have now had the opportunity to speak with Arnold Clark to discuss their findings following inspection and repair of your vehicle recently. They confirmed they were required to replace a cracked DPF Pressure Pipe which had caused the vehicle failure. Upon further investigation the DPF was found to be 181% saturated, and it is for this reason the repair was excluded as a warranty repair.

It is clear from your email that you are familiar with the workings of the DPF, and what is required to ensure it does not become clogged or saturated as it was in this instance. It is also important not to interrupt a cleaning cycle, which can take up to approximately 15 minutes to complete.

I regret that in this instance, in view of the saturation level of the DPF, we will be unable to assist towards the cost of your recent repair. In the unlikely event that you experience any future concerns, we will of course be willing to advise whether we will assist towards these, but I am sorry that I cannot offer a more desirable response on this occasion.

Thank you for taking the time to contact us, and for allowing me the opportunity to respond.

Yours sincerely

XXXXXXXXXXX

Vauxhall Customer Care




Thoughts?

It is stunning that they think it is possible to destroy their DPF in 1000 miles and 5 weeks. How do they suggest it is possible for it to become so clogged up in the first place?

To me, the response is nonsense, partly because 181% makes no sense - you cannot be more than 100% saturated in my limited mathematical training. Technobabble and false accuracy to give the impression of knowledge.

From your original post, I gained the impression that you had not previously had any indications of a cleaning cycle being required prior to the failure (edit:even better, you had one successful cycle that you dealt with appropriately). As that is the case, then it would suggest that there is a fault that caused the clogging. If no warning lights and no cleaning cycle were ignored then again you have something to go back to Vauxhall with.

Also, it is inappropriate to suggest that, as you had since researched the problem and now have some understanding of the issues, that you had that knowledge at the time of purchase.

I'd be very confident of winning this with a small claim. I can't imagine a judge, either knowledgeable or ignorant of car technology would think that Vauxhall's position was reasonable. They have provided no advice over what driving style might be inappropriate, they just hint that pottering about might lead you to needing to make some extra journeys. The manual seems to be weasel-worded too, in that it is all nicey-nicey and avoiding any meaningful discussion of the drawbacks, and then there is a single warning that interrupting the cleaning cycle twice will kill the engine - with no advice as to what to do if the circumstances make this difficult to comply with.

I would also suggest talking firmly to the lease company as the car would appear to be unfit for your purpose if every 1000 miles driving in your normal, reasonable style, you are faced with a £500 bill. That is not a foreseeable consequence of buying a diesel in your circumstances.

Further edit: I would give Vauxhall Customer Service one more chance to relent. The car has been driven in accordance with the manual, no warning lights have been ignored. There was clearly a fault that led to the excess clogging, or the failure of the engine to detect and deal with the DPF process appropriately. As the owner, there was no action you could have taken. If the refund is not made within 7 days then you will take action in the small claims court. Also, if it is Vauxhall's position that a car being used with no advanced warnings can have a complete breakdown and that this is the driver's fault, then it is clear that this car is unfit for purpose. You will use the evidence of this interaction to return the car to the lease company as unfit for purpose.

BeenThroughItAll

glauber_berti wrote: »

This the reply I have received from Vauxhall:

Dear XXXXXXXXXX,

Thank you for your recent email regarding your new Vauxhall Corsa, although we are sorry for the circumstances which have caused you to contact us.

We have now had the opportunity to speak with Arnold Clark to discuss their findings following inspection and repair of your vehicle recently. They confirmed they were required to replace a cracked DPF Pressure Pipe which had caused the vehicle failure. Upon further investigation the DPF was found to be 181% saturated, and it is for this reason the repair was excluded as a warranty repair.

It is clear from your email that you are familiar with the workings of the DPF, and what is required to ensure it does not become clogged or saturated as it was in this instance. It is also important not to interrupt a cleaning cycle, which can take up to approximately 15 minutes to complete.

I regret that in this instance, in view of the saturation level of the DPF, we will be unable to assist towards the cost of your recent repair. In the unlikely event that you experience any future concerns, we will of course be willing to advise whether we will assist towards these, but I am sorry that I cannot offer a more desirable response on this occasion.

Thank you for taking the time to contact us, and for allowing me the opportunity to respond.

Yours sincerely

XXXXXXXXXXX

Vauxhall Customer Care




Thoughts?

Make as much noise as you can via Facebook, Twitter, Watchdog, Citizens Advice, Trading Standards, etc etc.

AdrianC

IanMSpencer wrote: »

To me, the response is nonsense, partly because 181% makes no sense - you cannot be more than 100% saturated in my limited mathematical training. Technobabble and false accuracy to give the impression of knowledge.

181% of the normal maximum "permissible" saturation level, I would presume.

IanMSpencer

AdrianC wrote: »

181% of the normal maximum "permissible" saturation level, I would presume.

There are lots of things it could be, but the point is that it is technobable that does nothing to convey anything of use. For example, without dismantling the vehicle, and with no warning lights, how did the car manage to get into this state? How could the driver know about this?

glauber_berti

My response below.


Dear XXXXXX,

Thank your for your response.

Can you please clarify the reasons for why the repair is excluded as a warranty repair?

Your reply (and the response of Arnold Clark in the first instance) completely fails to take into account the age of the car and the mileage that it has been driven.

The car is five weeks old and had done just 1,000 miles before the breakdown. There is simply no way that a DPF should become so badly blocked in such a short period of time without there being a fault with the vehicle. I have taken advice from several mechanics on this matter and they all seem surprised that you have taken this decision.

I am not sure that I am "familiar with the workings of the DPF, and what is required to ensure it does not become clogged or saturated as it was in this instance". However, I can confirm that I have followed all of the advice that I have been provided with since purchasing the car. I have followed all instructions in the manual and did not interrupt the cleaning cycle on the one occasion that it took place since owning the car.

Consequently, I am struggling to understand what I have done to void the warranty or, indeed, what else I could have done to prevent the repair being necessary.

I request that you look into this matter again as I don't believe your previous e-mail provides an adequate response to my original e-mail. You have simply told me that the DPF was 181% saturated, which I already knew. Nobody has yet been able to successfully explain how this can happen in such a short time frame and how this makes it the fault of the vehicle owner.

I still feel that I am entitled to a full refund. If I don't receive repayment in the next 7 days, I will be pursuing the matter via the small claims court.

Kind regards,

XXXXXXXXXX

jaydeeuk1

Ahhh, arnold clark.

So basically what they're saying is with your current driving style expect the same problem every 5 weeks / 1000 miles until the end of the lease?

funkycoldribena

5 weeks!!! Thought it was"A warranty that could last a lifetime" fine if you're a worker bee,not even any good for a hamster.

photome

I will ask again

have you posted on facebook?

Its almost gteed a positive response

you can still take them to court and win IMO after wards

Make as much noise as possible everywhere there is no way you should be paying after 5 weeks and 1000 miles

what is 181% saturated

I can understand 81% but 181%

jcb208

Cant believe there response,No way would I expect to pay for a repair after 1000 miles and 5 weeks on a Brand new car.The car is not fit for the purpose.I would link this page in your response to customer services and also on there facebook page .I have had many Vauxhalls over the years without to many problems but If I was treated like this No way would I get another!!.Please don't give up and keep pestering them.Maybe some help from trading standards as well Good luck

colin79666

Quick question - did you retain the "broken" part? As you have paid for the repair you have the right to take the old part back and take it away for independent inspection. This might improve your standing if you take this to court.