AFAIK, ultra low sulphur petrol was introduced as a result of catalytic converters being introduced, sulphur in a cat makes the rotten egg smell and causes particulate production. It should have no bearing on the valves, that was the problem when unleaded fuel was introduced, which meant manufacturers had to introduce hardened valve seats and the fuel makers introduced additives to replace the lead.

Ian

Catalytic converters were introduced in 1992. 'Low Sulphur' petrol was introduced in 2005 as a result of EU legislation. UK petrol was ULS from early-mid 2009. Even this is not as low as the 'no-sulphur' petrol sold in Germany for many years, and for which the FSI engine was designed.

There have been numerous cases of FSI engines suffering burnt valves and needing new heads. Typically they fail at 50-60k miles, although it can be lower. The AZD 1.4l 100PS engine was most notorious for early failure. FSI engines in hire and lease cars (where the drivers didn't stick to the handbook requirement for 98RON) often suffer from valve problems and sometimes require a complete new engine, not just the head.

The handbook does state that 98RON fuel should be used.

I am assuming that the car in question was run on 95RON throughout its previous life, hence the problems now.

Get down to your local CAB office and have a chatwith them.

Burnt out valves should not be classed as wear and tear.

Also 3000 to strip and rebuild a head is taking the ****.

I did a K series rover last year and it cost me no more than £350 in parts and that included getting the head skimmed and all the valve seats recut and relapped.

But as I said the first step is to go to your local CAB office and see what they recommend.

The handbook does state that 98RON fuel should be used.

Not exactly. The manual with my car - a 1.6FSI - says on p242 under 'Grades of Petrol':

Engines which need unleaded premium plus petrol 98 RON can

also be run on unleaded regular petrol 95 RON. This does, however,

result in a slight loss in performance. You can in exceptional circumstances

also use unleaded petrol of 91 RON in the event that no

unleaded premium plus petrol of 98 RON or premium plus petrol of 95

RON is available. Refuel as soon as possible with unleaded premium plus

of 98 RON or unleaded premium petrol of 95 RON.

That quite clearly says that the only downside of using 95 RON fuel is 'a slight loss of performance' not premature destruction of the engine!

I spoke to RAC and in their opinion (within the limits of not having seen the engine themselves) its very unlikely for such thing to happen unless there was incorrect fuel used ie. Diesel. Ofcourse that was not the case!

Called up Consumer Direct. They have directed me to send a letter to Robinson Skoda asking them to repair the car. Now, question is: the car is currently in London area (Citygate Skoda in Colindale) with its engine half stripped. If the dealer asks to bring the car to Norwich, would that be required? Can Robinson Skoda not accept a verdict from their fellow dealership (Citygate). Taking the car to Norwich is going to be a costly proposition to tow/transport.

bluvrs2 suggested asking a local news paper to publish this issue. Would that have enough impact. Or should that be one of the last option (or not at all).

I imagine Honest John at the Torygraph would have more impact and interest than the teaboy at the Slough Express & Fleabag, but I would warn everyone you're dealing with first. Then again, seeing how VAG continue to fit like-for-like replacements for ABS units with known and proven design flaws (Teves Mk 60), it'd probably be a waste of a stamp or phonecall, and would remove any goodwill the dealer / warranty company have for you (not a lot by the look of things, TBH...)

If the dealer asks to bring the car to Norwich, would that be required? Can Robinson Skoda not accept a verdict from their fellow dealership (Citygate).

Have a look here: http://www.oft.gov.uk/business-advice/treating-customers-fairly/sogahome/sogaexplained

"Any refund, repair or replacement you arrange with your customer relating to faulty goods must not cause them too much inconvenience and you will have to pay for other costs, for example, collection or delivery."

Spoke to Robinson Skoda (the seller). They asked me to check with Citygate Skoda if they have submitted a FACTORY GOODWILL form.

Called up Citygate, they confirmed that was done and was declined.

Called up Skoda UK Customer care. Spoke to a nice representative Mr. John Good who is handling the case. He took all necessary details about the car and has opened a case for me. He mentioned once Car Care Services (the administer of Skoda Extended Warranty) have declined, it is very unlikely they will reverse their decision. However, in that case Skoda UK customer care becomes the last resort for Owners like me.

They have their own good will programme, thought they check all necessary service history details and confirm it is within 60months or 100K miles. In my case it fits their criteria. However the catch is, they pay only certain percentage of the parts and labour which is not 100%. Based upon age of car, the formula - in my case - brings it to a 35% range. I was unhappy with that, though he assured thats a ball park and it may sway based upon verifications he makes from Robinson and Citygate.

Nevertheless, its still going to be a BIG hit to take. I will wait for Mr. Goods appraisal and will share with you all.

I don't think your approaching this as well as you could. My advice would be to use SOGA NOT the warranty which will have you going round in circles. If you had the car less than a year, its not fix for purpose and you need to go back to Robinsons. Deal with them and them only, most warrantys are a waste of money as you have SOGA rights anyway. Don't deal with Skoda or anyone else, its between you and Robinsons.

If you got the car on credit, go to them.

Sent SOGA letter (as per directed by Consumer Direct) to Robinson Skoda as well as Credit card company I used to make payment. Do these letters usually make any impact? Some other consumer forums I read had users sending letters after letters asking for updates, in vain.

If you used a credit card for the deposit then I would deal with them via CC'ed letters. Did you send it recorded? Did you give them 7 days to respond? What sort of reply did you get? Am I right in thinking the car is with another dealer? If so, I would just fire off a letter to Robinson and state:-

Car not fit for purpose and of durable quality for the mileage/age.

You hold Robinson's responsible under the SOGA to repair the car

You want a courtsey car FOC whilst the repair is carried out

You have taken all resonable steps to effect a repair

You have 7 days to respond

Send it recorded, keep a copy, also send a copy and cover letter to Credit Card firm recorded. If you hear nothing, send another letter stating:

You gave 7 days to respond and got no satisfactory reply

Give another 7 days to respond/resolve before Small Claims Action.

Again keep copies, send to CC etc...blar blar...

If you still hear nothing or they stall, do the same routine and inform them you are taking court action in 7 days.

I would suspect that the suppler will deal with the dealer who have the car and will sort things out with them. John Good is a waste of time, I have delt with him and he just glosses over things and stalls you/go between. If he speaks to you, inform him you have notified the supplying dealer you intent to pursue them in court unless they repair the car under SOGA.

If you have no free loan car, then you might wish to hire one and indicate this on the letter and that you will be recovering the cost. Keep all recepts inc train/bus fares. Be resonable, don't hire an Aston Martin!

Dealers love selling these warrantys and "3 months free cover" cos they can try and hide behind them. Good luck!!

Sent SOGA letter (as per directed by Consumer Direct) to Robinson Skoda as well as Credit card company I used to make payment. Do these letters usually make any impact?

Well done. From my limited experience, the credit card company will write back to you stating that they cannot look at it until you have given the supplying retailer a chance to rectify the situation (this is just their internal procedures, though - this has no basis in law) - they really do not want to pay out (in my case HSBC said that I had no right to a refund on an item rejected as faulty inside 2 weeks, only a repair/replacement, and that the retailer had to refuse to deal with me before they could get involved - complete rubbish on both counts, and will probably result in an FOS/TS complaint). Note that if you are not happy with the way the credit card company handles it, you can take them to the FOS, although that takes months (but will cost the card company). No experience with car companies, but when my parents sued their insurers, they settled the moment the the case was called into court (after showing up with a barrister and 2 solicitors).

I had a look at the Skoda Approved Used Car Warranty for my parents car. Interestingly it states that it's provided by Skoda UK, and administered by Skoda Approved Warranty Services - no mention of Care Care Plan (also means that your agreement is with Skoda UK). The section you've quoted is 15b(ii), and it's a little out of context - section 15 states that it excludes wear and tear "commensurate with the age and mileage of the vehicle, including but not limited to: ... valves ... " - i.e. wear-and-tear appropriate for the vehicle's age/mileage. More worrying is section 15c, which excludes problems that may reasonably have existed before the warranty began (i.e. pre-existing problems). Interestingly, they state it's fair wear-and-tear, the counter-argument is "not sufficiently durable" (as engines are reasonably expected to last 100,000m+ these days), and if they say it's a pre-existing problem, then it was faulty at the time of sale, so I guess you could argue either would help your argument against the dealer..?

Just spotted this, here:

http://www.honestjohn.co.uk/faq/consumer-rights

The Sale and Supply of Goods to Consumers Regulations 2002 gives buyers of relatively new used cars who pay a full retail price a virtual guarantee of 6 months from the date of sale by assuming that any fault that occurs with the vehicle within 6 months was already developing at the date of purchase.

...which indicates inclusions / exclusions from the warranty may be irrelevant. GBP5000 appears to be the yard-stick for something that might be considered 'relatively new'.

HTH

@ m0bov: Clearly I wasn't witty enough to ask all that :( i just used the template provided by Consumer direct and it had a 14 days to respond warning rather than 7 and honestly - though I did think of asking for a replacement car - I was confused whom to ask (Citygate or Robinson). So I didn't ask at all. Silly Silly!!!

However, I have sent the cc'd letter from Robinson Skoda to the credit card companies. Same there too...14 days notice.

Just be firm but resonable and always give resonable deadline. Keep us up to date with what you get back!

Just now got a call from Skoda UK - Mr. John Good. He has offered to pay 80% of the parts and labour as a good will gesture and wanted me to accept the offer. I have contingently accepted the offer provided Robinson foots the bill for remaining 20%. He was trying to hard sell that getting more than 80% is going to be impossible.

He will be contacting Robinson Skoda to see what they can do about remaining 20%. After all the support and advise I have got on this forums, I am sure I will be able to get the full 100% claim, else legal route is always open.

BREAKING NEWS: I got another call from SKODA UK and they have pressurised Car Care (administer of Skoda extended warranty) to foot the remaining 20%. So the car will be fully repaired without any additional costs to me.

Another BIG THANKS to all of you for your continued support and advice.

Tremendous news so pleased for you , did you ask about courtesy car

Well, I didn't ask for a courtesy car TBH. They are going to return my car in few days.

So is it being repaired at Collingdale and will they pick you up when completed

Yes, Colindale will be repairing it. They have received the go ahead from Skoda UK for the work. They will claim 20% from Car Care warranty company. They should drop off the car like they did last time around. I will ask them to

Excellent

RESULT! Well done, your persistance has paid off!

Buy yourself a pint!

Thanks ap0gee. The point I was trying to make was, the dealer stated poor quality fuel as one of the causes. However, reading online I found out min RON in UK is 95 (ok, I dont know how much sulphur content it has).

I am sure not everyone affords super unleaded (depending upon what car they have).

All normal unleaded fuel in the UK must comply to BS EN 228:2004.

If a car can't run off BS EN 228:2004 compliant duel, then IMHO it isn't fit for purpose of being a car in the UK.

If it's running off super, then I guess this is an even higher standard.

Edited 21 January, 201115 yr by cheezemonkhai

Good result, nice one, once you get the car back make sure you send a stinky letter and insist on a free service voucher. Having to threaten them to get the car fixed is pretty dire.

All normal unleaded fuel in the UK must comply to BS EN 228:2004.

If a car can't run off BS EN 228:2004 compliant duel, then IMHO it isn't fit for purpose of being a car in the UK.

If it's running off super, then I guess this is an even higher standard.

It is actually illegal to sell any car in the UK that will not run on 95RON BS EN 228 petrol. However this just means that the car CAN run on the fuel, it does not mean that its best for performance and durability. I would run the car on 97+ RON fuel in the interests of long term durability - that's certainly all I ever put in mine. Problems with running the FSI's on 95 are very well documented.