I have a2015 diesel vrs 21k on clock, serviced as required by Skoda dealership car was bought from.

2 weeks just out of warranty banjo seal went, dumped the oil. Stopped immediately , car towed into garage.  Then 3 weeks later car just stopped, thank god not doing more than 40 at the time.  Almost caused a pile up.  Towed in only to be told the engine had disintegrated, Conrad right through the engine, needing replaced.  Skoda as “goodwill” stumped up 75% the dealship with a some of regociating pitched in another 20% which left me with a £500 bill, which I was not happy about.  Then told day I was picking it up I had to also pay for the turbo which was knackered, by the engine failure and another £250 was added to the bill.

car was due to be traded in , in about 7 weeks.  Why should a car doing 21k have this happen, and was the banjo seal failure and oil dump, got anything to do with this.  The Skoda garage said they checked the engine after this repair, how do I know they did?  I feel completely ripped off.

during the process it was the dealership raising the claim with Skoda, I have not contacted them yet, but will be.

any advice?

Edited 26 May, 20188 yr by Alz1995

Can't offer any advice, but jeez that's hard luck - sorry to hear about your engine woes 

 

Gaz

Skoda will dig their heels in but you need to seek professional legal advice and pursue this via the courts if necessary.

 

There is no way a diesel engine with 21k on the clock should fail in the manner you describe, especially if it's been serviced as per the manufacturers instructions.

 

 

I was going to see what Skoda said, they have put up 75% of the cost but given the circumstances I don’t think I should have had to pay anything.  I will see how I get on contacting them.  If they get defensive I will spam their social media, and take to small claims court, I’ve already paid the money so I’ve nothing to lose.  4 mechanics have said it was likely a manufacturing fault, and all cannot believe this has happened in a car serviced on schedule, repaired by them ( banjo seal), with little over 21k.  It had 5k on when I got it 3 years ago, so not done many miles, and certainly I am no boy racer, work, and golf club.

Sorry you paid seven & a half hundred quid for both the turbo & engine to be replaced on your car when it broke outside warranty 

 

& you wanna whinge about, close to end of warranty or not you still had NO WARRANTY 

9 minutes ago, themanwithnoaim said:

Sorry you paid seven & a half hundred quid for both the turbo & engine to be replaced on your car when it broke outside warranty 

 

& you wanna whinge about, close to end of warranty or not you still had NO WARRANTY 

 

Irrelevant these days because consumers do have more robust statutory rights than they used to.

 

The Sale of Goods Act offers protection against faulty goods even when the manufacturer's guarantee / warranty has expired.

 

The Act says goods must last a reasonable time, irrespective of guarantee.  It doesn't define what "reasonable" is.......so a washing machine that packs up after 13 months with a 12 month warranty might not be covered by the Act if the manufacturer can show it was used in a commercial environment, for example.

 

In the case of motor vehicles, however, it's fairly cut and dried where a diesel engine (that will easily complete 200,000 miles) fails completely after 21,000 miles.

 

Unless, of course, the OP is omitting some important details from his/her account of things?

1 hour ago, SkodaVRS1963 said:

The Sale of Goods Act offers protection against faulty goods even when the manufacturer's guarantee / warranty has expired.

 

Consumer Rights Act 2015 might be relevant, according to when it was bought.

 

Gaz

Trying it on if you ask me, bad luck getting a bad car but, when you get one you either move it on or buy as long a warranty as you can.

 

I ain't knocking the OP for trying but, 95% covered by others is a right result in my book

Edited 26 May, 20188 yr by themanwithnoaim

10 minutes ago, themanwithnoaim said:

Trying it on if you ask me, bad luck getting a bad car but, when you get one you either move it on or buy as long a warranty as you can.

 

I ain't knocking the OP for trying but, 95% covered by others is a right result in my book

 

I concur.

 

(Denzel Washington - Crimson Tide)

9 hours ago, themanwithnoaim said:

Trying it on if you ask me, bad luck getting a bad car but, when you get one you either move it on or buy as long a warranty as you can.

 

I ain't knocking the OP for trying but, 95% covered by others is a right result in my book

The very fact that Soda have stumped up 95% of the repair bill indicates that they have accepted that what happened shouldn't have.

 

I suspect the other 5% is the cost to the OP of ending up with a brand new engine instead of one with 21k on.

The thing I don’t ‘get’ - if £750 is 5% of the bill, that’s a £15,000 bill.  Surely that is way more than a 3 year old car with 21k miles is ever worth.  Why was it even considered worth economic repair?  Assuming you have owned the car a while, the recently changed consumer law won’t apply to you so you will need to rely on the old sale of goods act.  Whilst you still have rights, onus is on you to prove that the fault pre-existed when you bought the vehicle.  In other words that the item that failed broke due to a manufacturing or assembly defect.  By accepting the 95% contribution you will have signed away your rights to the broken parts for independent inspection which is your only realistic means of proving a pre-existing defect.  They have you over a barrel as covering 95% sounds reasonable because £750 for 3 years worth of engine wear is about right.  However, as you have already accepted the offer, the only way now is to try and shame them through social media but even this carries its risks.

Edited 27 May, 20188 yr by Falmouthboy

I think the 95% is a generous offer as others have said, bit naughty about the turbo though.

I’d drop the shaming thoughts, it won’t achieve anything except damage your online reputation. Especially if you are trading it in, other dealerships might see it and put 2+2 together and think you’re a difficult customer.

9 minutes ago, Falmouthboy said:

The thing I don’t ‘get’ - if £750 is 5% of the bill, that’s a £15,000 bill.  Surely that is way more than a 3 year old car with 21k miles is ever worth.  Why was it even considered worth economic repair?  Assuming you have owned the car a while, the recently changed consumer law won’t apply to you so you will need to rely on the old sale of goods act.  Whilst you still have rights, onus is on you to prove that the fault pre-existed when you bought the vehicle.  In other words that the item that failed broke due to a manufacturing or assembly defect.  By accepting the 95% contribution you will have signed away your rights to the broken parts for independent inspection which is your only realistic means of proving a pre-existing defect.  They have you over a barrel as covering 95% sounds reasonable because £750 for 3 years worth of engine wear is about right.  However, as you have already accepted the offer, the only way now is to try and shame them through social media but even this carries its risks.

 

 

£500 bill for the engine replacement which is 5% of that repair (£10000 if my maths is correct), then £250 charge separate for the turbo.

 

If I'd had a complete engine & turbo replacement for £750 out of warranty, I'd shut up and drive. Bear in mind the new engine and turbo will again have 2 years warranty...

Gong back to your question: sudden loss of oil from the banjo failure IMO would more than likely damage the turbo bearings, which would potentially shorten its life.

 

 

14 hours ago, SkodaVRS1963 said:

 

Irrelevant these days because consumers do have more robust statutory rights than they used to.

 

The Sale of Goods Act offers protection against faulty goods even when the manufacturer's guarantee / warranty has expired.

 

The Act says goods must last a reasonable time, irrespective of guarantee.  It doesn't define what "reasonable" is.......so a washing machine that packs up after 13 months with a 12 month warranty might not be covered by the Act if the manufacturer can show it was used in a commercial environment, for example.

 

In the case of motor vehicles, however, it's fairly cut and dried where a diesel engine (that will easily complete 200,000 miles) fails completely after 21,000 miles.

 

Unless, of course, the OP is omitting some important details from his/her account of things?

 

The Sale of Goods act applies to the seller of the goods, not the manufacturer, surely? 

21 minutes ago, juan27 said:

 

The Sale of Goods act applies to the seller of the goods, not the manufacturer, surely? 

Correct - the contract is with the supplying dealer.

Just to clarify: 

You bought a diesel and ran around 5K a year during the past three years? That’s pretty much asking for a disaster to happen :(

4 minutes ago, GaSelle said:

Just to clarify: 

You bought a diesel and ran around 5K a year during the past three years? That’s pretty much asking for a disaster to happen :(

 

I doubt the conrod through the block was a result of lack of miles driven. Yes, there may be other issues such as DPF related faults, but a conrod escaping wouldn't be something I'd consider as a possibility.

Am I reading this right? After the

95% contribution your still paying £750?

3 minutes ago, SimonD316 said:

Am I reading this right? After the

95% contribution your still paying £750?

What else was there which would be a possibility?

1 hour ago, Rustynuts said:

 

I doubt the conrod through the block was a result of lack of miles driven. Yes, there may be other issues such as DPF related faults, but a conrod escaping wouldn't be something I'd consider as a possibility.

And diesel in the engine oil due to failed regeneration of the DPF, short trips does not bring the engine/oil up to operating temp etc. 

 

Not saying that the low mileage did this, but it does not help, that’s for sure. 

 

11 minutes ago, GaSelle said:

And diesel in the engine oil due to failed regeneration of the DPF, short trips does not bring the engine/oil up to operating temp etc. 

 

Not saying that the low mileage did this, but it does not help, that’s for sure. 

 

It could be something like 100 miles round trip per week, which would be plenty of miles to get up to temperature. Low miles in itself isn't an indicator that the car has been abused. The way those miles are driven is way more important for me.

 

But again, I'm not sure throwing a conrod can in any way be attributed to not driving enough.

Like stated above - if you drive many short trips, so the car will try to regenerate the DPF without succes will eventually thin up the oil with diesel. When there is too much diesel in the oil, the bearings won’t get enough lunrication which could lead to the stated failure. 

5 minutes ago, GaSelle said:

Like stated above - if you drive many short trips, so the car will try to regenerate the DPF without succes will eventually thin up the oil with diesel. When there is too much diesel in the oil, the bearings won’t get enough lunrication which could lead to the stated failure. 

You know how many short trips the OP has been making? I don't, so attributing a sudden catastrophic engine failure to such is simply guess work. Besides, if low miles / short trips were to cause conrod failure there'd be a load more posts like this one.

I'm suspecting it's not related to the low miles, and until that's disproved I'm gonna stick my neck out and say you're incorrect.

 

Edit: Mother in laws Polo diesel has done 12k miles in the past 10 years. No sign of any conrod poking out of the engine yet.

Edited 27 May, 20188 yr by Rustynuts

26 minutes ago, Rustynuts said:

 

Edit: Mother in laws Polo diesel has done 12k miles in the past 10 years. No sign of any conrod poking out of the engine yet.

Would a 10 yo diesel polo have a dpf?