W212 2011 Rear Subframe Failure. MB Refuse to Help. Where next?

[Killorp]

Hi all.

Can anyone help with advice ?
Last week (Dec 2012) My 2011 E220 CDI with 121,300 miles has just suffered a rear subframe failure. MB have rejected my claim.

What can I do next to convince MB to cover the cost of replacement for rear subfame?

I have read other threads and forums of similar age, mileage and service history (ie full serive history but not all with MB main dealer) and MB have covered all the costs and replaced the subframe conpletely free of charge.

Details: Driving along 3 months after my MOT pass and the car suddenly veers to the left when breaking. I managed to adjust the nearside mirror to watch the rear wheel and it does an dramatic 'toe-in' under breaking. This makes the car turn to the left (towards the nearside kerb/ditch etc)

I nurse it to a local garage who put it up on the lift and confirm rear subframe has snapped (I have photos). So I used my Greenflag breakdown to have it recovered to MB Tamworth.
MB Tamworth were very helpful and quickly did a visual inspection and raise a quote by the next day. I then asked them to raise a claim to MB but they have rejected it.

I bought the car 2nd had in May 2018.

It had a full MB service history up till the car dealer I bought it off serviced it when I purchased it in 2018.
I've then had full service from a local Indy (they are all recorded on the Mercedes Service Register. (and I have receipts)

The friendly and helpful lady at MB Tamworth and put the claim to MB but they have rejected it stating 'no goodwill for car of this age'.
I have read others have had success with similar awge, mileage, and service history and MB have covered the full of replacement.

Estimate quotes
- MB have quoted me 2170.00 inc VAT
- Local MB/BMW Indy quote is £1500.00 plus

I consider this to be a 'premature failure' of the rear subfame. It appears to have rotted from the insisde.

Any ideas or advice gratefully received

Many thanks
Peter

 

[BPD07]

It’s high mileage, and not MB serviced/inspected - a surprise maybe but it’s an old car. What did you expect? The MB quote is close to the Indy quote once you add VAT which is a surprise.

 

[Killorp]

Hi thanks for reply. I was really hoping (and keeping everything crossed etc) as I have read other threads of similar age, mileage and service history that MB ( MB Derby) have covered this exact failure FOC. I was hoping for the same.
Apologies my Indy quote for genuine MB part does include VAT so is £700 difference.
A none MB subframe was £200 cheaper but I don’t want to risk that saving.

I realise I might have to bite the bullet and stump up the cost myself but just wanted explore all avenues first.

Thanks again.

Photo attached

 

[AndrewOl]

This is so frustrating. It is hard to understand why MB would authorise some repairs and not others. The suspicion is that the dealers seem to make the difference. In my book a 10 year old car with average mileage should not suffer a structural failure like this. This sort of thing does great damage to the MB brand.

 

[stephenmercedes]

I too have had a rear sub frame failure last month, but in a 2005 Ford Focus with 105,000 miles. (Similar symptoms with also the steering wheel pointing 20 odd degrees from 'straight'). Cost for repair was £300 all in, that included my garage sourcing a used frame, pressure washing it, painting it, and fitting. One of the reasons I got rid of my Merc was that although you could buy used ones relatively cheap, unless you're a mechanic, everything was just so extortionate to repair!

 

[TeddyRuxpin]

I'm so confused by the inconsistency of MB. I would try other dealers until one accepts?

 

[HB]

Had myn checked on Friday, 2011 car and totally rust free. What the hell is going on with these subframes? However I do need engine mounts…..

 

[TeddyRuxpin]

I wonder if they used different suppliers or something? Is it a matter of ‘when’ for all C and E class of this era (pre 2013) or if there are some that are a ‘bad batch’ and some that are ‘good ones’?

 

[markjay]

To the OP, it would be good if you had documented proof that the goodwill or warranty repair was rejected by MB UK (not the dealer).

There are two alternative possibilities here, the first is that the dealer never actually put the claim through to MB UK, the other is that dealer did not submit the claim correctly (e.g. it was submitted as a goodwill claim instead of a warranty claim etc).

So it would be helpful if you could actually see the correspondence between the dealer and MB UK.

And, as TeddyRuxpin said, try your luck with another dealer before forking out £1.5k + VAT.

 

[Killorp]

Many thanks for the replies. I really appreciate the feedback.
I agree it would be good to see the actual correspondence between MB Tamworth and MB UK. I will ask for them for that info.
For what it’s worth the nice lady at Tamworth I am dealing with was at pains to explain that they always put forward all claims. The decision and discretion was not theirs but was all down to ‘MB’. Whether that is MB UK or MB in Germany I’m not sure.

With that being the case (and I have reason to doubt Tamworth’s word) I can’t see that taking to another MB dealer could produce a different result.

And taking it to another dealer then I am at risk of another set of transport and investigation costs.

 

[Killorp]

Sorry but to just correct my initial quote: my local Indy quote is £1.5k ‘including’ VAT.
MB quote is £2.2k inc VAT

I was going to write £1.5k plus costs of any control arms that cannot be re-used due to damage when trying to remove them etc. but changed my mind for brevity but left the word ‘plus’ in there.

Apologies for confusion.

 

[Fastcar155]

Hi , I would have though that the authorities should be aware of subframe issues with Mercedes cars.

Do they want to know ?

 

[BfgSLKMan]

In Germany they are honouring claims: W212 Rear subframe corrosion | Wheels, Tyres, Brakes & Suspension


Worth emailing MB Care Centre in Holland direct and not via dealers?

 

[grober]

THREAD'S A YEAR OLD?

 

[Popell]

Just means the rust is worse….

Been under mine today, 2010 E350 CGI, condition is appalling tbh, and I have known this car from new.

 

[TeddyRuxpin]

I'm still a bit confused on where exactly to look.

I took my car for an MOT from an MB specialist (TM Motors, West Molesey, Surrey), who said that the W212s do suffer from this issue and that they'd done a few of them.

I said it's difficult as not visible/usually flagged up on MOTs, but he said that his staff are aware of the issue (being an MB specialist) so make a note to look. Mine passed without any issues, so he said it was safe to assume it's all okay (for now), but I'd still like to know exactly where to look!

 

[TeddyRuxpin]

This should help

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[grober]

The Subframe is of hollow open ended steel box section construction and not protected against rust save for a coat of paint. This allows water to enter the structure together with road salt, mud and grit reading to corrosion. The rear suspension arm loadings are fed into the structure via a series of brackets welded to the box sections-typically failure occurs when one or more of these brackets tear away from the box section or the section itself fails. It's shoddy engineering for Mercedes and I can only surmise that it was done on the grounds of cost or weight saving. Imminent failure is very difficult to predict from external appearance since majority of rear subframes of that era are rusty externally. Where the major rust occurs is internally and unless you use some form of endoscope to inspect it you can only extrapolate the likelihood of failure from the external appearance and age of the car.

 

[TeddyRuxpin]

Is hosing it/jet washing it regularly a good thing or just likely to create puddles of water that can’t be drained?

It seems like the lip created from punching the metal to create the drain hole actually seems to trap water there

 

[Deleted member 126251]

deleted ...........old thread