Rejection from MB Milton Keynes for Rust Order

Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.

un1l

Active Member
Joined
Feb 5, 2008
Messages
226
Location
NW London
Car
CLK 230K
Now i am proper piss*d off, rang up Mercedes MK today and spoke to the customer care monkeys and they said a letter had been sent out today to me saying my car wouldn't be covered by goodwill.
WHY???!?! - I do not know. He said it's because they only cover perforation, that is what is on my car!

As per my 2 previous threads, i have been round the mill with this!
http://www.mbclub.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=48610
http://www.mbclub.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=49780

And the man i spoke to said he couldn't take it any further.
I am still going to try my best to fight this.
I have a 1999 CLK 230K with a full dealer history.
There is rust on the bonnet, arches and bootlock.
I have been to my local dealer (colindale) on a few occasions before the claim went to MK. This was for photos and a paint reading.

After processing the claim, the lady dealing with the case, She then said they came back to her and said it was rejected because the mobilo cover only works for vehicles 2000 onwards. I know this is incorrect and its from 98, i told her this and she suggested i take it up with MK themselves.

I since have and the above conclusion is what i've got, how much further can i take this. It states in black and white in my MB booklet that the car is covered 30 years for rust. Is it worth me going through the whole process with another dealer or approved bodyshop (not that i really want to)...or just pushing my current case even further (not sure how).

As per below, Desilva has had a similar case and he managed to get it done, so if you can give me any advice it would be great!

"By this time I was no longer dealing with the dealership, and my point of contact was the UK MB Bodywork Manager who oversees all of these bodyshops." - I'd like to know who that is!

This really needs to get sorted now, as i am not putting my AMG monoblocks on or getting HIDs fitted until the bodywork is done!!

Any help is highly appreciated!!!
 
Sorry to hear that.
Ring them back up and ask for Trudy Eterington in the ESCALATION DEPT.

I can't remember the exact date, but it came into force when the S class was launched.

I must chase them up about mine too.
 
08/98 it started. Ask for copies of the Eskulab reports to pass to your solicitor explaining exactly why the claim has been rejected.
 
Now i am proper piss*d off, rang up Mercedes MK today and spoke to the customer care monkeys and they said a letter had been sent out today to me saying my car wouldn't be covered by goodwill.
WHY???!?! - I do not know. He said it's because they only cover perforation, that is what is on my car!

I know it's of no consolation, but this does seem to be signalling the end of the "goodwill" repairs that MB have been carrying out over a number of years. Down to the economics of it I suppose.

It's been the problem with these - many on here have been fortunate enough to have repairs carried out under goodwill as they did not (or probably did not, who can say?) fully comply with Mobilo conditions. However, many of us have wondered how long MB could afford to continue with such a generous policy - look what's happening with the service packages too.

It'll be good to follow this through to the end - I hope you get the result you're looking for.
 
I think the claim system has always had an element of luck built in... I have had rejections many years ago on cars that should blatently have been repaired and have had obvious stonechip caused repairs approved..

Its very hit and miss IMO..
 
Thanks - i guess i will try my best, who'd have thought i would have to get a legal team involved for something as petty as spraying on my car.
Can i just clarify then that they are not under any obligation to go through and spray the car, it is all out of goodwill?
 
They have twice repaired body perforations on my 2000 W215 under Mobilio Life, no mention of goodwill. As long as the rust is from the inside out and there is no previous evidence of resprays in that area is the criteria in my experience.
 
They have twice repaired body perforations on my 2000 W215 under Mobilio Life, no mention of goodwill. As long as the rust is from the inside out and there is no previous evidence of resprays in that area is the criteria in my experience.

It seems you have something i do not...a 5ltr car maybe.
The wheel arch would count as rust from inside out right?
I'm not sure about the boot lock and anything on the bonnet.
But like jaymanek said there are times he has been covered for stonechips.
 
As above. They have a legal requirement provided you have met the terms of Mobilolife.
 
It seems you have something i do not...a 5ltr car maybe.
The wheel arch would count as rust from inside out right?
I'm not sure about the boot lock and anything on the bonnet.
But like jaymanek said there are times he has been covered for stonechips.

In the first instance I had wheel arch rust, although I'm note sure if you call it rust with aluminium.
 
OK as I understand it, the goodwill scheme has a 7 year cut off limit and this would typically cover the scabby wheel arch lips, door tops on W210's, rust on the tailgates of W202's and 210's etc.

What it does not cover is stone chips on bonnets that have gone rusty and they normally get out of the boot lock rust as they use the "the paint must have been damaged with a key etc etc"

Also if you have owned the car for less than 6 months, the claims are often rejected.

Its worth pursuing, but don't be surprised if it doesn't get any further.
 
Correct, 24th October 1998.

Mobilo-life only covers actual rust holes through the panel from the inside, otherwise it's down to discretionary goodwill.
Wheelarch corrosion is edge corrosion, not through from the inside of a panel..

Good luck to anyone with a claim in progress.

See here.
http://www.mbclub.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=38520&highlight=mobilo

Take this PDF and use it as proof - thats what I did and they were quite surprised to see it and were unable to offer an explanation as to why they were going against what was clearly stated.

In the first post here, the reason why I was eventually dealing directly with the UK MB Bodywork manager was because my claim went very high up into the MBUK herarchy as I really kicked up a big fuss, and once it was approved, I was told to deal directly with them on the repair. My local dealer was quite shocked at the level of management that was dealing with the issue. Privately he was happy that I had managed to get a result after a massive battle.
 
Last edited:
Correct, 24th October 1998.
Wheelarch corrosion is edge corrosion, not through from the inside of a panel..

Actually my wheelarch corrosion was from inside, from the two panels that meet to form the inner and outer wheelarch.
 
There may be a bit of hard commercial psychology at work here. :( If your model was still current it functions as a MOBILE ADVERT saying
Don't buy this model of car it rusts
People don't make the same mental connection with an older superceded model hence not the same impetus to the manufacturer to preserve the brand name for quality?
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom