Okay people this thread is up to 124 posts now and I think both sides of the argument have been well covered.

It has at the very least confirmed the following points (which I expect most people knew):

1-Skoda Uk monitor the website

2-Modifying your car will void the warranty on the effected parts

While personally I am not convinced there was any need for Dave to be told and that it was an issue between skoda Uk and the dealer I don't see much point in it continuing for another 124 posts along the same arguments.

Just my view anyway

Right Moral of the story

1. Leave mods till your warranty runs out (I was going for the remap but (Long Story) a certain co didn't call me back (still waiting for a call over a month later)). So I am not having anything done till then. If the skoda employee is reading 1. Skoda was much better customer service wise before VW took over and 2. If you keep this attitude up my 7th Skoda will be my last).

2. Don't brag about modifications on a public site.

3. Dave - take Skoda to the small claims court. Costs literally nothing

4. Under the sale of goods act - talk to trading standards. If the part is not affected by the mod Skoda do not have a leg to stand on.

Now where is the brochure for the Focus ST - and Skoda if you think I'm joking.....

.......so anyone holding up their hands to being the 'Skoda supergrass' then?

John, couple of points re your point 4

1. The warranty doc states that if you modify without their consent it invalidates your whole warranty, not just part of it

2. They usually won't enforce it to the letter, they'll just void the bits you've modded and stuff effected by it

3. In the case of an ECU, point 2 covers loads; engine, turbo, manifold, wheel bearings, gearbox, driveshafts, brakes, bushes, clutch, fly wheel etc etc the list goes on as you have increased the power by 30%+- you are putting more strain on other parts.

.......so anyone holding up their hands to being the 'Skoda supergrass' then?

Yeah, he served me soggy chips so I grassed him up!

John' date=' couple of points re your point 4

1. The warranty doc states that if you modify without their consent it invalidates your whole warranty, not just part of it

2. They usually won't enforce it to the letter, they'll just void the bits you've modded and stuff effected by it

3. In the case of an ECU, point 2 covers loads; engine, turbo, manifold, wheel bearings, gearbox, driveshafts, brakes, bushes, clutch, fly whteel etc etc the list goes on as you have increased the power by 30%+- you are putting more strain on other parts.[/quote']

Jon - agreed - but wasn't sure what part was covered. If it was the ECU fair do's but if it was something like trim - then seems very harsh.

If Skoda UK invalidate the warranty then the part may be covered by the tuners. Check with them

That said challenging it in a small claims court will mean 2 things - one Skoda will fight and things will become clearer or 2 they can't be bothered and cave in.

I mean the car is designed to use air, and it's designed to use no more air than it needs a foam filter simply allows a freer flow of air and without the need to replace it.

The problem with an air filter is that even if it's not as good a fit as the OEM item, or it's underoiled, the air getting into the engine may not be properly filtered. This could cause all kinds of damage and I certainly wouldn't expect Skoda to foot the bill for that!

Chris

Yeah' date=' he served me soggy chips so I grassed him up!

[/quote']

*******... How dare they serve soggy chips, next you will be telling me the fish is dry :p

Nah, was definitely wet fish

Jon - I can understand both viewpoints and its fair enough to void warranty with mods. I think the difference here is that they have acted very rapidly on voiding a warranty on complete hearsay - surely it would have been easier to log it and then bring it out into the open when any warranty claim was initiated (as in your case)?

Took the words out of my mouth

Shifty, when are you taking your car in to get it checked over for mods by the dealer?

Shifty, when are you taking your car in to get it checked over for mods by the dealer?

Next week or the week after. Im on holiday shortly.

Next week or the week after. Im on holiday shortly.

can i borrow the car then??

I believe this to be underhand:-

Based on speculation' date=' without seeing the vehicle first.[/quote']

exactly, and as a lawyer if I might offer my tuppence worth, if Shifty's account of it is correct and Skoda announced they would not honour the warranty full stop (ie they repudiated the contract) then they were more at risk of being in breach. This is not a legal issue, after all if the car is modded then as Shifty has said, no warrnty. What this is about is a customer relations faux pas. Skoda have drawn conclusions based on what was said on this site and implemented a decision without any proof. Thankfully it seems the dealer has seen sense and done his best to salvage their legal position by setting out a mechanism to get that proof (ie the inspection).

Skoda's warranty bods I suspect have not spoken to the legal dept - not that unusual, happens in the company I work for too, and in most others I suspect! We (the lawyers) get hauled in afterwards to sort out the shambles that could have been avoided by seeking advice in the first place.

I don't thinkk there's anything wrong with Skoda's use of info on here, but what they should have done was contact the dealer, ask him to contact Shifty and offer the chance to have the car checked out. Or warn the dealer of their suspicions and suggest that the next time the car was in for some work, have it checked out for mods and then tell Shifty that the warranty wouldn't cover the costs (before they do the work!)

Domhnall

What this is about is a customer relations faux pas. Skoda have drawn conclusions based on what was said on this site and implemented a decision without any proof.

What constitutes proof though? Is a written, published account by someone about their car not considered as proof?

Rob.

If Skoda lurk on here can I ask...do you do you solve some of the issues that some menbers have?

Sarah

That's a good point, oi Skoda, how about sorting out once and for all a way of connecting a non ipod MP3 player to the stream HU on the Octy 2? Oh and can you tell the nice people who answer the phones to stop denying thatthe aux in port exists onthe stream?

What constitutes proof though? Is a written' date=' published account by someone about their car not considered as proof?

Rob.[/quote']

you have to look at the context, if Dave wrote to Skoda and said "Dear Skoda I have modded the car to the hilt as follows:...." then that would be much stronger proof than a posting on a site which has fairly widespread use of humour.

For instance just in reading this thread (which has taken my whole lunch break now!) I have seen one member claim to have a jet engine in a skoda and another point out that Dave was lying to try to impress his mates coz he's sad and can't afford the alleged mods (allegedly!).

I think that creates reasonable doubt as to whether the postings can be taken as gospel so I'd have to physically check the car for mods.

I'm actually heartened that Skoda read the site, they might actually sort out the mess of info about plugging in MP3 players to the Stream HU in the Octy II (are you reading this Milton Keynes??)

For instance just in reading this thread (which has taken my whole lunch break now!) I have seen one member claim to have a jet engine in a skoda )

I think you will find we all claim it:D

Strewth,I hope skoda don't come poking my pipes now

What constitutes proof though? Is a written' date=' published account by someone about their car not considered as proof?

Rob.[/quote']

No why would it be, I could set an account up with a pic of your car claim to be you and say your car now has a 30MegaBrakedHorsePower engine with elastic bands for tyres and a banging new pine air freshener.

Problem with the internet is there is no authenticity.

The only way to actually "prove" shifty is shifty is for him to sign his posts with a digital signature using a private key and anyone who wants to read them to use his public key available from a trusted 3rd party to decode and read them

That doesn't even take into account the possibility of a compromised account or server etc.

Sorry for being geeky but i work in software and do a lot of this sort of stuff.

At the end of the day it'll all come out in the wash at inspection time. If Dave chooses to revert his car to standard or not, the fact remains that the warranty clearly states that you cant modify the vehicle and retain warranty.

As someone else said - If you get caught speeding you pay the fine and get on with it.

Problem with the internet is there is no authenticity.

Oh I wasn't even going to go near all that set of issues :eek:

This is one of the biggest objectiosn to all those great ideas about using the net to improve turnout at elections and so on. Before long you're into identity theft and so on.

Mind you now that my second Skoda Stream HU is malfunctioning I'm wondering if I just lose patience and refuse to put up with it any longer, will a non Skoda HU mean my warranty is null and void? Strictly speaking I reckon it would and if Skoda are getting all strict and stroppy.........:(

No why would it be, I could set an account up with a pic of your car claim to be you and say your car now has a 30MegaBrakedHorsePower engine with elastic bands for tyres and a banging new pine air freshener.

Why not? You write it in a newspaper, you're held accountable for it. You write it on the internet, casebook studies have shown that you can be held accountable for it.

Domhnall's comment about context does make sense...if it's blatantly written with humourous intent or is unlikely to be true for other reasons then fair enough...but if a post doesn't hold any of these traits, and also promotes a user's business, and their posts contain details about verifiable events (new turbo on a blue Octy II vRS in the Blackpool area owned by a person named the same as advertised on the user's business website), then I'd say with a fair degree of accuracy the person's account could be taken as true without resorting to certificates and private keys.

Rob.

I am currently on my third or fourth symphony head unit on my octy I and figure that over my two years of ownership it has been out with a loan non-symphony unit from the dealer or nothing in it's place more than it has been in.

Here is a hint to skoda, maybe you should stop using grundig to make the stereos as they appear to unable to make one that lasts three years.

Here is a hint to skoda, maybe you should stop using grundig to make the stereos as they appear to unable to make one that lasts three years.

Mine's survived pretty well over the past 4 years...it's amazing how pristine they stay when you keep them in a box in the loft...

Rob.

(Warranty Invalid)

Domhnall's comment about context does make sense...if it's blatantly written with humourous intent or is unlikely to be true for other reasons then fair enough...but if a post doesn't hold any of these traits, and also promotes a user's business, and their posts contain details about verifiable events (new turbo on a blue Octy II vRS in the Blackpool area owned by a person named the same as advertised on the user's business website), then I'd say with a fair degree of accuracy the person's account could be taken as true without resorting to certificates and private keys.

Rob.

Don't see how, as I said I work in software, I did a degree in computer science covering all these issues and I am pretty sure that anybody who knows about any of this could easily put reasonable doubt up in a court of law.

It wouldn't stand up and has infact recently be proven in cases not to stand up on e-mail and similar for the case of a contract.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/04/12/email_sigs_legal/

ok that artical is talking about a signature, but point stands regarding not forming a contract with a verifiable e-mail address so I'd be sure you could get reasonable doubt in a court.

Anyway comparing to a newspaper isn't fair as you can sue the publisher for liable there if they mention anything that can be linked to you.

EDIT: Yeah with regards to the radio if it goes when it's out of the three years I won't be putting a skoda one in there.