Incorrect Tyres Fitted - Higher Load and XL

Grumpy_chap

Duplicate thread
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81714708#Comment_81714708

Goudy

I'm not wanting to get into the in's and out's of the reasons about rejecting the tyres that were fitted.

But if you truly believe these aren't the correct parts for your car, get the correct parts fitted and return the incorrect ones asap, then initiate the chargeback/Section 75.

You may need some sort evidence that you ordered abc but they supplied xyz, like a receipt and that you have exhausted all reasonable attempts to resolve this between you.

Using the wrong parts or even holding them hostage isn't going to help with the chargeback/Section 75.

oldagetraveller1

In the case of an insurance claim, would having tyres of a different speed and load rating, to those originally fitted, invalidate the claim?

matt_drummer

leosayer said:

Firstly, I'm not sure why the fuss over the OP's tyre size. 225/45/17 is a fairly standard size on most family hatchbacks - they're hardly the rubber bands that you find on sportier models with 35 or 30 profile. I've driven my car (Audi A3 1.4) on both 225/45/17 and 205/55/16. There's very little difference in ride quality. 

There'll be even less noticeable difference in the OP's case, like none!

Mildly_Miffed

oldagetraveller1 said:

In the case of an insurance claim, would having tyres of a different speed and load rating, to those originally fitted, invalidate the claim?

No.

Both speed and load ratings are "at least..." - anything above the minimum is just fine.

We don't know what car it is, but the Y speed rating on both is good for 186mph. I very much doubt that too low a rating will be deemed to be a major contributory factor in any claim.

Tyre load rating 91 is 615kg per tyre, 94 is 670kg.
If the maximum loaded weights of both axles (1- and 2- on the VIN plate) are below 1230kg, then either 91 or 94-rated are perfectly fine. If the heavier axle is between 1230 and 1340kg, then the heavier rated are the correct ones. If one is over 1340kg, neither are.

XL simply means it's the higher of the load two ratings available in that size.

As far as the self-certified efficiency ratings...
Both have C fuel efficiency, A wet grip, while the noise rating differs. Both are 69dB drive-by noise rated, but the 94 load is A rated, while the 91 is B...
https://www.goodyear.eu/en_gb/consumer/tires/eagle_f1_asymmetric_6/225-45-17-94-Y-581511.html
https://www.goodyear.eu/en_gb/consumer/tires/eagle_f1_asymmetric_6/225-45-17-91-Y-721235.html

saajan_12

Goudy said:

I'm not wanting to get into the in's and out's of the reasons about rejecting the tyres that were fitted.

But if you truly believe these aren't the correct parts for your car, get the correct parts fitted and return the incorrect ones asap, then initiate the chargeback/Section 75.

You may need some sort evidence that you ordered abc but they supplied xyz, like a receipt and that you have exhausted all reasonable attempts to resolve this between you.

Using the wrong parts or even holding them hostage isn't going to help with the chargeback/Section 75.

Where did holding them hostage come from? Its also difficult to not use tyres once fitted without incurring further cost.
- OP would have to drive on them to go to another garage and replace with the original tyres, then pay again for a change to the correct ones once ordered, meaning 2x tyre changes plus the returned ones are 'used'
- or wait for new tyres to be ordered and then replace once, but then what does OP drive in the meantime - claim for a hire car or taxis? 

If the garage refused to reinstate the old tyres that day, then the costs go up anyway, whether by the tyres becoming 'used' or taxi costs or both. If anything the OP's actions are ensuring its not 'both'.