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'. 

Goudy

saajan_12 said:

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'. 

When has anyone got a refund for a wrong product that they continue using and haven't returned?

It's unfortunate that the circumstances are awkward but chargeback/section 75 doesn't account for every individual circumstance.

If the process worked as wanted in this case, would everyone claim their tyres were wrong, not return them and continue to use them, yet get their money back?


Imagine as this is a motoring forum and it's often advised to do this.
You buy a car from a dealer and pay the deposit on a credit card.

You take delivery, drive off and use the car for x amount of days before you realise it's not the car you ordered.
It has a sunroof and you didn't order it with one.

You can't just continue to use the car, claim section 75 and hope to get your money back.

photome

saajan_12 said:

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 it’s not 'both'. 

They could have insisted on having the old tyres put back on before leaving the depot

but would still like to know if the OP has checked the tyre pressures

EnPointe

BraveHeart said:

Mildly_Miffed said:

fwor said:

maj1987 said:

Sorry if this sounds a little harsh but you are making a mountain out of a mole hill, the only difference between the 2 tyres is, one can carry 670kg per tyre (94xl) vs 615kg (91) both are rated y so safe upto 186mph

The problem is that if the sidewalls are significantly stiffer, it can make for a very harsh ride on some cars.

I very much doubt the <10% higher load capacity would make for any noticeable ride quality difference in any blind back-to-back test.

That aside, if ride quality is important, I'd suggest that any 45 profile tyre would be a bad move.

As for "owned by Goodyear" - HiQ operate as franchises, so the HiQ-branded site visited is actually owned by the franchisee operating it, who pay a fee to the parent to use their branding, marketing, and supply chain. That parent is indeed Goodyear Dunlop Tyres UK Ltd... BUT running through the website as if to order tyres, it appears to be the individual site that you are contracting with, not the national parent.
https://www.hiqonline.co.uk/about-hiq/franchise-with-us

I most certainly can feel a difference in road handling and comfort with the 94Y XL tyres.
The stand in manager was the person who fitted the tyres - is he not duty bound to check the order/product before fitting?

The only reason to contact Goodyear is for them to be aware of the poor service provided by HiQ, and was asked to do so by Goodyear's customer service representative so this could be investigated further.

As for HiQ, I have a chain of contact (email/calls) to which I have not received any response.

I think approaching my bank is the easiest manner in which this issue would get resolved.
- Waiting until the 08/11 just seems a long time given the car does not drive as I am used to.

ah the psychological power of suggestion