I'd like to see a 'class action' run in support of those who have had any part of their 'emission control system' fail INSIDE to stated 10 year 'minimum design life' of such equipment.

Items such as EGR s and such, costing thousands of £€$ should not have to be paid for by the owner when they fail within the industry accepted period.

Why is it so?

The stated warranty is 3 years. Why should they cover parts outside it?

The stated warranty is 3 years. Why should they cover parts outside it?

Because the OEM and vehicle manufacturers have been on record (decades ago) in agreeing to all governments' requirement that everything associated with emissions be manufactured to a MINIMUM 10 year design life.

I was around and fully aware when it happened......stainless exhaust systems flowed from it (I remember the old mild steel ones which were rubbish in comparison)

So why is a failure with THE most important component (DPF/EGR), particularly in a diesel, not be held to account for an 'implied' warranty.

An early failure surely would be regarded as not having been 'fit for purpose' when fitted or 'of merchantable quality' when supplied as it clearly fails that test.

I have no doubt the trade doesn't want this discussed as it could cause a lot of embarrassment for govt also.

Why should those who see a diesel as a long term investment be the fall guy for component failure inside it's 10 years guarantee to govt?

Or was that a joke all along?

Don't confuse the standard manufacturers warranty with the industry's promise on emissions systems.

Edited 14 October, 201510 yr by Ryeman

SAI pumps on petrols seem to fail at about 6 years.

Mine did.

SAI pumps on petrols seem to fail at about 6 years.

Mine did.

Do they still have them?

I remember the old rubbish that Holden put on Kingswoods and Commodores etc .....they led to the 10 rule, at least in Australia .

It's part of the emission system and you've been had also.

Do they still have them?

I remember the old rubbish that Holden put on Kingswoods and Commodores etc .....they led to the 10 rule, at least in Australia .

It's part of the emission system and you've been had also.

 

The original 1.8t had them. Don't know if the TFSIs do.

I'd say the reason nobody complains is that they have never heard of the 'implied' guarantee......it was to govt but it seems we are not supposed to know or apply the knowledge in terms of

"You said it would last a MINIMUM of 10 years.....it didn't.......YOU (the OEM/vehicle manufacturer) pay for it"

What does "minimum design life" mean? I bet it doesn't mean everything is guaranteed to last at least that length of time. So a non starter.

Sent from my D5803 using Tapatalk

What does "minimum design life" mean? I bet it doesn't mean everything is guaranteed to last at least that length of time. So a non starter.

Sent from my D5803 using Tapatalk

You bet?

Well, it's certainly an opinion.

In Australia it certainly was an industry commitment as a result of the shoddy rubbish we had to endure.

Reading some of the Californian EPA regs

It would, on the surface, appear that light vehicles that fail an emissions test, and relating to specific component failure, within

10 YEARS or 120,000 MILES

MAY

Be repaired at the manufacturers cost

ie

NOT the owner's

(I suspect an 'east coast' lawyer however would need to confirm it)

I've raised this with the ACCC and EPA plus Maurice Blackburn.

Am I being cynical in suggesting that lawyers are likely to be the only ones of help in finding the truth?.

Has anyone had to pay for the failure of their EGR or DPF inside 10 years of the manufactured date........we talk about failures of the above, but do we have any numerical data to confirm early failures?.

Is it an urban myth that they commonly fail early?.

Edited 17 October, 201510 yr by Ryeman

Can you provide direction to any documentary evidence of this "decades ago" agreement?

Can you provide direction to any documentary evidence of this "decades ago" agreement?

It was, from my recollection an Australian, 'commitment' and that is indeed the 64 million $£€ question.

I don't think it's an easy question to resolve and also doubtful that anyone wants this investigated.......including govt and peak associated industry bodies.

Repairers would have to 'reclaim' costs....much easier to charge the 'unaware' owner.

I'm not claiming it's fact......I just want an official clarification.

In California, the EPA, from my reading of their web info <www3.epa.gov> it seems to indicate that if an emission component fails and the vehicle fails a 'test' the repair is covered by 10 year 120,000miles warranty specific to emissions systems.

We'll see

I can find nothing in UK legislation.

ADR = Australian Design Rule

I seem to have found in ADR 79 mention of conforming to a UN convention.

I've found mention in (ADR 79/01 Emission Control for Light Vehicles) 2005

Here we go

4. Requirements

4.1.1

Vehicles which operate on diesel fuel shall comply with the relevant limit values in row "B(2005) of the table paragraph 5.3.1.4 of Appendix A, and the FUNCTIONALITY of EMISSION CONTROL DEVICES shall satisfy the 5 YEAR or 100,000 KILOMETRE requirement specified in the opening paragraph to paragraph 8.2 of Appendix A.

I'm not trained in law but it's a starting point for further investigation ......and my head's aching already

Edited 17 October, 201510 yr by Ryeman

That's 5 years though not 10. Better than 3 though.

 

I do agree that given the increasing complexity and therefore cost and the increasing number of failures due to this complexity that customers as a group are getting a bit peed off with having to stump up for the expensive replacement of components which fail after the warranty period but within what should be a reasonable time/mileage due to poor design/lower quality components. As said, cars are not fit for purpose.

 

I'm not saying that mega mileage should be covered but it's a bit galling for say 5 year old/30k. owners to foot the bill, especially if the car has a full dealer history. I know that costs are sometimes covered on a goodwill basis but it's still hassle.

 

When I started looking around for a replacement for my old Fiat Stilo I was looking at older VW's and Audi's etc. I was frightened off most of them as most have had an issue of some kind e.g. timing chains, excess oil use, dual-mass flywheels, DSG., etc., the list goes on. I'd looked at second-hand Yetis as well, but when the 0% finance became available I jumped at it as at least I'd get 3 years warranty and peace of mind for that period.

 

It's not just about first and second owners having unacceptable costs it's about cars being scrapped before what should be their useful/expected lives are over due to some expensive part failing and the increased impact on the environment that has.  

 

My mate won't have any truck with modern cars. His daily drive is an MGB GT and he has a Mini Moke. I'm beginning to see he is right!

^^^^ re your last

The clocks ticking on light diesels........false economy to me

I'd like to see a 'class action' run in support of those who have had any part of their 'emission control system' fail INSIDE to stated 10 year 'minimum design life' of such equipment.

Items such as EGR s and such, costing thousands of £€$ should not have to be paid for by the owner when they fail within the industry accepted period.

Why is it so?

 

Go for it then.

Go for it then.

I'll send you the account number for the money transfer

Exhausts

Mild steel systems used to rot out from lead acid (leaded petrol) attack so with the introduction of ULP they would have lasted longer

But

Without anyone being told, we got full stainless steel systems from exhaust manifold to tail tip

They didn't do it just to be nice.....they'd have told you all about it

It was to guarantee a minimum life which mild steel still couldn't.

Just been out and checked under my car. No one has been and fitted a stainless exhaust recently I'm afraid. When can I expect them to do this for me?...

Just been out and checked under my car. No one has been and fitted a stainless exhaust recently I'm afraid. When can I expect them to do this for me?...

And your salt laden roads too

I take it Ryeman is not in the UK - standard stainless exhaust?

Do not beleive any "standard" everyday UK vehicles have a full stainless system unless I've slept for sometime and woken up somewhere else?

My local garage has a pile of old exhausts outside all the time and they sure ain't nothing but good old mild steel.

I take it Ryeman is not in the UK - standard stainless exhaust?

Do not beleive any "standard" everyday UK vehicles have a full stainless system unless I've slept for sometime and woken up somewhere else?

My local garage has a pile of old exhausts outside all the time and they sure ain't nothing but good old mild steel.

Cripes, realy!

I've no experience of an exhaust system failure for many decades.

Mr Muffler used to specialise in them, now they do brakes clutches etc due to lack of work.....

When I was young I was always replacing exhausts but I can't remember the last time I had one done. Even if not stainless modern exhausts are good quality and last well.

 

I suppose they have to given that they contain expensive cats. etc. and the complaints there would be if folks had to replace expensive systems before time. 

 

My son has had one exhaust on his 2003 Fiat Punto but there's no cat. in that.

Australia a 'Lemons'.

http://carsguide.com.au/car-news/lemon-laws-protect-you-18502

 

 

Maybe a bit strong, but then we will see, because we are still at the start of the story, 

and the main act has yet to happen.

(No idea why VW think they are in a position to speak about re-building trust!)