Just received a quote from Peugeot dealership to fix the rear wiper on 05 206SW. They aparently have to replace the complete rear window due to the fault being in the wiring in or going through the window!
I would think an unreasonable amount to have to pay on a car not yet 5 years old? Presume I have to write to Peugeot UK to stake a claim for cost sharing?
|
Hmm. I wonder when the wiper will fail in my April'08 207 SW ... does the screen in the 206 SW open separately from the tailgate?
But this is just an example of specific maker parts being high-priced to offset the low initial cost of whole cars. Peugeot's price for a front wiper motor for a 205 (yes, they are still available!) is £180. A used one from Car Transplants - £15. A no-brainer, but maybe not a choice for the OP.
|
AT, yes opens separately.
We were considering a 207SW replacement, as they offer proper, small estate car features, but this amount is just ridiculous.
Would be interested to hear of other window mounted-wiper problems.
|
> 207SW replacement ..
The only wiring in the 207 SW rear screen is for the demister. The wiper motor is in the tailgate and engages with a pin on the part that wipes. I would have thought any design with an opening screen would be similar?
|
|
|
We were considering a 207SW replacement as they offer proper small estate car features
Slightly off topic, but check out the Fabia estate, I looked at both the 206, 207 and Fabia and concluded that the Fabia was the better car... especially than the 206, which had a tiny boot compared with it... the only thing going for it was the looks as the Fabia looks a bit dumpy compared with it!
Edited by b308 on 18/02/2009 at 11:00
|
|
b308, big issue for me is having a flat load area, i.e. no lip for dogs to negotiate. is Fabia flat load area? Recall looking at larger Skoda estates some years ago, and all had a 2 or 3-inch drop to the floor. Otherwise agree that they are far better value than Peugeot/Renault.
|
|
Its got a 2" drop, probably one reason the boot is bigger!
Edited by b308 on 18/02/2009 at 13:14
|
|
|
|
|
|
I would try another dealership or find a good local garage who may well charge you less to repair this. Alternatively find a good auto electrican who may be able to effect a suitable repair by using his engineering skills to replace the wiring rather than the dealers skills of reading a manufacturer's repair handbook. Failing this your only talking about the rear wiper which is not an MoT failure rather than spend out £600 carry a damp sponge in plastic bag in the boot and give the rear screen an occasional clean when you stop.
|
|
|
I would think an unreasonable amount to have to pay on a car not yet 5 years old? Presume I have to write to Peugeot UK to stake a claim for cost sharing?
If you think it's unreasonable then it probably is.
In theory you could sue whoever supplied the car using the Sale of Goods act as it should be made durable enough to last a resonable length of time. Five years is the norm for consumer items.
Problem is that liability rests with the supplier, not Peugeot. If you've owned the car from new and the dealer you bought it off is still in business, then that makes things a bit more straightforward. But even then, you'd probably have to get them to do the repair then ask for the money back then use the online small claims court to recover it. All a bit messy really.
Your best bet probably is to appeal to Peugeot's good nature. The car must be only just 4, not nearly 5? Good luck.
I had some issues on daughter's SEAT Ibiza at its 4yr MOT recently and the dealership and SEAT said hard cheese. At least crossing VAG off the family fleet list makes choosing the next cars a bit simpler.
|
|
Isn't it still within warranty?
|
|
I would guess that with dealers' current cash-flow difficulties they will do all they can to persuade you that such items are excluded from the maker's warranty, if necessary prolonging the rigmarole until it expires. But you have to try, especially if you are a valued customer.
|
SFAIK dealers do not pay the cost of parts for warranty repairs, the parts are supplied by the manufacturer, BUT, dealers get a fairly low hourly labour rate for doing warranty work.
|
|
|
|
This doesn't seem right or the dealer is just covering themselves:
Tailgate glass (8744.X3) costs £365.41 + vat from a dealer - wouldn't your insurance cover this??
Wiper motor (6405.N0) costs £63.17 + vat from a dealer
Information for the people would base a buying decision on the speculatory cost of a rear wiper repair - on the 207SW the wiper motor is part of the tailgate not the glass.
|
Quote is for £532.03. Cost this morning for dealer to diagnose problem was £65 plus VAT! ;
quote 'checked fuses, checked wiper motor, checked wiring to rear of vehicle, checked tailgate wiring, fault in tailgate glass requires replacing'.
Dealer supplied address and phone number for Pinley House, Coventry, to write to with my case for consideration.
|
Dealer supplied address and phone number for Pinley House Coventry to write to with my case for consideration.
Did the dealer ask Peugeot themselves first?
If not, then what kind of customer service is this? Next thing they'll be complaining when you buy your next car off the internet and get your servicing done at an independant.
|
|
Don't forget that your contract is with the company you bought the car from, eg Arfur Daley Motors. Any claims to, or offers from Peugeot are supplementary.
|
I cant believe the SOGA got mentioned for this !
Its a talk with your dealer (especially if you are a repeat customer with them), possibly contact with Peugeot if you dont't get the response you need.
But surely a word with another dealer and and independant first would be the sensible step forward? Especially with the confusion over the prcing as mentioned above by another poster!
But SOGA ?
Edited by yorkiebar on 17/02/2009 at 20:28
|
But SOGA ?
The car's an 05 so it can only be just over 4 yrs old at most - do you think it's reasonable to expect owners to have to lay out £600 on repairs for something that really ought to last the life of the car?
This is exactly what the SOGA is for.
|
I dont think it is right that the wiper has failed, but if its out of any warranty then the SOGA is not the course of action. Throwing that at the dealer would not help any "goodwill" gesture!
If a warranty does not cover it, then how would the SOGA?
|
Polite letter going off to Peugeot Coventry address supplied by my Peugeot dealer. (phone number also provided is the 'dealer helpline')
Rear wiper motor assembly is all attached to the opening glass window. (the micro-switch operated glass and tailgate are pretty poor in my opinion)
Car bought used from Peterborough Peugeot dealer, so quite a way to get fixed by seller.
|
|
|
If a warranty does not cover it then how would the SOGA?
That's an odd question to be honest. If the warranty covered things like this then the Sale of Goods act wouldn't be needed.
Remember the phrase "warranty is in addition to your statutory rights". Warranties are largely irrelevant. All they do is make the process of getting something fixed a bit easier.
You are entitled to have a reasonable period of trouble free use from an item. The main issues are, what is "reasonable period", and whether the fault is intrinsic or just hard luck. I would say that something failing at 4 ish years on a car is unreasonable, and for the item to have failed it must have been either badly designed or badly made and it's therefore unfit for purpose.
You don't go to a supplier with all guns blazing quoting the law, but I've found it useful to gently make suppliers aware that you understand their legal obligations.
A few years ago I had Renault replace both rear springs on wifey's Clio when they were discovered broken at the car's 4yr MOT - and this was on a 1998 car that only had 1 yr warranty. At that time (2002) I'd never heard of springs breaking. The Dealer laughed at my request to replace them free. I had a brief discussion with Renault customer services and they agreed to replace FOC.
|
Except that the warranty on a new car is its guarantee.
The assemblers guarantee the parts etc on it for a determined period. Outside this period its out of its guarantee.
If there was no cut off period everything we bought would be so expensive it would be untrue because it would have to work for ever! The real world isnt like that, things wear out, pack up etc. Unfortunate but true.
An example is a timing belt. Assembler states it should be changed at (eg) 50000 miles or 5 years but the guarantee is for 1 year. If it fails before the end of that period is the seller responsible? No, if its outside the guarantee period. They may offer a goodwill gesture but are under no obligation to do so, soga or no soga!
Bad as it is, I dont see how this wiper could be covered under soga .
Goodwill yes, especially if furhter purchases are possible from the customer.
|
Except that the warranty on a new car is its guarantee.
Same thing.
If there was no cut off period
>>
Cut-off periods have been set in case law for domestic appliances as 5yrs (6yrs in Scotland). That's why Which tells people not to buy extended guarantees on TVs etc.
I'm not aware of any set period for cars, but I think 5yrs would be OK. Some adjustment would have to be allowed for if the vehicle was higher than average mileage. At the end of the day you might end up in court and then it would be down to the Judge to decide what was fair and reasonable.
An example is a timing belt. Assembler states it should be changed at (eg) 50000 miles or 5 years but the guarantee is for 1 year. If it fails before the end of that period is the seller responsible?
>>
Of course they are. If the car is serviced per the manufacturers recomendations and the belt snaps within the service mileage & time then I would be astonished if the manufacture even argued about it. No skin off the car manufacturers nose - they would just send the bill to the belt manufacturer.
|
|
To back up BP. The guarantee is for the convenience of the dealer and the bafflement of the buyer. SOGA applies over and above, and in many cases, well beyond the "guarantee". It cannot be evaded where SOGA applies. As has been said, what is reasonable is arguable. For a timing belt not to survive its service interval, assuming necessary care and maintenance, is a nonsense. Ditto wiper - in this case, the wool pulling exercise aggravates the situation, but armed with the facts the OP may well succeed if cool calm and collected:)
|
Interesting comments about timing belts then.
I know of plenty that have failed before there due time, many reported on this very forum. No body that I know of has ever managed to get past the 12 month guarantee period with or without any threatening action. Some have achieved a goodwill contribution; some have not had that!
Now perhaps nobobdy has ever contested it (very doubtful) or maybe the guarantee actually means something?
Simple really, why is a guarantee ever issued? Its obviously not needed if the SOGA is so watertight!
|
With regard to the SOGA....some 9 months ago my mother's flat screen TV developed a line down the centre of the screen. I contacted the supplier, a major retail chain, and was told that because it was 3 years old, and I had not bought an extended warranty, it was 'tough', but they would kindly give me 10% off a replacement.
I spoke to CAB and Trading Standards, downloaded a letter, forwarded it to the store manager and Head Office, and was given a replacement within the week.
It was not reasonable to expect a TV costing £400 to fail withinin 3 years, and it is certainly not reasonable to expect the rear wiper to fail either within such a short space of time.
|
The problem with going down the SOGA route is that it's wearysome. You meet resistance at every step. So most people give up.
I've had various things repaired over the years out of guarantee, but it's never very easy (the springs on the Clio was the easiest by far). Getting a Sony VCR repaired at 3yrs old was very hard work. Had Dell here recently replacing the screen on a 3yr old laptop - that was medium difficulty. Never needed to get to stage of writing threatening letters, much less suing people.
You have to be pragmatic about these things. I'm not happy that I got screwed by a dealer over work to my daughters SEAT. It was £200. I complained. They said tough. Am I ultimately prepared to pursue them to court for £200? No. I just crossed VAG off the car choice list.
I just bought a plasma TV and hummed and harred about the extended g'tee - £100 for 5 yrs - and in the end I took it. If it goes faulty without the warranty then I might have to take it back to shop, prove the fault was intrinsic etc etc and all the while the family giving me grief as the telly doesn't work. With a warranty I call someone and they fix it. I'm paying for the convenience, that's all.
|
|
|
|
