1.5 SEL first gear issue.

[Ootohere]

Skoda UK very much involved as the importer of potentially danger goods and the Warranty provider in the UK.

[MusicalEclectic]

Didn’t test drive this actual vehicle. Did test drive another but the salesman warmed it up and took it to the flat before I took over and started out.....

[Armeg1]

I just went straight to the main man, let them talk to dealer 

 

[MusicalEclectic]

You should reject the car and ask for money back within 30 days of purchase. Or better still don’t buy ŠKODA in the first place. They aren’t responding honourably on this one. Ours is rejected but still waiting the 14 days before commencing legal action against the dealer for our money back. 

[Armeg1]

We have 9 skodas in our family all been 100 per cent until now.

All got from the same dealer so we will now see how good they are, and if they want our future business..

 

 

 

 

[Armeg1]

Mine was bought in Dec now got 2000 miles on it, at first I thought it was me.

So gave it a chance but did go in to dealer early to air my concerns.

 

 

[LittleOwl]

We had ours 10 days before complaining to dealer. Given massive runaround, especially by Skoda UK. Clear legal advice meant we focussed our attention on the parties that mattered. Resulted in successful rejection and full refund. Strongly advise you reject too. No-one should have to drive a car they no longer trust.

[Dai_8]

Left the below on a SEAT forum but thought I’d share as I’ve been taking interest in this thread the last few weeks as you’ll see why below.

 

Just going to leave this here for peoples’s information. 

We took delivery of our 1.5 tsi Ateca first week of January, took it in to dealer with lack of response/stalling/kangaroo fault on the 2#th Jan. Called Seat assist as SEAT service technicians weren’t available as a Sunday. AA attended and arranged a hire car through SEAT assist “mobex” (warning- VW group will only allow Enterprise hire to supply VW group customers with VW group cars so you could end up with an Audi Q7, we ended up with a spartan Skoda Fabia until complaining about its maintenance 2 days later and managed to get a golf plus). SEAT technicians at our dealership managed to replicate the faults on the Monday and provided me with email confirming this. The technician also told me that he had raised a safety critical fault report to SEAT technical. On 3#st January, we had confirmation that there was no fix at present for the fault, expected sometime in 2019... Technicians also recorded faults occurring and sent to SEAT technical in the mean time.
We followed this up by rejecting the car on the 3#st January by sending a letter to SEAT Finance and the dealer exercising our short term right to reject under Consumer Rights Act 2015. This is where the “fun” started!

We had our email and it’s contents ignored for the first week while we were passed between several Vwfs dept’s and personnel including receiving emails from named managers who no longer worked in those dept’s. It was not until we were allocated an executive complaints handler that we had one point of contact with Vwfs. Even then, SEAT UK attempted to deny faults existence, tried to get the dealer to buy car back from finance company, tried to get us to accept/buy a different car, and attempted to take the hire car off us with 6 hours notice after telling us to pick up the Ateca as SEAT technical had found the faults to be non-safety critical. We stuck to our guns and eventually, after the dealer had continued to refuse to buy back the car from the finance company and take the financial hit on the car, (SEAT) Vwfs accepted responsibility for refunding everything we had paid out on the car. Our case handler took a fair few angry calls from me given that I had provided exactly the evidence required from the outset of our rejection but they obviously have pressure from above. Her final decision based on her 4 weeks investigation consisted of basically 4 lines. “You said car had fault, SEAT agreed there is fault, Complaint upheld, here’s your money back” packed out with some apologies and the legal information they have to provide. 
Full Refund with interest and admin costs received this week after more angry phone calls and emails threatening legal action as rejection had been accepted 2 weeks ago and Vwfs were delaying refund due to arguments between entities of SEAT as to who was going to refund us and the waiting for senior manager’s approval. I had also started to go public on Twitter with the issue.  

Think the issue may be about to get a lot bigger for VW group as more people realise the fault is not them “adapting driving style to new vehicle” or “characteristic” of the car. Just want to give an insight into the battle that you may face in rejecting a car but also encourage you not to be put off if you are currently lumbered with a faulty car and you wish to take this route. I would suggest having a good read of the Consumer rights act 2015, particularly the right to reject, first 30 days and up to 6 months and beyond. You can also search and read previous case decisions against VWFS on the financial ombudsman service website, gives a good insight into an ombudsman’s application of the law in such cases.

SEAT/VW may come up with a fix for the issue eventually but their handling (apart from the dealership who were completely honest and professional with me) of the case has put us off the brand for life, What others decide to do is down to them entirely but if what I’ve shared helps one person with their own battle, It’ll have been worth writing it.

Happy ending for us, we test drove and have just ordered a 2019 Suzuki Vitara to replace the Ateca. Made us realise how a new car should feel to drive! 

Dai

[Kodiaqman]

Very helpful background info and sage advice from those who have been put through the mill and have come out the other side.

Dispicable conduct from the various VAG entities.

[Stevieweevie]

I don’t understand the intricacies of automobile production but there are some things about this that are unclear to me.

 

1. Why is VW Group not taking a consolidated approach to this? As in, why the misinformation and smoke screens etc. If there is a problem, and there surely must be, and it involves one of their biggest selling engines, you’d think they’d want to sort it out ASAP.
2. Is this problem, or group of problems (flat area in power curve, hesitation and kangarooing) like they say, one suffered by “some” owners or is it universal to the engine? I know when used in different vehicles the same basic engine unit is present in different states of tune. But I thought with modern manufacturing tolerances being fairly tight that if there is an inherent flaw with an engine then any vehicle with that unit in it is going to be suffering the same problems. There seems to be some inconsistency in this as some owners of even manual transmission 1.5 units report no issue or that it does not detract much from their experience or expectation. This lends credence to it not being a universal problem but I don’t understand how it could just be here and there if the problem is with the engine itself.

[LittleOwl]

OMG! This is exactly what happened to us, including the short notice removal of loan car. Incredible. It was only when we contacted Which? Legal services and got clear advice and guidance that we made any headway.

[Dai_8]

1 hour ago, LittleOwl said:

OMG! This is exactly what happened to us, including the short notice removal of loan car. Incredible. It was only when we contacted Which? Legal services and got clear advice and guidance that we made any headway.

 

At the point they tried to tell me that we were no longer entitled to the hire car as it was a non-safety critical fault and to pick up the car from the dealer, I literally went to war with them from that moment.  As the SEAT executive later that day told me he’d been unaware that we had rejected the car at that point and that’s why he had tried to discontinue our use of the hire car, I was holding an email in my hand from the dealer linking him to the case from the first day I’d rejected it. Incidentally the hire car is still outside our house at present as he became a lot more helpful in extending the hire from that point.

 

We got refunded the full invoice deposit + 2 months interest at 8%, admin fees & pro rata refund for changing insurances, gap bought separately & £80 to put our plate back on retention.  They declined to consider my request for additional damages for the inconvenience or indeed the delay in making a refund once fault was confirmed so I may well now refer the decision to the ombudsman as a matter of principle to highlight the poor customer service shown and the lack of clarity in VWFS/Seat’s rejection process. 

 

I did a LOT of reading and also talked to a colleague who although not practising is a qualified solicitor.  Ombudsman can also give some advice and the most important thing is to document and record every conversation you have with Dealer/Brand/Finance company and follow everything up with emails confirming what has been said as they will refuse to put anything in writing to you if they can help it.  This will only help your case if it doesn’t go to the ombudsman.

[Dai_8]

1 minute ago, Dai_8 said:

 This will only help your case if it doesn’t go to the ombudsman.

Should say if it does go to the ombudsman

[john999boy]

7 minutes ago, Dai_8 said:

Should say if it does go to the ombudsman

Non Freedom members can edit their own posts up to 60 minutes after posting. 

[kifir]

Interestingly, is it possible to return the car or exchange it for a new one if 5 months and 4850 km has passed? Or it is too late?

I have a confirmation from the dealer that the problem exists, and they do not know how to fix it. 

 

too tired of it, it's terrible to pay that kind of money and not enjoy the car ...:(

Finland, Skoda Octavia

Edited 3 March, 2019 by kifir
Mileage and country

[keiroha]

Reading recent posts, it seems owners are getting different treatment by different dealers, and mostly poor.

 

My own experience of my dealer (Rainworth Skoda) has been much better.  I reported my 1st/2nd gear issues to them in the first week or so after purchase, specifically loss of power and a tendency to kangaroo!  They took note of this and told me a software fix was due Q2.  Some weeks later, I experienced a total loss of power pulling away one morning, absolutely no response to pressing the throttle, causing the car to stall.  Fortunately, this was on a quiet side street and didn't leave me exposed to traffic, but it probably would do one day, so I resolved to contact the garage.

 

By coincidence, I got a pro-active call from their After Sales Manager who I'd already reported the issues to. I told him about my latest experiences, and he told me that Skoda UK have acknowledged the problem, are offering a replacement vehicle free of charge until the issue is fixed and they will then compensate owners once it is fixed, still timetabled to be Q2. I accepted the offer of the replacement car and collected it yesterday.

 

I have a 68 plate Karoq 1.0 SE Nav Plus as a replacement.  To drive, it is much better, no loss of power and no kangarooing.  It goes quite well considering the lower engine capacity but I'd still prefer the more powerful 1.5.  Also the 3 cylinder engine sounds odd!  The trim is lower specification so it is not as comfortable.  But at least I now have a car I feel safe to drive.

 

 

So praise to Rainworth Skoda.  Pity all dealers are not so proactive!

 

Keith

 

[Salp]

Same predicament for us.  Car is now 15 months old, and since the update in sept/oct it has been considerably better, but not fixed.  More annoyed and angry by the lack of responsibility by Skoda to correct this issue.  

[AMC150]

31 minutes ago, keiroha said:

Reading recent posts, it seems owners are getting different treatment by different dealers, and mostly poor.

 

My own experience of my dealer (Rainworth Skoda) has been much better.  I reported my 1st/2nd gear issues to them in the first week or so after purchase, specifically loss of power and a tendency to kangaroo!  They took note of this and told me a software fix was due Q2.  Some weeks later, I experienced a total loss of power pulling away one morning, absolutely no response to pressing the throttle, causing the car to stall.  Fortunately, this was on a quiet side street and didn't leave me exposed to traffic, but it probably would do one day, so I resolved to contact the garage.

 

By coincidence, I got a pro-active call from their After Sales Manager who I'd already reported the issues to. I told him about my latest experiences, and he told me that Skoda UK have acknowledged the problem, are offering a replacement vehicle free of charge until the issue is fixed and they will then compensate owners once it is fixed, still timetabled to be Q2. I accepted the offer of the replacement car and collected it yesterday.

 

I have a 68 plate Karoq 1.0 SE Nav Plus as a replacement.  To drive, it is much better, no loss of power and no kangarooing.  It goes quite well considering the lower engine capacity but I'd still prefer the more powerful 1.5.  Also the 3 cylinder engine sounds odd!  The trim is lower specification so it is not as comfortable.  But at least I now have a car I feel safe to drive.

 

 

So praise to Rainworth Skoda.  Pity all dealers are not so proactive!

 

Keith

 

Thank you for this info. Rainworth are my dealers and I reported my "fault" three days after taking delivery in July 18 but  I've had no offer of a replacement vehicle. I will be banging (loudly) on the Service Managers door tomorrow demanding one and quoting your case. 

[kifir]

1 hour ago, keiroha said:

Reading recent posts, it seems owners are getting different treatment by different dealers, and mostly poor.

 

My own experience of my dealer (Rainworth Skoda) has been much better.  I reported my 1st/2nd gear issues to them in the first week or so after purchase, specifically loss of power and a tendency to kangaroo!  They took note of this and told me a software fix was due Q2.  Some weeks later, I experienced a total loss of power pulling away one morning, absolutely no response to pressing the throttle, causing the car to stall.  Fortunately, this was on a quiet side street and didn't leave me exposed to traffic, but it probably would do one day, so I resolved to contact the garage.

 

By coincidence, I got a pro-active call from their After Sales Manager who I'd already reported the issues to. I told him about my latest experiences, and he told me that Skoda UK have acknowledged the problem, are offering a replacement vehicle free of charge until the issue is fixed and they will then compensate owners once it is fixed, still timetabled to be Q2. I accepted the offer of the replacement car and collected it yesterday.

 

I have a 68 plate Karoq 1.0 SE Nav Plus as a replacement.  To drive, it is much better, no loss of power and no kangarooing.  It goes quite well considering the lower engine capacity but I'd still prefer the more powerful 1.5.  Also the 3 cylinder engine sounds odd!  The trim is lower specification so it is not as comfortable.  But at least I now have a car I feel safe to drive.

 

 

So praise to Rainworth Skoda.  Pity all dealers are not so proactive!

 

Keith

 

It's good that they say something about Q2. No official service has ever told me about it.

I can not make a decision, try to return the money with a lawyer or wait for an update. but will it be or not?! ...

Edited 3 March, 2019 by kifir

[Stevieweevie]

2 hours ago, keiroha said:

Reading recent posts, it seems owners are getting different treatment by different dealers, and mostly poor.

 

My own experience of my dealer (Rainworth Skoda) has been much better.  I reported my 1st/2nd gear issues to them in the first week or so after purchase, specifically loss of power and a tendency to kangaroo!  They took note of this and told me a software fix was due Q2.  Some weeks later, I experienced a total loss of power pulling away one morning, absolutely no response to pressing the throttle, causing the car to stall.  Fortunately, this was on a quiet side street and didn't leave me exposed to traffic, but it probably would do one day, so I resolved to contact the garage.

 

By coincidence, I got a pro-active call from their After Sales Manager who I'd already reported the issues to. I told him about my latest experiences, and he told me that Skoda UK have acknowledged the problem, are offering a replacement vehicle free of charge until the issue is fixed and they will then compensate owners once it is fixed, still timetabled to be Q2. I accepted the offer of the replacement car and collected it yesterday.

 

I have a 68 plate Karoq 1.0 SE Nav Plus as a replacement.  To drive, it is much better, no loss of power and no kangarooing.  It goes quite well considering the lower engine capacity but I'd still prefer the more powerful 1.5.  Also the 3 cylinder engine sounds odd!  The trim is lower specification so it is not as comfortable.  But at least I now have a car I feel safe to drive.

 

 

So praise to Rainworth Skoda.  Pity all dealers are not so proactive!

 

Keith

 

 

Good that you got a replacement but what about the fact that it’s lower trim? Should it not be basically equivalent?

 

You've purchased a vehicle of a higher trim and you’ve paid for it, in the meantime (which could be months) they have that vehicle and you’re driving about in a lower trim. Yes, you feel safe, but you didn’t pay the extra money for safety, you paid it for more comfort and convenience and you’re not benefiting from that while you’re driving a lower end model.

 

Whats positive is your dealer’s proactive response to this but you’re still effectively being short changed aren’t you? If you were to lease that vehicle that you have at the moment it would cost markedly less than to lease your own. That’s the cost to them. So there is a disparity there isn’t there? It’s lopsided. For the inconvenience it’s okay if you got a larger engine or a vehicle with equivalent or better trim but giving you less is cheeky.

[shyVRS245]

5 minutes ago, Stevieweevie said:

 

Good that you got a replacement but what about the fact that it’s lower trim? Should it not be basically equivalent?

 

You've purchased a vehicle of a higher trim and you’ve paid for it, in the meantime (which could be months) they have that vehicle and you’re driving about in a lower trim. Yes, you feel safe, but you didn’t pay the extra money for safety, you paid it for more comfort and convenience and you’re not benefiting from that while you’re driving a lower end model.

 

Whats positive is your dealer’s proactive response to this but you’re still effectively being short changed aren’t you? If you were to lease that vehicle that you have at the moment it would cost markedly less than to lease your own. That’s the cost to them. So there is a disparity there isn’t there? It’s lopsided. For the inconvenience it’s okay if you got a larger engine or a vehicle with equivalent or better trim but giving you less is cheeky.

Or simply clever of the Skoda dealer!

[LittleOwl]

Skoda are trying to reduce number of official rejections. The only ones losing out are the customers. You don't need a lawyer to reject.

[MusicalEclectic]

This is the right to reject per Which?:

 

30 day right to reject

Your early right to reject is limited to 30 days from the date you took ownership of the goods (this could be the date of purchase or the date the goods were delivered to you - whichever is later).

 

After the first 30 days

If you're outside the 30-day right to reject, you have to give the retailer one opportunity to repair or replace any goods or digital content which are of unsatisfactory quality, unfit for purpose or not as described.

Tell the retailer whether you'd prefer a repair or a replacement, but bear in mind that it has the final say.

But the retailer can refuse if they can show that your choice is disproportionately expensive compared with the alternative.

If the attempt at a repair or replacement is unsuccessful, you can then claim a refund, or a price reduction if you wish to keep the product.

Can I get a full refund? - the first six months

If you've owned the item for less than six months, the retailer must give you a full refund if an attempt at a repair or replacement is unsuccessful.

The only exception to this is motor vehicles, where the retailer can make a deduction for fair use after the first 30 days.

It doesn't matter whether you bought your goods before or after 1 October 2015 - in the first six months from when you buy something, the onus is on the seller to prove your defective product was of satisfactory quality when you received it.

It's not for you to prove that the faulty item was not of satisfactory quality in order to get it repaired or replaced during the first six months after purchase.

[kifir]

9 minutes ago, MusicalEclectic said:

This is the right to reject per Which?:

 

30 day right to reject

Your early right to reject is limited to 30 days from the date you took ownership of the goods (this could be the date of purchase or the date the goods were delivered to you - whichever is later).

 

After the first 30 days

If you're outside the 30-day right to reject, you have to give the retailer one opportunity to repair or replace any goods or digital content which are of unsatisfactory quality, unfit for purpose or not as described.

Tell the retailer whether you'd prefer a repair or a replacement, but bear in mind that it has the final say.

But the retailer can refuse if they can show that your choice is disproportionately expensive compared with the alternative.

If the attempt at a repair or replacement is unsuccessful, you can then claim a refund, or a price reduction if you wish to keep the product.

Can I get a full refund? - the first six months

If you've owned the item for less than six months, the retailer must give you a full refund if an attempt at a repair or replacement is unsuccessful.

The only exception to this is motor vehicles, where the retailer can make a deduction for fair use after the first 30 days.

It doesn't matter whether you bought your goods before or after 1 October 2015 - in the first six months from when you buy something, the onus is on the seller to prove your defective product was of satisfactory quality when you received it.

It's not for you to prove that the faulty item was not of satisfactory quality in order to get it repaired or replaced during the first six months after purchase.

It is EU laws or just your country?

[xman]

Just Uk, Consumer Rights Act 2015.

 

There are EU laws covering up to 6 years in some cases, but I know very little about them, except cars are a special case.