As I said in another thread, I regret buying my modest C Class 320 Merc.
However, their warranty is bullet proof!! The bushes on the front suspension are one of the many weak links on the car - MB replaced those and re-aligned the wheels, all under warranty.
As I see it - the Merc is covered for 3 years unlimited mileage under normal driving conditons and the bushes to go within the first few k's is not on!!
The brake pads are not covered, nor are the discs or wiper blades if it is wear and tear, But everything else is.
|
What worries me is that this was his first MOT. New bushes needed already? Rusty doors?
|
|
under 60,000 miles on british roads, thats good going for a good ride and firm to supple i would say,unless anyone knows different?
|
Further to various comments in the "Warranty woes" thread:
(Moved to Warranty Woes because it does not justify a separate thread. HJ.)
Ford say:
"
Every new Ford car sold is protected by 12 months' unlimited mileage manufacturer's warranty and a year's Ford Assistance as standard, plus the option of extending this warranty to a 3-year/60,000 miles Ford Protect Classic Plan at no extra cost.
Scheduled servicing can be carried out by any repairer during the 3 year Classic 60,000 mile Plan though must be carried out by an Authourised Ford Repairer on Premium Plans.
Premium Plans cover the cost of scheduled servicing.
"
Ford Assist (breakdown cover) applies to the first year only, there are no other T&Cs that differentiate year 1 from years 2 & 3, the warranty is fully transferable at any time during the 3 year period.
|
(Moved to Warranty Woes because it does not justify a separate thread. HJ.)
Fair enough.
However there has seemed to be a general misconception in various threads over a period of time that in years 2 & 3 various exclusions and conditions apply, I wrongly though that FSH was one such condition. I was interested in establishing that facts for my own reference and also considered it was worth posting here as a general clarification for anyone that is interested.
|
But Aprilia's point still applies. There are exclusions to the dealer part of the warranty. And if anyone else has worked on the car during the warranty period, the franchised dealer can contend that it was that non franchised garage's non manufacturer standard workmanship that led to the problem. That's why it's a grey area.
In the case of K. Lynch's rear subframe bushes, and please correct me if I'm wrong, my understanding is that what can happen is the bushes wear away, then metal to metal contact enlarges the attachment points to the subframe. The original fix was a new subframe. But over the last year or two Ford has come up with a fix that repairs the subframe with a special tool and uses a special glue to fit the new bushes. So if someone else had simply fitted new bushes without using the special tool and special glue, that could have led to further damage which a Ford dealer would contend was not its responsibility.
HJ
|
There are exclusions to the dealer part of the warranty. >>
No, there are no exclusions to the dealer part of the warranty as per my last but one post.
>>And if anyone else has worked on the car during the warranty period ............>>
Repairs yes, as with any warranty. Though not service related items performed to spec.
what can happen is the bushes wear away, then metal to metal contact enlarges the attachment points to the subframe.
They would have to be clonking to 1000's of miles to damage the subframe.
Until a few months ago the Ford solution was a new subframe at a cost of around £350 fitted However Ford now do replacement bushes that a dealer will fit for around £150, these are bonded in unlike the alternativer Powerflex poly bushes.
|
|
To clarify, if the subframe itself is damaged (unlikely) it needs replacing and cannot be repaired, the 'special glue' simply retains the new bushes in place of the old ones.
|
Correction accepted about the subframe and many thanks for that. However, from www.ford.co.uk :-
The Warranty excludes the protection of the following parts:
Classic/Premium Plans
Normal wear and tear parts: ancillary drive belts, batteries, brake friction material, bulbs, clutch facings, exhaust pipes and silencers (although catalytic converters are covered), fuses, lamps, shock absorbers and MacPherson struts, tyres and wiper blades and checks and adjustments.
Trim and bodywork: interior trims, glass (although heating elements are covered), seat covers and pads, bumpers, mouldings, paint, sheet metal, water ingress, weather strip and body seals, aerials and wheels.
Additional Classic Plan exclusions
Standard service parts: air cleaners, pollen/odour filters (where applicable), fuel filters, oil filters and gaskets, spark plugs, most fluids and engine oils.
HJ
|
The Warranty excludes the protection of the following parts....................
Surely typical wear and tear warranty exclusions, for instance Toyota say:
"3 years or 60,000 miles whichever comes first, covering your car against the unlikely event of a mechanical fault attributable to a manufacturing defect - includes full RAC recovery service for the first 12 months."
"a mechanical fault attributable to a manufacturing defect" rules out ANY wear and tear.
The Ford Premium Plan includes service items (over the Classic Plan) because the servicing costa are included in the Premium Plan.
|
>> >> The Warranty excludes the protection of the following parts.................... >> Surely typical wear and tear warranty exclusions, for instance Toyota say:
I disagree. The Ford 2 & 3 warranty excludes parts that would be covered under the typical manufacturer-backed warranty. Under a typical 3 year/60k manufacturer warranty I would expect things like shock absorbers, clutches, interior trim to be covered. Obviously if there is evidence of misuse then you would have an argument on your hands, but I have certainly known shocks and clutches replaced under warranty. A manufacturing defect will often cause a part to wear out 'prematurely', as will a design defect. In fact a rear subframe bush could be said to be a 'wear and tear item', but clearly it should last a reasonable length of time/mileage and certainly not wear out at less than 3 years/60k mi.
|
I guess the terms of the warranty allow discression whether specific items are mentioned or Toyota's catch all. However if all of the above T&C's etc are correct Ford would replace a clutch after, say 11 months no quibble though Toyota could quibble under the "manufacturing defect" wear & tear caveat
Re the bushes, I am aware that 3 to 4 years or 100k is typical though some have failed earlier I have heard of Ford paying 75% of the cost on a three year old car at around 80,000 miles that had dealer history.
|
|
>>And if anyone else has worked on the car during the warranty period ............>> Repairs yes, as with any warranty.
Under EU Block Exemption regs applied to manufacturer warranties I believe that repairs can be carried out during the warranty period by any repairer provided that OE parts are used. Obviously the manufacturer is not obliged to refund the cost.
In the Ford dealer warranty plan you are obliged to use a Ford repairer otherwise the warranty becomes void.
In the case of this vehicle I suspect that the problem is not that the repair has been done badly, but that the old bush has split and damaged the subframe slightly. Once the bush splits and the centre part can move then the cup is soon damaged. Its probably new subframe time. I believe they are about £185 plus fitting.
Its astonishing that Ford still can't make bushes that don't fail at low mileage. They have a history of this going back 30+ years. More recently they had problems with Transit front bushes failing after about a year.
|
Under EU Block Exemption regs applied to manufacturer warranties I believe that repairs can be carried out during the warranty period by any repairer provided that OE parts are used. Obviously the manufacturer is not obliged to refund the cost. In the Ford dealer warranty plan you are obliged to use a Ford repairer otherwise the warranty becomes void.
Hi Aprilia, I dont believe any manufacture would warrant a repair carried out by a non authourised repairer during the warranty period - scheduled servicing yes, IF genuine parts are used and IF it is carried out on time and to spec - though surely not repairs.
To quote MB because it was easy to find:
"
The repair work must be carried out by an Authorised Mercedes-Benz Repairer and all parts must be parts supplied by Mercedes-Benz. We will then reimburse the Authorised Repairer directly.
"
|
Hi Aprilia, I dont believe any manufacture would warrant a repair carried out by a non authourised repairer during the warranty period
I didn't say that the manufacturer would warrant the repair - clearly not. But under EU Block Exemption they cannot void the warranty of a vehicle system or sub-system because you've had a repair done outside of their network.
For example, if you had a faulty outer CV joint replaced by a non-authorised repairer then the manufacturer would not warrant that joint against future defects. They should however continue to cover the hub, driveshaft and inner CV joint etc.
Some dealers and manufacturers have in the past tried to void the whole warranty on the basis that one item had been touched by a non-authorised repairer.
|
I didn't say that the manufacturer would warrant the repair - clearly not. But under EU Block Exemption they cannot void the warranty of a vehicle system or sub-system because you've had a repair done outside of their network.
This is a really grey area, the non authorised repairer could have made errors in disassembly / reassembly.
|
It would be up to the manufacturers agent to demonstrate that this was the case.
To take a common example; you have new pads and discs fitted by Kwik-Fit during your car's 3-year warranty period. If your car subsequently has, say, an ABS system failure then the this should still be covered under warranty. If the manufacturer were to decline a warranty claim on the basis that you'd had discs/pads fitted by a non-authorised repairer than they would have to prove that this work had led to the defect.
|
If the manufacturer were to decline a warranty claim on the basis that you'd had discs/pads fitted by a non-authorised repairer than they would have to prove that this work had led to the defect.
>>
That would be perfectly reasonable however if in practice it required the owner to prove that the Kwik Fit work HAD NOT led to the defect it would not be so simple.
|
|
|
|
