1two5guy
New member
Hi there,
I really need some help and advice, some of you may know that in addition to the 125i and X5 we have another vehicle brand, I shall refrain from naming the brand though.
Here's the story...
I took my car to a franchised service centre,in February 2011 where by my car was to be repaired. I purchased a brand new turbocharger from a vehicle brand dealership in Boksburg (hereafter abreviated as AR), and took it to the franchised mechanic who fitted it along with other the parts.
Six painfull months later, in July the car was ready for collection. The work done included, replacing a turbo charger, big end bearings, conrod, gaskets, rings and a few other items. I paid in full on the 8th of July. (two months after CPA came into effect) A few days later, less than 250km driven the bearings on turbo charger failed while driving. The car was then towed back to the franchised workshop.
The mechanic said the turbo should have a warranty with AR. After personally dealing with the AR's claims department, I was informed that AR technical deptarment had analysed the turbo and will not replace the turbo with a new one as the part failed due to incorrect fitment by the franchised mechanic.
I then relayed this information to the mechanic who then told me, there is only one way to fit a turbo. The mechanic then informed me that he found out that AR, sent out a bulletin ( which he never recieved or knew about untill now) with information regarding to fitment of the turbo. Had AR informed him of this information, he would have fitted in such way. My point of view is that as a mechanic, he should have known and researched this.
The mechanic seems to be under the impression that he will go to AR, with this information saying he was never informed of the bulletin and that they should honour the warranty and replaced the turbo.
I am sceptical that AR will honour the claim as it seems the mechanic never did enough research with regards to the fitment of the turbo. I suspect that the mechanic is also stalling for time with regards to "writing a letter to AR" for the claim.
How do I speed up the process as I have been messed around for the last six months and have now had enough. I need to issue an ultimatium of some sort
The franchised mechanic is R.M.I accredited and very well known within the vehicles community.
1)What protection do I have under the CPA with regards to repairs done? and how do I initiate proceedings?
I think that the mechanic is clearly at fault.
The deal was concluded upon payment for services rendered, correct? Falling under the CPA.
2) What other remedies or action shall I take to get this sorted out as soon as possible as it has been dragging on forever and is a thorn in my side.
Thanks in advance.
Found out this so far
In terms of Section 56 of the Act, where the consumer allows the supplier to repair failed, defective or
unsafe goods returned by the consumer within six months of delivery and within three months after
such repair, the failure, defect or unsafe feature re-appears or a further failure, defect or unsafe
feature is discovered, then the supplier must (at its choice):
ï‚· replace the goods; or
ï‚· refund to the consumer the price paid by the consumer for the goods.
It is thus critical for suppliers effecting repairs to get it right first time!
Section 57 of the Act compels a service provider to warrant new or reconditioned parts installed
during repair or maintenance work, including labour, for a minimum of three months after
installation. This warranty will be void if the consumer subjected the installed part or goods to misuse
or abuse. The warranty further does not apply to ordinary wear and tear.
Where reconditioned, rebuilt, remade or grey market parts or components (goods) are used in the
performance of a repair, service or maintenance work this fact should expressly be disclosed to the
consumer by the supplier. (Section 25 and Regulation 8)
A service provider should furthermore take cognisance of the fact that poorly performed service or
maintenance work could cause harm to the consumer through product failure, unsafe, hazardous or
defective goods. This would potentially place the service provider in the supply chain for product
liability in terms of Section 61 of the Act. The use of poor quality parts or components in the
performance of service or maintenance work or the use of unskilled and unqualified service
technicians should be avoided at all costs.
I really need some help and advice, some of you may know that in addition to the 125i and X5 we have another vehicle brand, I shall refrain from naming the brand though.
Here's the story...
I took my car to a franchised service centre,in February 2011 where by my car was to be repaired. I purchased a brand new turbocharger from a vehicle brand dealership in Boksburg (hereafter abreviated as AR), and took it to the franchised mechanic who fitted it along with other the parts.
Six painfull months later, in July the car was ready for collection. The work done included, replacing a turbo charger, big end bearings, conrod, gaskets, rings and a few other items. I paid in full on the 8th of July. (two months after CPA came into effect) A few days later, less than 250km driven the bearings on turbo charger failed while driving. The car was then towed back to the franchised workshop.
The mechanic said the turbo should have a warranty with AR. After personally dealing with the AR's claims department, I was informed that AR technical deptarment had analysed the turbo and will not replace the turbo with a new one as the part failed due to incorrect fitment by the franchised mechanic.
I then relayed this information to the mechanic who then told me, there is only one way to fit a turbo. The mechanic then informed me that he found out that AR, sent out a bulletin ( which he never recieved or knew about untill now) with information regarding to fitment of the turbo. Had AR informed him of this information, he would have fitted in such way. My point of view is that as a mechanic, he should have known and researched this.
The mechanic seems to be under the impression that he will go to AR, with this information saying he was never informed of the bulletin and that they should honour the warranty and replaced the turbo.
I am sceptical that AR will honour the claim as it seems the mechanic never did enough research with regards to the fitment of the turbo. I suspect that the mechanic is also stalling for time with regards to "writing a letter to AR" for the claim.
How do I speed up the process as I have been messed around for the last six months and have now had enough. I need to issue an ultimatium of some sort
The franchised mechanic is R.M.I accredited and very well known within the vehicles community.
1)What protection do I have under the CPA with regards to repairs done? and how do I initiate proceedings?
I think that the mechanic is clearly at fault.
The deal was concluded upon payment for services rendered, correct? Falling under the CPA.
2) What other remedies or action shall I take to get this sorted out as soon as possible as it has been dragging on forever and is a thorn in my side.
Thanks in advance.
Found out this so far
In terms of Section 56 of the Act, where the consumer allows the supplier to repair failed, defective or
unsafe goods returned by the consumer within six months of delivery and within three months after
such repair, the failure, defect or unsafe feature re-appears or a further failure, defect or unsafe
feature is discovered, then the supplier must (at its choice):
ï‚· replace the goods; or
ï‚· refund to the consumer the price paid by the consumer for the goods.
It is thus critical for suppliers effecting repairs to get it right first time!
Section 57 of the Act compels a service provider to warrant new or reconditioned parts installed
during repair or maintenance work, including labour, for a minimum of three months after
installation. This warranty will be void if the consumer subjected the installed part or goods to misuse
or abuse. The warranty further does not apply to ordinary wear and tear.
Where reconditioned, rebuilt, remade or grey market parts or components (goods) are used in the
performance of a repair, service or maintenance work this fact should expressly be disclosed to the
consumer by the supplier. (Section 25 and Regulation 8)
A service provider should furthermore take cognisance of the fact that poorly performed service or
maintenance work could cause harm to the consumer through product failure, unsafe, hazardous or
defective goods. This would potentially place the service provider in the supply chain for product
liability in terms of Section 61 of the Act. The use of poor quality parts or components in the
performance of service or maintenance work or the use of unskilled and unqualified service
technicians should be avoided at all costs.
