Advice Regarding warranty Issue on Engine failure on a 42 Month old Range Rover Sport

Grumpy_chap

I am surprised that anyone would "think" they can afford any car on PCP at £700 monthly, or thereabouts and despite a major issue having developed early on, but then scrimp and save a few pennies:

Longtoe1 said:

I decided to get extended warranty with a company called Motoreasy. 

feel like I was miss sold a unclaimable warranty. 

Longtoe1 said:

The services and oil changes have been done
I have just had a manager call me and apparently they thought I hadn't had the recent service done.
I have provided evidence as it was done at an independent with Jaguar Land Rover parts.

Those small savings will have put an end to any chance of 

facade said:

 LandRover should be extending some goodwill at least.

So much so that I am not surprised that the OP feels

Longtoe1 said:

nothing but patronised by the guy at Land Rover complaints

If you can afford a Range Rover, you can afford the Range Rover service costs and running costs.  If you can't, well, then you can't (like most people including myself).

I am surprised that the PCP does not require the vehicle to be main dealer serviced as part of the forecast valuation / balloon payment calculation.

It does seem that with the budget servicing and budget warranty, the OP has a case of "the bitterness of a poor product lasts far longer than the sweetness of a low price".  It certainly is not Land Rover's fault that the OP feels the warranty was mis-sold and unclaimable - I thought most after-market independent warranties were specifically written to be virtually unclaimable and IMO the only warranty worth having is the manufacturer's warranty.  Particularly for a car that had issues and £10's of £k's outstanding finance, the scrimping on servicing and warranty is unfathomable.

I can't see that this is going to be sorted any way other than the OP repairing the car, or getting rid and taking the hit on outstanding balance.

Sorry, it is not what the OP wants to hear, but it is the harsh truth of the situation as I see it.

In the mean-time, the OP might as well pursue the complaints process at JLR and the after-market warranty company and, even seek clarification of the comments from the AA, whose statement is being held against the OP at present.

nottsphil

Longtoe1 said:

 They said last time they replaced the engine. Whether they did or not I don't know I'm not sure how I would prove that.

Don't engines carry serial numbers anymore? 

frost500

See my post perils of car finance. Surely if you do 10k a year, finance on 12k per year, common sense. Regardless of what any spiv of car salesman tells you.  With regard to the engine, sounds like turbo seals due to wrong oil or low oil (foaming). Gonna cost 2k. Warranty companies are there to make a profit only, they will avoid paying out at all costs, finding any reason they can. 

Longtoe1

Once again thanks for the replies guys. 
I know it looks bad that I've gone to a independent. Who incidentally was a Jaguar Land Rover mechanic before setting himself up in a very successful and reputable business.

Unfortunately change of circumstances sometimes require that you can't pay dealer prices any more. However the position remains the same. If a car requires a new engine every 25,000 miles whether serviced at the manufacturer or not there is an issue.

The warranty situation was a massive mistake and one I will learn from. However I do not know about cars and these people should not be able to take advantage of people like this.

Grumpy_chap

Longtoe1 said:

I know it looks bad that I've gone to a independent. 
Unfortunately change of circumstances sometimes require that you can't pay dealer prices any more. 

I do agree that the use of an independent service company should be acceptable and should not affect the warranty from the manufacturer.  I think the normal criteria are needing to be a VAT-registered garage.  For your own car, this can be a sensible cost-saving.

Obviously, this is not your own car, but one you have borrowed for 4 years.  I am not sure how the use of an independent service garage will be viewed when the car has to go back, or whether it impacts the valuation.  I am certain that the dealer will try to argue that, as the car cannot be sold on with full RRSH, that will impact the forecourt price.  How much difference that makes I do not know.

The best mantra to take for any car-buying, and the rule I follow is "if I can't afford it cash, I can't afford it".  More expensive cars always come with more expensive running costs.  With a RR on a 4-year PCP, it means to lay-out £10k deposit plus (4 x 12 x £700 = ) £33k plus whatever excess mileage at 15 pence per mile, so that's going to be at least £45k all-in and all to have nothing.  If more people could realise the true cost of these PCP plans, which are just as proportionally bad on cheaper cars, the world would be a better place.

frost500

Totally agree. Pcps should be made illegal. Pch for new cars. Hp for used cars. Pcps banned.

Longtoe1

Well Grumpy_chap I just wish I'd had your wise words three and a half years ago. I think the issue is I have learned a lot of lessons but to be honest I would like to warn any person doing a similar thing to be careful. I totally agree and I was having a conversation with someone recently that the only way I  would by a Range Rover again would be if I literally could afford to bin it and buy another car at the drop of a hat. 

The car has been really looked after because it was my dream car. I loved it and was a pleasure to drive. It's just a shame the reliability and customer care isn't of the same standard. I still stand by the fact that to lose one engine after that amount of mileage once is unfortunate, twice is unforgivable and proves the product is not worth the price tag.
The sales of goods act states:

"The Sale of Goods Act offers protection against faulty goods even when the manufacturer's guarantee has run out. The act says goods must last a reasonable time - and that can be anything up to six years from the date of purchase"

With that in mind should an engine on a £62,000 car last longer that an average of 25,000 miles?



 

Grumpy_chap

Longtoe1 said:

The sales of goods act states:

"The Sale of Goods Act offers protection against faulty goods even when the manufacturer's guarantee has run out. The act says goods must last a reasonable time - and that can be anything up to six years from the date of purchase"

With that in mind should an engine on a £62,000 car last longer that an average of 25,000 miles?

I would have thought so.
Exactly the same as a £10k Dacia.

frost500

An engine on a 62k car should last for 200k easy, and it normally would. A modern RR is a wonderful piece of state of the art engineering, your case is unusual. And using indys should never be an issue if vat registered and invoiced correctly, showing OEM parts. That should satisfy any warranty claim. But sadly warranty companies are cowboys who operate like it's the wild west with zero compassion for the average punter such as you. They are just a "vehicle" to fund the lifestyle of a rich banker type at the top of the organisational tree. 

Longtoe1

Grumpy_chap said:

Longtoe1 said:

The sales of goods act states:

"The Sale of Goods Act offers protection against faulty goods even when the manufacturer's guarantee has run out. The act says goods must last a reasonable time - and that can be anything up to six years from the date of purchase"

With that in mind should an engine on a £62,000 car last longer that an average of 25,000 miles?

I would have thought so.
Exactly the same as a £10k Dacia.

I know it shouldn't matter what the brand. A modern day engine should last way longer.
As I said I came on here really with hat in hand. I know I've been foolish. However I want to challenge this.
Too many of these premium brands are not providing the quality they should. I'm ok because I will survive this. However others may get caught by this and they will not fight it like me, because I will not give up.