Car at Mercedes for 4 weeks, plus they cant source part for repair

[liam1987]

The benefits of the MB Approved Used are that the car has FSH, been inspected prior to sale and all faults rectified to meet the Approved Used standard, has been serviced and consumables (brakes, tyres) replaced if need be, and comes with a 30-day no-questions-asked replacement policy. The 1 year Approved Used warranty is only one element in the equation (though it may have been the most important to you), and you may find that it has benefits above the New Car warranty (e.g. courtesy car?).

I see two issues here - the first is that MB do not explain this point, the second - and this is why Approved Used isn't good value for money - is that judging by the number of complaints on this forum, it seems that dealers don't actually bother with inspecting the cars and fixing faults prior to sale - and in one case reported here they didn't even check that the car they sold had FSH (it didn't).

EDIT - I bought cars from 'car supermarkets' before, they only fix faults that they would be liable for under the Consumer Protection Act anyway, everything else is honestly presented and explained: missing service history, missing spare key, missing manuals, car in need of a service, dents and scrapes - on one occasion they even made sure to let me know that the navigation SD Card was missing - which I think is fair. But the point is that when you pay extra for an Approved Used car you don't expect to get the car in the condition it would have been sold in a car supermarket.

True, mine needed new brake discs and tyres within months of owning it. Admittedly I should of noticed the tyres but that was an expensive start

 

[jpwilliams]

I would speak to the service manager and ask him/her if mercedes will offer any goodwill as it's just out of warranty. Regarding parts, I know the commercial side of MB used to be able to get parts from Germany within days until Brexit and can take over 2 weeks now

It is not a MB Warranty matter. Under the Sale of Goods Acts, the part is not fit for purpose. It should last at least 6 years. Tell MB (the Dealer you bought it from ) to fix it at their cost or you will pursue via the Small Claims Court.

 

[liam1987]

It is not a MB Warranty matter. Under the Sale of Goods Acts, the part is not fit for purpose. It should last at least 6 years. Tell MB (the Dealer you bought it from ) to fix it at their cost or you will pursue via the Small Claims Court.

Seen somethings online about it being an emissions problem, so MB should be fix it etc. You have 6 years to raise a claim, but after 6 months of ownership you have to prove the seller was at fault. 14months I have had it now so they could easily blame me. Getting a mechanic/engineer to say it should have lasted longer is probably my best shot

 

[grober]

DIY Fix - 205C16 Adblue Temperature Sensor : Short circuit to Earth - MBWorld.org Forums

I believe BMW X5 warranties extended to 10 years/120,000 miles on their early SCR systems in the US-- due to the old class action frightener probably?

X5 35d CEL P205b

www.bimmerfest.com

this was on the early replaceable level/ temperature sensor car tanks------there was also word of a DIY fix for sensor level failure by washing out the tank with warm water several times to remove/ redissolve urea that had crystalised on the sensors causing shorts or out of range readouts --unfortunately I believe that since around 2014 MB use Ultrasonic level sensors so doubt this would work for the present generation of cars.

 

[Petrol Pete]

Not 100% related to this , but I see again in todays press half page colour adverts asking owners of Diesel MB's to get in touch with the lawyers 'no win no fee' class action Dieselgate type stuff. I don't care what the thoughts are on this sort of litigation, MB saw how VW (a much bigger company) got a right royal kicking over this so maybe they are making a 'mission' out of every claim against them - no matter how small - so as to avoid future hassle . ?

 

[ernie]

Mb Dundee but think its part of Arnold clark

Yes, they are part of Ac's organisation...not the easiest to deal with., but I have always found the Grangemouth branch to be helpful.

Thanks to all who have explained how the Approved Used Warranty works on a car bought between 2 and 3 years old. I hadn't thought it through sufficiently. However, I do think the OP should get some help from MB on a £2000 bill on a car that is only 4 years old.

On another tack, my grand-daughter recently bought a used Skoda Fabia from an AC outlet and although they sold it with heavy corrosion on the brake discs, when she reported a 'squeak' from the brakes, they replaced discs and pads all round without question. It was obvious to me after she took delivery that the work should have been done prior to putting the car up for sale.

I think part of the problem with such organisations is that any work required before sale, is chargeable to 'Sales' and therefore reflects on their profits.

Ernie

 

[grober]

Part of the problem as I see it is that many of the emissions devices be they CATS-catalytic converters, DPF's diesel particulate filters or SRC selective reduction catalysts form part of the exhaust system. For many years ICE exhausts were regarded as "consumable items"because they were simple----couple of silencer boxes and mild steel piping -- an engine "waste pipe" if you like. Because of the simplicity a ready aftermarket fitting and supply network developed to service car owners. Now exhausts are complex integrated parts of the ICE emission control system and as such should be regarded as part of the engine/powertrain unit. There needs to be a change in manufacturer mindset to warranty--- if their cars engines start to fail at 60,000 miles there would be howls of protest and their marque reliability questioned--- they need to extend this attitude to include their exhaust emission equipment also. Government regulatory authorities need to play a part here also- the vehicle emission equipment life should be comparable to vehicle powertrain life. It's not sufficient for manufacturers to pass emission tests when an ICE vehicle is brand spanking new and fail after three years.

 

[markjay]

Part of the problem as I see it is that many of the emissions devices be they CATS-catalytic converters, DPF's diesel particulate filters or SRC selective reduction catalysts form part of the exhaust system. For many years ICE exhausts were regarded as "consumable items"because they were simple----couple of silencer boxes and mild steel piping -- an engine "waste pipe" if you like. Because of the simplicity a ready aftermarket fitting and supply network developed to service car owners. Now exhausts are complex integrated parts of the ICE emission control system and as such should be regarded as part of the engine/powertrain unit. There needs to be a change in manufacturer mindset to warranty--- if their cars engines start to fail at 60,000 miles there would be howls of protest and their marque reliability questioned--- they need to extend this attitude to include their exhaust emission equipment also. Government regulatory authorities need to play a part here also- the vehicle emission equipment life should be comparable to vehicle powertrain life. It's not sufficient for manufacturers to pass emission tests when an ICE vehicle is brand spanking new and fail after three years.

An exhaust may be classified as 'consumable', and indeed used to be replaced regularly in the olden days, but the last time I changed an exhaust on a car was well over 30 years ago. I've recently scrapped a 1997 Toyota Previa which we had from new.... with the original exhaust still fitted. DPF and CATs are a different story, but most DPFs are replaced because they become clogged or because they fail, rather than become 'spent' and reach the end of their service life. .

 

[Rpp999]

I attempted to get an exhaust replaced on a two year old Vito due to a rattling baffle and was informed it was a consumable item and not covered under the warranty.

 

[grober]

An exhaust may be classified as 'consumable', and indeed used to be replaced regularly in the olden days, but the last time I changed an exhaust on a car was well over 30 years ago. I've recently scrapped a 1997 Toyota Previa which we had from new.... with the original exhaust still fitted. DPF and CATs are a different story, but most DPFs are replaced because they become clogged or because they fail, rather than become 'spent' and reach the end of their service life. .

A 97 Toyota previa would have used 23 year old exhaust technology, assuming it was petrol as most Japanese cars were then, it will have merely had a catalytic converter-- exhaust technology has moved on considerably since then as we became more aware of harmful emissions from IC engines. Remember 97 was only 10 years on from an era when we cheerfully spread tetra ethyl lead out of exhausts and only stopped because it poisoned the catalytic converters!


ps
In terms of DPFs failing rather than being spent its a fine distinction when the owner has to stump up for fitting a new one