Letter to MB

[crockers]

Hi
I am going to write a letter to MB about the auto shut off valve and its failing 3 times. I feel that there is some fundamental fault in the V6 and want their opinion of how they intend to rectify this.

I know that there is little chance to get much response but was wondering does anyone have any idea as to whom I should address the letter and their address.

Thanks

 

[davidjpowell]

I wrote to the MD back in 2007. Sadly can't find the letter.

Be very interested to see what they come back with.

eta this might help - http://www.am-online.com/recruitment/story/Breitschwerdt-moves-in-as-Mercedes-UK-CEO/42903888

 

[The Boss]

i believe the correct person is [email protected]

but best to write a letter as you say to the head office.. opposed to email, as i am not 100% sure it is correct, but i am certain he is the right person to speak to!

 

[st4]

IIRC Graham it should have been recalled and done under that when the car was new. There is a modified seal which does prevent it happening again although it is a major weakness of that engine?

 

[crockers]

Well Steve as I'm on my 4th motor it's more than a weakness. IMHO.

 

[crockers]

Just received a reply.
Original repair was done in April 2009 and done again under repair warranty September 2010. The repair done in May 2011 was out of warranty but done as a "goodwill" repair.
Therefore the original repair was done over 2 years ago and if any further issues occur then it can no longer be done under the warranty issue as I paid nothing towards the latest repair.
BUT... if it does have a future related or associated issue then it will be looked on very favourably under their goodwill policy. They will need me to pay 10% towards any parts and they will provide the labour. So I do think that is a very fair result and I feel Mercedes are being very fair.

 

[Doodle]

Perhaps it is my interpretation, but that seems to be a bare faced cop out.

Part fails. They fix it, it fails again 15mths later and is warranty repaired. This 2nd fix then fails again 9 months later but the subsequent 3rd fix is viewed a goodwill job.

How was the second fix different to the first one, apart from the fact that no money changed hands? Does this mean that the quality of the 2nd fix is somehow not to the same standard and cannot be warranted?

Smacks of "Let's patch it up until we can wash our hands of it".

 

[Druk]

10% contribution on your part is a pretty good deal. Remember however that all Merc supplied parts have a two year warranty. (so sayeth Merc Edinburgh parts.)

 

[mattc]

I agree with post 7. this appears to be "fix" that has never worked. but its cheaper for Merc to do it this way than admit there is a bigger problem and do a general recall. Economics rule perhaps?

 

[crockers]

Perhaps it is my interpretation, but that seems to be a bare faced cop out.

Part fails. They fix it, it fails again 15mths later and is warranty repaired. This 2nd fix then fails again 9 months later but the subsequent 3rd fix is viewed a goodwill job.

How was the second fix different to the first one, apart from the fact that no money changed hands? Does this mean that the quality of the 2nd fix is somehow not to the same standard and cannot be warranted?

Smacks of "Let's patch it up until we can wash our hands of it".

As it was explained to me ...

If you buy a new car you get a 3 year warranty. Any repairs done within that warranty are not warrantied after the 3 year period. Therefore if you pay for the repair you get a 2 year warranty. Any repairs under that warranty are covered until the end of the original 2 years. If you pay anything towards the repair you get a fresh 2 year warranty. My last repair was 2 weeks outside the original repairs 2 years so it was done under goodwill not the warranty. If it goes again my cost is approx £19-£20 and for that I get a fresh 2 year warranty. To be honest I think it's penny pinching BUT I do see their point and it is just their way of keeping me in the pay and get 2 year warranty system.

So I'm pleased with the deal as it now gives me peace of mind on the issue.

 

[crockers]

10% contribution on your part is a pretty good deal. Remember however that all Merc supplied parts have a two year warranty. (so sayeth Merc Edinburgh parts.)

True - but only if you pay..

 

[crockers]

I agree with post 7. this appears to be "fix" that has never worked. but its cheaper for Merc to do it this way than admit there is a bigger problem and do a general recall. Economics rule perhaps?

I think you could well be right as it is a common problem well documented on this and other forums.

According to Olly (who's opinion I rate) to do the job properly they ought to change the manifolds. We are talking big money for that and on a 88k car I don't think they will payout for that and to be honest I don't have to time or will to fight for it either.

 

[mattc]

I think you could well be right as it is a common problem well documented on this and other forums.

According to Olly (who's opinion I rate) to do the job properly they ought to change the manifolds. We are talking big money for that and on a 88k car I don't think they will payout for that and to be honest I don't have to time or will to fight for it either.

I understand your position..just keep all that paperwork for when it fails again and next time they try billling you 50% or more of the cost(including labour!)

 

[developer]

10% by you is bizarre. Why doesn't the multi billion MB machine pay 100% and get the plaudits.

They pay 90%, save a few quid and get to look like a company with an uncaring aftersales attitude (albeit only by some, but's it's the "some" who make up part of the customer base).

I'm happy you're happy Graeme, but it's a strange way to run a business

Probably financial legalise for not admitting liability.

 

[Doodle]

The counter argument could be that you DID pay for it, first time round. The fact that they are incapable of repairing it properly and of a sufficient standard to last the "repair warranty" period is their problem, and to wash their hands of it in such a manner is at the least unacceptable, perhaps even legally questionable.

However, in practical terms paying a token amount is probably the easiest approach (provided you can keep milking the goodwill)

 

[crockers]

10% by you is bizarre. Why doesn't the multi billion MB machine pay 100% and get the plaudits.

They pay 90%, save a few quid and get to look like a company with an uncaring aftersales attitude (albeit only by some, but's it's the "some" who make up part of the customer base).

I'm happy you're happy Graeme, but it's a strange way to run a business

Probably financial legalise for not admitting liability.

You may well be right there John. But sometimes it's easier in life to accept the compromise and move on. As it's a token payment requirement then I'm not really bothered. It may never go again so this is a spurious discussion. If it does go once it costs me £20. Then i get a fresh 2 year warranty. But by then the car will not be in my possession. Lexus sounds good..

 

[st4]

True - but only if you pay..

It has to be that way.

From a financial point of view, if customer A's car fails within warranty and it pays out and a new part is provided. Consider the financial view that that part fails again outwith the warranty in year 4, and then its covered again. If you like that customer has got an extended warranty which they did not pay for.

Customer B, who could learn this, could be upset as nothing failed in his new car warranty but decided to extend it as there is a known weakness on his C320cdi, lets say it cost £500p/a, when customer A, who had the same fault, got that gratis as they suffered a failure under MB warranty which they did not pay for. In financial services, and no doubt you know this, this is not treating customers fairly. A warranty is a financial product is essence, view it as a free insurance policy bundled in with the product (the car).

BMW (Parks Motor group) were doing a deal to give customers an extended warranty on known weaknesses, BMW 530d would go in after 2 years from new under BMW warranty, needing a new turbo. Service desk would say, pay 1p for the turbo and we wont pay the rest under warranty but goodwill so you get a 2yr part warranty for the same failure, not just the balance of the warranty. They told me they replaced something on my car FOC for goodwill, but for 1p if I bought it and they paid the rest, it would be treated as a purchase and I'd get a parts warranty.

View a warranty as a financial product, if something is replaced under warranty, you have no financial part in that transaction, you merely are a beneficiary of the entitlement that warranty affords and when it lapses, all entitlements lapse with it. In effect MB are the customer for warranty jobs, not yourself from the financial position.

Personally, I feel your letter has earned you an extremely good result, and I can understand after so many failings, you've lost patience in that car, but a £60 quid bill for a £600 job inc labour is not so bad if it happens once every 2 years.

There is no Lexus on the market that can match your Mercedes for performance, economy, and space. They are very good cars, but for a car of such ample pace as yours, you'll be in a V8 Lexus of some description handing over lots for petrol. A good alternative and a step up, would be a BMW 335d and if BMW dealers are doing that trick, its a 1p job. You'll love that, they move really well. If its customer service you are after, Lexus are good at that, and also Infiniti are getting a name for themselves doing the same, providing a level of customer care and attention that you simply do not get from a Mercedes dealer. Which is a shame, as the cars that are in them are rather pleasant.

 

[st4]

edit

 

[crockers]

Steve my oomment about Lexus was my being flippant. .
I agree, I think I have gotten a fair result too. Especially as the contribution of 10% is parts only. So on the £600 bill you mentioned it would be nearer £20 not £60.