RUST- THE RULES Aug 2009

[hawk20]

RUST – THE RULES Aug 2009
If you have rust, Mercedes will sometimes repair it completely free. Having spent some time reading all the literature and talking to knowledgeable contacts this is the best I can do at summarising the position in August 2009.

Mercedes cars made in the late nineties and early 2000’s were painted with water-based paints. These were required under EU environmental rules. These paints are not inherently waterproof –unlike the older cellulose paints- and it is only the clear surface lacquer which has to provide the waterproof skin. Repairing stone chips and scratches is therefore most important.

Various primers and treatments were tried in production to prevent rusting from occurring but on the 210 E class especially (and some other models) rust has been a problem. Oddly the problem affects some cars but by no means all. Near me, by the sea, there is a 210 estate with over 500k miles, and with little or no rust. Elsewhere there are rusty examples of similar age but with far less miles, even well inland.

Towards the end of 2002, Mercedes began to move to full galvanising of all steel panels, which is generally accepted as the best preventative treatment for rust. BMW, which had had similar problems with rust, also moved to galvanising at around the same time. For details on the dates for galvanising different Mercedes models see: -
http://forums.mercedesclub.org.uk/showthread.php?t=23630

Cars first UK registered from October 24th 1998 are covered by a 30 year rust warranty under Mobilo Life. To see if you qualify for MobiloLife see this thread: -
http://forums.mercedesclub.org.uk/showthread.php?p=307465#post307465


If you have rust Mercedes will sometimes repair it completely free and sometimes will make a substantial contribution. To find out if you qualify you need to go to an MB dealer or an MB approved bodyshop for inspection. They will take pictures and take up your case with MB if they think you have a case. You can try more than one dealer or paint shop.

There are three potential kinds of cover for rust: -
1. MobiloLife 30 year warranty –but you need to qualify for Mobilo via MB servicing as above – and it only covers rusting through from the inside (pretty rare).
2. Rust and paint defects due to faulty manufacture are covered under the three year warranty. These are pretty rare too.
3. Most rust problems have been dealt with by MB as a ‘goodwill’ gesture. Once the three year warranty runs out MB have always been prepared to consider making a contribution (up to 100% in some cases) for anything going wrong which can be argued should not have gone wrong. So a gearbox, failing earlier than it should, might attract a ‘goodwill’ contribution. So might the rust problems which have sadly occurred with some models –and which all agree should not have occurred. In many cases MB have contributed 100% of the cost of rust repairs as many threads show. In other cases a percentage contribution has been made. Others have been turned down and have not always been clear about why, as many dealers are unclear about the rules. In any case the rules for ‘goodwill’ contributions are not actually published. Here’s what I think they are today.

RULES FOR GOODWILL (To qualify for 100% contribution).
Car should generally be under eight years old to qualify.
Car should have done no more than 175,000 miles
Car should not show obvious signs of neglect (scratches, damage, and/or stone chips left unrepaired etc).
Any bodywork repairs should have been carried out at MB approved workshops.
Car should have been in your ownership for at least six months (dealers were buying rusty ones cheaply at auction, getting MB to repair free, and then selling at a handsome profit)
Full MBSH seems to be required since mid 2009 (though, in the past, partial MB histories have been accepted).


Once the repairs are done they are guaranteed for two years (1 year by the bodyshop and for a further year by MB UK).

 

[Xtractorfan]

Hawk the first part of your statement regarding the use of waterbased paints is totally inaccurate, the rust issue is not caused by the use of waterbased paints, it is unwise of you to make such a statement..no other manufacturer has had this problem, and everyone used waterbased paints.. maybe the germans used rusty waterbased paint..
The metal used in these cars was faulty, it contained no copper oxide, due mainly to the price of copper at that time.. one of the benefits of using copper oxide in metal is its ability to charge the metal and prevent rusting..ie prevent.. the metal from rusting within itself.. once the metal has been sealed. by paint oil or whatever.. and anyone who knows anything about the painting of cars knows that all paint is porous even the clear lacquer.. The rust preventative on any vehicle is the initial acid etch primer or dip that is used on the metal, that is why stone chips on cars in general dont rust..
In my opinion it is not a good idea to post any stickys on the rust issue as most people are only guessing at what the problem may be..MB themselves are hoping to grow out of the problem .. but one good law case and they are up the creek without a paddle.. Faulty goods!!!!!!!!

And just to add the 30 yr rust warranty is basically pie in the sky, you try getting MB to actually own up to where the rust started from. An owner will have to prove beyond doubt.. most probably in a court of law before Mb will stand over a 30 yr warranty .. the guys who thought this up didnt make the bank interviews..

 

[Xtractorfan]

and just to add to your post regarding the Mb approved bodyshop or dealer taking up the case with MB.. The guy who sees the car makes the initial decisions, the people at MB goodwill team are basically a trained team of monkeys or robots who check out the service history and how good of a customer you are then make their decision based on that.. just in case the Bodyguy at MB isnt au fait with your face..

 

[Chrishazle]

RULES FOR GOODWILL (To qualify for 100% contribution).
Car should generally be under eight years old to qualify.
Car should have done no more than 175,000 miles
Car should not show obvious signs of neglect (scratches, damage, and/or stone chips left unrepaired etc).
Any bodywork repairs should have been carried out at MB approved workshops.
Car should have been in your ownership for at least six months (dealers were buying rusty ones cheaply at auction, getting MB to repair free, and then selling at a handsome profit)
Full MBSH seems to be required since mid 2009 (though, in the past, partial MB histories have been accepted).

My experience :
Car just under 8 years old (got it to MB Ashford quickly having read threads on here about 8 year thing).
Mileage 70K
Full MBSH - documented, MB Brentford from delivery.
Owned by me (second owner) for over 6 months.
No unrepaired stonechips on area where paint bubbling and rust colour showing (bottom 1/2" of both offside doors, small area on front of lip of both rear wheel arches)
MB Ashford bodyshop estimate for repair - £800 + VAT (!!).
MB "Goodwill" offer towards cost of repair (at second attempt, after initial refusal) - 10%
A good friend is half owner of a bodyshop trusted by Lord March with £1.5million of 1955 Ferrari roadster for bodywork repair / repaint - so I will be getting a second opinion.

I consider the MB rust guarantee as worth far less than the paper it's printed on.

 

[Miffy]

MB offered me 0 contribution, and also quoted 800+vat for a very small rust spot, getting it done this week by an indie for under 200

 

[Alex Crow]

in fairness to hawk, it is widely believed that the problem was caused by either poor quality steel or water based paint, depending on who you talk to.

as i understand it MB have not officialy declared the cause, and so all the above is mere speculation.

 

[hawk20]

Hawk the first part of your statement regarding the use of waterbased paints is totally inaccurate, the rust issue is not caused by the use of waterbased paints,
..

I should read what I said again please. Nowhere do I say that that was the cause of the problem.

The purpose of the posting is not to claim knowledge of the cause (I have none). The purpose is to summarise for the many who ask what the rules are for getting treated under goodwill, as far as they can be discovered, since nowhere are these rules written down and available to members as far as I know.

As to what caused the problem, there are many theories (see the other sticky in the general section).

Other manufacturers had rust problems in this period as well (not all). See links below for refs to BMW etc.

 

[hawk20]

Useful threads: -
http://forums.mercedesclub.org.uk/sh...ad.php?t=27552

http://forums.mercedesclub.org.uk/sh...016#post385016

RUST and BMWs
http://www.bavarian-board.co.uk/foru...TID=39921&PN=1


Useful thread on rust and Mercedes fixing the problem for some but not all: -

http://forums.mercedesclub.org.uk/sh...highlight=rust

A case where Mercedes did lots under ‘goodwill’
http://forums.mercedesclub.org.uk/sh...highlight=rust

Another useful thread with lots of information and many cases of Mercedes paying for rust to be treated: -
http://forums.mercedesclub.org.uk/sh...highlight=rust

Another interesting thread giving info on the eight years cover prior to MobiloLife coming in.
http://forums.mercedesclub.org.uk/sh...highlight=rust

MERCEDES –why the quality dropped

http://forums.mercedesclub.org.uk/sh...564#post195564

 

[robertjrt]

I have asked MB for a full copy of the Terms & Conditions of the MobiloLife Warranty in a recent letter, to date no reply.

Perhaps I should follow up with a request for the conditions that need to be fulfilled for "Goodwill" repairs?

 

[Xtractorfan]

in fairness to hawk, it is widely believed that the problem was caused by either poor quality steel or water based paint, depending on who you talk to.

as i understand it MB have not officialy declared the cause, and so all the above is mere speculation.

No Mb have never disclosed what the problem is, and never will, it is not in their interests to do so..

But the facts must speak for themselves..Find me another Vehicle manufacturer on this planet with the rust problems, throughout the range, that have plauged Mercedes Benz and I will gladly submit to the claims being made.

The reason I post is simply because MB have now have an authority on this forum who has blamed waterbased paints for their problems..They must be loving it.. and also the EU for implementing such laws

I do not think that a sticky which gives wrong information should be posted..

The impression given is that the cause is the use waterbased paints, and therefore not a fault by MB themselves..

And BMW's rust problems are nowhere near Mb's problems

The waterbased paint is easily taken out of the equation,...all cars would be rusting, all cars were painted using waterbased paint for the past 20 odd years

 

[Alex M Grieve]

But the facts must speak for themselves..Find me another Vehicle manufacturer on this planet with the rust problems, throughout the range, that have plagued Mercedes Benz and I will gladly submit to the claims being made.

Very fair point. Rusting was much commoner in motor cars of the 60s and 70s, to the point that some manufacturers were taken off the list of company cars from which business users could choose (Citroen, Lancia, Fiat).

The MB problem is distinguished by the fact that a brand not known for rusting developed that ability at a time when others were cleaning up their act (and moving to water based paints)

The problem is greatly emphasized by 3 things:

1. MB is a premium brand, and you don't expect rust
2. MB has a warranty scheme in place which apparently offers extremely comprehensive support for the customer in the event
3. but the third, and possible most telling problem is the extremely variable, if not arbitrary way in which MB's agents (the dealers) are responding to customers difficulties, as instanced by the fact that this thread exists, and is justified by the volume of comment on the Forum from enthusiastic and loyal MB owners.

 

[Xtractorfan]

Absolutely Alex, you have nailed the points neatly and firmly to the mast, this is precisely my points on this. MB are fully aware of the problem , and we know as they do it will cost lots of dosh to sort it. They do believe that closing their eyes will make it go away and hide behind thir goodwill team and their fickle decisions.. and then give ridiculous prices for repairing the problem and then asking customers to pay over the amount as a goodwill gesture towards the repairs..

Please no one take offence from my postings, but I feel strongly about my 20Ks worth of rust..

 

[hawk20]

The reason I post is simply because MB have now have an authority on this forum who has blamed waterbased paints for their problems..They must be loving it.. and also the EU for implementing such laws

I do not think that a sticky which gives wrong information should be posted..

The impression given is that the cause is the use waterbased paints, and therefore not a fault by MB themselves..

.

Have you read my posting number 7? It says quite clearly: -
"I should read what I said again please. Nowhere do I say that that was the cause of the problem."

I am not an authority on the causes of rust and am not saying that it was caused by water-based paints. However often you choose to keep repeating that, it is not what I am saying.

This thread is not about the causes of rust. It is about the rules for getting help from the manufacturer for those who have suffered from its ill effects.

 

[hawk20]

The problem is greatly emphasized by 3 things:

1. MB is a premium brand, and you don't expect rust
2. MB has a warranty scheme in place which apparently offers extremely comprehensive support for the customer in the event
3. but the third, and possible most telling problem is the extremely variable, if not arbitrary way in which MB's agents (the dealers) are responding to customers difficulties, as instanced by the fact that this thread exists, and is justified by the volume of comment on the Forum from enthusiastic and loyal MB owners.

I agree with much of what you are saying. None of us expected Mercedes cars to have this problem -and no doubt MB didn't either. They have clearly spent a fortune on repairing many of the cases we have read about on different threads here and in the US.

The apparent variability of decisions is made the more difficult for us to judge because we don't see the cars in question or hear the views of the bodyshops that have examined them. I have seen a couple of examples. One it was clear that the owner had looked after it and deserved all the help he actually got. The other was not a pretty sight with dents and scratches and chips galore and plenty of damage that had never been repaired. Sometimes, just sometimes we have to accept that the refusal of free treatment can be justified.

As for the causes of rust on some Mercedes, numerous theories have been put forward but none seems to explain why some cars get the problem badly and others don't, even though they were made at a similar time in the same factory. Very odd.

However, in my view, the owner who has a car going rusty when it is under say 8 or even 10 years old, is not so much concerned with what caused the rust as with getting someone to admit it should not have happened on a quality car. and with getting someone to contribute substantially to putting matters right.

 

[Xtractorfan]

Hawk I'm not disputing your post here and it is something that is worthwhile. I think personally that you may need to just mention the fact that there are many therioes with regard to the rusting issue...My only beef is MB themselves will be quite happy to blame waterbased paints, with the added provisio that everyone else had to use them as well.. so basically not their fault..
One of the reasons why you will find some cars not affected by rust is mainly due to the use and treatment of the steel.. for instance.. a new batch of fresh steel arriving at the plant, it is required immediately and used up, cleaned pressed and painted, no time for the bare steel to be contaminated.. haff way thru the batch, the remainder has now been sitting about and is contaminated by dampness etc, it is prepared and painted and the contamination has already started the rusting process....

I remember many years ago being told by a guy who worked for Vauxhall.. they were on stirike or three day week or something that meant the factory was closed for a few days.. a new bodyshell ..viva.. was just being hoisted for dipping, and as was the practise, a few of the guys on the line would basically hold on to the shell with their bare hands until it cleared the line. So when they returned after the few days stoppage they could clearly see the hand marks neatly rusted onto the bare shell.. and was it cleaned no........

 

[hawk20]

Xtractorfan, I have said that there are many theories. Here and on the other thread.

Your Vauxhall story could be repeated often at other car firms I know. I saw it in the Midlands several times.

MB have never to my knowledge said it wasn't their fault. They have accepted publicly that there were problems and have spent a fortune repairing cars for many, many people. See the links I gave to other threads. They have fixed free many people without full MBSH. And been very flexible about the 'rules'. I realise this does not satisfy anyone who has been turned down for full help. I hoped that helping some to know what the rules for goodwill appear to be, might help them either understand why they were turned down or maybe help them fight their corner a bit better.

What I am also concerned about is that more recently the rules seem to be being much more strictly adhered to especially the need for full MBSH.

 

[television]

One can look at rusted metal in the way that it reacts to rust.
Some steel will stand out for some time, and only get a mild rust on the surface,, other steels can disintegrate into flakes, almost as though the metal was porous. The worst one that I ever saw was a 208 1999 and the rear wheel arches on the turned lip had split and was badly out of shape, the holes around the inside were just crumbling away. the car had not been damaged or repaired and still was within the 170 paint thickness limits. Trapped water also plays a big part and affects thing like rust around the rear boot locks, the arches, tops of doors around the rubbers and the bottom of the doors. All of those places can hold water. if the car stands out and is not used much, the problems could start to arrise.

Funny thing is that I have the back of a 42" plasma TV standing in the garden for 6 months and not a spec of rust on it, where as another can go rusty just with its back towards a window in a single glazed house

 

[AndrewIles]

I have just been told by Tony Purslow in Basingstoke that I need to own the car for at least a year for them to submit a successful paint warranty claim!

It is only 2 weeks away so I am prepared to wait, however, has anyone else been told this as I had thought 6 months ownership was the pre-requisite.

 

[Xtractorfan]

It is now possible that thy have changed the goal posts again, you have to remember that MB will do all in their power to avoid shelling out money on this,and using dealers as a barrier is one way of achieving this..

 

[hawk20]

It is now possible that thy have changed the goal posts again, you have to remember that MB will do all in their power to avoid shelling out money on this,and using dealers as a barrier is one way of achieving this..

OK but let's be fair on this. In the past MB have spent a fortune on this problem regularly accepting cars for goodwill treatment even without full MBSH as many of the threads I have posted links to, will testify.

But since the recession has bitten there does seem to be a tightening up and stricter application of rules. Great shame. But I guess in Mercedes, as in most firms, saving money becomes a big priority when sales and profits slump as dramatically as they have in recent times.