Mercedes = Rust

[energysolutions]

To all who have offerred the benefit of their experience, I thank you.

Roofless - where are you coming from? Yes, it IS a big deal. It may not be much to you, but I've spent the thick end of 20 grand on a car which is going rusty after TWO YEARS. I think that is good reason for my airing my concerns on this forum. If it came to a dummy spitting competition, I would in every case deferr to your goodself.
My previous car, an Alfa which is now 12 years old has no rust in it whatsoever, not even where it had stone chips which went untreated. Not a speck, NONE. TBH I wish I'd kept the b****y thing, rather than give it to my son who is still ragging it around and having fun whilst waiting for the inevitable bottom end explosion!
The purchase of the A Class was meant to be a 'no risk' option which I would keep for three years or so before trading up to a CLK or something along those lines.
I will be thinking very carefully before making that decision now.
I would also add that my experience of M-B goes back some time - my first was a '63 220SE Fintail and whilst none have been perfect, this one has been the most trouble. I havent bored you with the repairs carried out under warranty and recalls, 'cos I'm bored with it myself!

Yep - I reckon its a "big deal" too!

So basically you changed from a non rusty Alfa to a rusty Mercedes

Were it not for my own expierence of Mercedes spectaculary bad bodywork I would swear you had got mixed up when typing that

I`m beginning to wonder why Mercedes even bother to put paint on their vehicles - they all rust anyway!

 

[energysolutions]

cancer ect is a big deal a little rust on a car i think not life is to short

I see your point - everything is relative

However

I dont think it is unreasonable to expect that a vehicle being used under normal conditions (as the manufacturer designed it to) should last longer than 2 years without developing rust

Surely any vehicles failure to achieve this would have to be considered "unfit for purpose"

How do other manufacturers manage to stay rust free?

 

[roofless]

ok the white flag is now flying

 

[neatvito]

Hello all,

I use a 2002 112 CDI Mercedes Vito van for work. I have had it since 2004 and put around 60000 miles on it (130000 in total)

I`ve had a good few niggling mechanical faults with it but nothing major. My friend however also had a 108 CDI which cost him a bomb. He replaced driveshafts (as have I, a common weakness), Turbo, Head and injectors costing around £2000, he then sold the van and then new owner had more trouble and spent another £2000 before giving up and scrapping it!

My main issue has been rust. It is now getting to the point that something needs done and I have had a friend who does bodywork look at it and he assures me that it will take a full respray as it is beyond "touching up". This is what I expected but it is quite expensive and I feel short changed by Mercedes as a 6 year old van should not look like a tea bag! I do not live near the sea, it was well looked after and has never been damaged. I know of several other owners who have had the same problem and my local Mercedes specialist has shown me several examples of cars and jeeps (even fresh £40000 ones!!!) which have rust issues

The rust is breaking out everywhere, with the drivers door being the worst area, but each panel is rusting quite severly somewhere. Even the panel at the front of the engine bay that the bonnet rests on (which is shielded by the bonnet) is rusted severly with no paint left on it at all. I feel now that it would very much hurt the sale of the van, I would change to a VW in an instant but current finances dictate that this wont happen till later in the year at the earliest, and by that time I reckon unless something is done there may only be the tyres and windows left!!!

A couple of pictures (below) may explain better.

In conclusion I am disappointed as I think the van is a good size (not too big or small) and is quite nippy (for a van), however this will undoubtedly be my last Mercedes as I have been well informed that the new generation that replaced my range are equally as poorly built and also rust!

I was looking around it today (in disgust) and wondered if it would be worth contacting Mercedes to see if they would contribute towards respraying costs as this is clearly a manufacturing fault????

Opinions??? Has anyone else had similar Mercedes problems?

Thanks in advance.

Not sure where you live but in some countries vitos have a 12 year warrantee against rust.

 

[philharve]

Rusty Vitos are quite common

Hi neatvito

I live in Cornwall where Vitos are commonplace, particularly white ones, my neighbour has one. Very few Vitos are rust free. Some have rust spots all over the bodywork and in areas apparently undamaged by abuse. I saw a white Vito only yesterday covered in rust spots and it was only 3 or 4 years old.

Cornwall is surrounded by sea and the salty air will accelerate corrosion if present. However, rust will breakout if there is inadequate paint protection and if it is present in the base metal itself. Eventually if appears beneath the paintwork as many owners, like me, can testify.

The length of warrantee doesn't see to matter. Rust appears sooner or later.

REGARDS

Phil

 

[Maggra]

Paint Job

I have had my car looked at by MB just recently under their paint warranty, they scanned the paint depth, took pictures and contacted me within a few days - their reply was a negative due to the short length of time I have owned the car.., 6 months!
I've been given a number to ring if I wish to appeal which once I'm suitably calmer, I will give them a call! so they accepted my service records and ignored the 2 areas of reworked panels on the car ! but rejected my claim due to age of ownership but the rust must have there before I bought it!

I'm planning to make another claim later in the year (12 months) maybe they will reject it due to the service record not being all Merc? or (18 months) the 2 reworked areas.., mean while the paint is bubbling and getting worse.

Considering parking my CLK outside the local merc dealership so all the prospective Merc owners can see what happens to their car in 9 years! think it might work??

 

[Blobcat]

I have had my car looked at by MB just recently under their paint warranty, they scanned the paint depth, took pictures and contacted me within a few days - their reply was a negative due to the short length of time I have owned the car.., 6 months!
I've been given a number to ring if I wish to appeal which once I'm suitably calmer, I will give them a call! so they accepted my service records and ignored the 2 areas of reworked panels on the car ! but rejected my claim due to age of ownership but the rust must have there before I bought it!

I'm planning to make another claim later in the year (12 months) maybe they will reject it due to the service record not being all Merc? or (18 months) the 2 reworked areas.., mean while the paint is bubbling and getting worse.

Considering parking my CLK outside the local merc dealership so all the prospective Merc owners can see what happens to their car in 9 years! think it might work??

The reason they look at the lenght of time you've owned the car is because traders were buying rusty Mercedes' cheap then taking to Mercedes for repair then selling them on for a profit. Mercedes take the view that as it hasn't been owned very long and probably had the rust issue at the time of purchase that the purchase price will therefore have reflected the condition it was in therefore not their responsibility to undertake a repair.

 

[Dosco]

Responsibility???

...so who was responsible?

I purchased my 2nd hand W210 in 2002 from an MB dealer, I will refrain from boring you with the list of stuff they failed to spot, correct and resolve before and within a month of purchase.

This car had initially been sold by this dealer to a large multi national company who issued the car to a directors wife, so the the history was 'virginal'

After about 9 months I saw the now familiar rust forming on the front wheel arches in the usual spot - at this time I had no knowledge of the W210 rust issues. So asked for an opinion and was given an estimate to replace them! "But surely this should not happen" says I still calm and polite. They would not budge one inch saying rust is always, in their opinion a result of a stone or accident damage and is not something we would ever consider repairing FOC. I asked them to approach MB for me? the reply was in effect no adding that MB will always take our advice and opinion.... I am sure you get the now familiar picture.

So I contacted MB and got nothing other than denials that any such problem existed. I suspect the dealer had much to do in their decision not to help.

For all sorts of reasons at the time I did not pursue further and let them get away with it, a failure I now regret, but one has to move on. However it did do me one great favour in that it forced me to look for another service outlet to maintain the car, since which MB service department have never had any money off me other than £49.95 the other week to service the A/C, inspect and report on the condition of the car, a sprat to catch a mackerel is the saying methinks, didn't work and given my experience this week at an Indie they did not do a very good job inspecting the car!

What do I think of MB? well a bit like the curates egg really!

As I am on a fixed income and have an aversion to paying through the nose, being treated like a second class citizen just because I own an 11 year old car, left to wait whilst other more 'important' customer get the 'full works' and talked down to because I questioned everything said instead of rolling over and let them tickle my cheque book, upset? no, biased? yes indeed.

Do I still rate MB cars of course I do:lol: but despite their so called customer satisfaction rating I would not let them get their hands on my car or more important my money, at any price would you?

 

[hawk20]

Do I still rate MB cars of course I do:lol: but despite their so called customer satisfaction rating I would not let them get their hands on my car or more important my money, at any price would you?

Well, we can all only speak as we find. I have had nothing but excellent service from my local MB dealer in Southampton.

 

[television]

Well, we can all only speak as we find. I have had nothing but excellent service from my local MB dealer in Southampton.

You might nor feel so pleased had any of your cars had gone rusty at an early stage in life

 

[philharve]

Rust - how soon does it appear?

...so who was responsible?

I purchased my 2nd hand W210 in 2002 from an MB dealer, I will refrain from boring you with the list of stuff they failed to spot, correct and resolve before and within a month of purchase.

This car had initially been sold by this dealer to a large multi national company who issued the car to a directors wife, so the the history was 'virginal'

After about 9 months I saw the now familiar rust forming on the front wheel arches in the usual spot - at this time I had no knowledge of the W210 rust issues. So asked for an opinion and was given an estimate to replace them! "But surely this should not happen" says I still calm and polite. They would not budge one inch saying rust is always, in their opinion a result of a stone or accident damage and is not something we would ever consider repairing FOC. I asked them to approach MB for me? the reply was in effect no adding that MB will always take our advice and opinion.... I am sure you get the now familiar picture.

So I contacted MB and got nothing other than denials that any such problem existed. I suspect the dealer had much to do in their decision not to help.

For all sorts of reasons at the time I did not pursue further and let them get away with it, a failure I now regret, but one has to move on. However it did do me one great favour in that it forced me to look for another service outlet to maintain the car, since which MB service department have never had any money off me other than £49.95 the other week to service the A/C, inspect and report on the condition of the car, a sprat to catch a mackerel is the saying methinks, didn't work and given my experience this week at an Indie they did not do a very good job inspecting the car!

What do I think of MB? well a bit like the curates egg really!

As I am on a fixed income and have an aversion to paying through the nose, being treated like a second class citizen just because I own an 11 year old car, left to wait whilst other more 'important' customer get the 'full works' and talked down to because I questioned everything said instead of rolling over and let them tickle my cheque book, upset? no, biased? yes indeed.

Do I still rate MB cars of course I do:lol: but despite their so called customer satisfaction rating I would not let them get their hands on my car or more important my money, at any price would you?

Hi Dosco

I had a similar experience with my W202 but persisted with my claim. I eventually won after getting a report from an MB-approved bodyshop who negotiated with MB HQ thus bypassing the dealer. Had my C230K been over 8 years old when I made my first rust claim, the likelihood would be that my claim would have been rejected. My car is now 9 year old and will be going into the bodyshop within a fortnight for minor rust repair which I am having fund.

The rejection you experienced is quite common as are the excuses given for rejection. However, this forum advised me to be polite but persistent when pursuing my claim and I eventually won the day.

I am the second owner of my C class but I was lucky enough to meet the original purchaser who reported that rust first appeared at 18 months from new. I expect there are other examples in this forum where rust appeared even earlier. I used to think Mercedes never rusted - that's why I bought one - but now I'm older and wiser.

If I can just lick the rust issue I should have a vehicle capable of extremely high mileages and long life. In every other respect it is reliable transport and never breaks down.

REGARDS

Phil


REGARDS

Phil

 

[jberks]

I can't argue with the points raised but I do think it gives the wrong impression.
It is true that some dealerships really should have had their franchises taken away due to appalling customer service but equally there are some excellent dealers out there that quietly persue rejected claims on your behalf. My local dealer had gone in to bat on my behalf on a couple of occasions now. They've normally won through in the end.

My other concern is this constant 'Mercedes rust' clamour.
Lets get something straight - NO THEY DON'T
Only Mercs built between 1998 and 2004 rust and then to a varying degree. That's a 6 year period and it will always be painful until they work their way through to the scrapyard. 2002 cars will still be fixed by MB too.
I sympathise with those who bought an older car on the basis of 1990's paintwork, I may have done the same not that long ago, but as with any car, buyer beware and do your homework. The rust issue was very well known by 2001 and the info is out there if you look for it.
If you took any 9 year old item back to the manufacturer, do you really think they'd be any more accomodating? I had a very expensive 4 year old dishwasher fail with a common fault recently - were the manufacturers interested? no.

 

[philharve]

Reputation for fine build - gone

Hi jberks

I think what grates with me most is that I was seduced by the belief that Mercedes had an enviable reputation for fine build and longevity. Because I tend to keep my cars a long time (>10yrs) the thought of owning a Mercedes made a great deal of sense. However, when that expectation was shattered and it slowly dawned upon me that the life of my C230K may be largely dictated by the condition of the chassis and body panels which look like deteriorating at a faster rate than less prestigious and much cheaper vehicles, there is a natural tendency to feel great disappointment, even anger.

I had not expected when I purchased my C class that in order to maintain my expectation for longevity that I would have to plough hundreds and maybe thousands of pounds into maintaining its bodywork, a hithertoo Mercedes strong point, and in my opinion an unnecessary additional expense.

If, subsequently, a dealership adopts the attitude that rust is the result of untreated stone chips and therefore the owners responsibility, and then use this as justification for rejecting a claim, it only rubs salt into ones wounds. I suffered this treatment and was duly notified that it wasn't a paint problem because the coating was within spec'. I saw the dealer make the thickness measurements and I was immediately suspicious of their validity and therefore questionable.

I subsequently took my car to an MB-approved bodyshop where the paint thickness measurements were retaken. I was duly informed by the bodyshop that the paint thickness maybe within spec' but it was woefully inadequate compared with the paint thickness of older Mercedes models. Furthermore, the rust problems that my C class subsequently displayed were well known to MB and fully documented. I joined the MBOA at this time and the forum confirmed all that the bodyshop had stated. The dealership would certainly have known that my C class had started to demonstrate the classic symptoms of the 'thin paint' syndrome. So why did they reject my claim?

It was at this point I decided to steer clear of the dealerships and the MB-approved bodyshop took on the task of progressing my claim. This was a very smart move. Who would know better if rust was the result of untreated stone chips or the result of a more fundamental production problem? My C230K was repaired under warranty.

Aren't there two problems here: first - there WAS a production problem which some dealerships seem to ignore; secondly - an inconsistent approach by the dealerships regarding rust claims?

My limited experience of dealerships is that they have a strong tendency to deny a production problem existed and an unshakeable expectation that the customer will simply 'go away'. I accept that another dealership may well become the customer's champion wrt rust claims and there is sufficient anecdotal evidence within this forum to support this conclusion.

Should not MB take disciplinary action - if in fact they can - against franchises who fob customers off when the evidence of a production problem is overwhelmingly in the customers' favour? Fobbing off customers is likely to harm future Mercedes sales. It only seems natural that MB would want to know and act upon such indiscretions?

I am undecided about the issue of ongoing liability. At what point should Mercedes 'wash their hands' of one of their vehicles knowing it had a manufacturing defect as serious as poor paintwork that could adversely impact upon the vehicles' average 'design life' without the need for ongoing and expensive repairs? It is a question of liability and when does it end.

I tend to think that Mercedes does have an ongoing liability and responsibility for repairs directly attributed to any manufacturing defect, e.g., free repairs resulting from recalls, but I am still uncertain at what point the line should be drawn. MB have their own complex warranty terms & conditions but are they reasonable when paintwork and rust is concerned?

If a body shell has an average design life of 30 years (say), if properly maintained, and it shows serious corrosion problems after fewer than 10 years (say), it is a given that repairs will be necessary sooner rather than later. When does the manufacturer's liability end wrt 'extraordinary' repairs and is poor build a 'fit for purpose' quality issue?

REGARDS

Phil

 

[Xtractorfan]

I can't argue with the points raised but I do think it gives the wrong impression.
It is true that some dealerships really should have had their franchises taken away due to appalling customer service but equally there are some excellent dealers out there that quietly persue rejected claims on your behalf. My local dealer had gone in to bat on my behalf on a couple of occasions now. They've normally won through in the end.

My other concern is this constant 'Mercedes rust' clamour.
Lets get something straight - NO THEY DON'T
Only Mercs built between 1998 and 2004 rust and then to a varying degree. That's a 6 year period and it will always be painful until they work their way through to the scrapyard. 2002 cars will still be fixed by MB too.
I sympathise with those who bought an older car on the basis of 1990's paintwork, I may have done the same not that long ago, but as with any car, buyer beware and do your homework. The rust issue was very well known by 2001 and the info is out there if you look for it.
If you took any 9 year old item back to the manufacturer, do you really think they'd be any more accomodating? I had a very expensive 4 year old dishwasher fail with a common fault recently - were the manufacturers interested? no.

Methinks had you paid £30K + for your dishwasher then you wouldnt have given up so easily.. Horses for courses

 

[television]

What has caused so much heart ache is that many believed that MB cars were well built, as there are plenty of 201's and 124's still going strong and most without any sign of rust. So someone sees say a 208 in a showroom, and they buy it as the inside looks very nice. Sadly 1 year down the line and the rust starts showing up all over, and this is expensive to fix, that is if you can, so the owners come on line with their tales of woe.
These people do not know about the rust issues, so they do not go looking for it when they bought the car, and lets face it, I did not know about the rust issues before I joined here.

Many have saved and planed the buying of a car, even if it only cost say £6k, and I would be very upset if it happened to me

 

[psmart]

Both the ML270 and C220 were bought brand new, with part of the package of sale being a 30year rust guarantee. After 6 years the ML developed serious rust and MBUK sent me a very nice letter, lucifer himself would have had trouble writing better! So being in Europe, I got the Austrians to 2nd look at it and MB Austria/Germany approved the repairs, which amongst many things amounted to: full drivers door, pillar, front wing and bonnet (resprayed).

A year later, loads more rust was noted on the sub-chassis and the rear hatch door! MBUK again tried to wriggle out of it, albeit some months after saying no, they reneged!

I havent had the C220 checked independently (although last 2 services at dealers I asked them to check), it falls into the 'bad years', so watch this space and the fun Ill have when rust eneviatably comes its way!

Mercedes charge a massive premium for their product and provide misleading quotes in their advertising and sales pitch! If an item is not fit for purpose, such as being able to weather 30 years without the body rusting, they shouldnt advertise it (and perhaps lower their product pricing).

It should be irrespective wether a car is 1 owner or more, all their cars were sold with a 30 year rust warranty at original point of sale and it was transferable!

 

[turbopete]

i dont want to be the one to throw a spanner in the works here, but i recently read something about this "rust warranty" and, if you read it properly, its a 30year anti perforation warranty not an anti rust warranty. this means if the paint isnt chipped etc or is suitably repaired to MB specifications, the car will not corrode to a point where there is a hole in the panel. this is all subject to MB servicing/inspection etc, and earlier cars from late 90's like 202's 210's etc have a 20yrs anti perforation warranty

 

[hawk20]

You might nor feel so pleased had any of your cars had gone rusty at an early stage in life

Of course not. Why would anybody be pleased to have that?

But, BTW, it would not affect what I think about my excellent local dealer, which was the point being discussed.

 

[hawk20]

It should be irrespective wether a car is 1 owner or more, all their cars were sold with a 30 year rust warranty at original point of sale and it was transferable!

Yes and if you read the many threads on this subject you will see they have frequently treated rust problems on 2nd and third owner cars, and more, and have even done so where there has not been a full MBSH. Same is true in the US if you follow their forums.

What they don't like is someone buying a car cheaply because it has rust, and then expecting MB to put the rust right free so they can sell on at a profit. Hence the general rule seems to be that you have to have owned the car for at least six months. Must say it seems fair enough to me.

 

[television]

Of course not. Why would anybody be pleased to have that?

But, BTW, it would not affect what I think about my excellent local dealer, which was the point being discussed.

Well some dealers do nothing about the rust on some cars, irrespective of full MB history or not (and the history has nothing to do with them going rusty in the first place) Anyone can read on here and elsewhere of the bitter exchanges between owners and dealers