Someone in Taunton's angry with the dealer..!..

[Frontstep]

The problems arise when longer term warranties are offered such as MOBILO or when the vehicle changes ownership,
Mobilo lasts for a lot longer than any normal warranty or legal obligation of the supplying dealer.
Change of ownership, where does the new owner seek satisfaction with his two year old car ?
The supplying dealership may be hundreds of miles away from the original and owned by a seperate company.
I still don't blame the owner though for arriving at his local dealership and making a nuisance of himself what is he to do ?

 

[LTD]

The problems arise when longer term warranties are offered such as MOBILO or when the vehicle changes ownership,
Mobilo lasts for a lot longer than any normal warranty or legal obligation of the supplying dealer.
Change of ownership, where does the new owner seek satisfaction with his two year old car ?
The supplying dealership may be hundreds of miles away from the original and owned by a seperate company.
I still don't blame the owner though for arriving at his local dealership and making a nuisance of himself what is he to do ?

I think you are clouding the issue. Rust is rust.

Show me anywhere in the WIS schedule where a check for rust is specified as part of a service schedule.

 

[Frontstep]

I offer no clouds for MB to hide behind rust is solely their fault.
Its just that the redress chain is not so simple, it could be though, MB just seek to avoid claims wherever possible and to some degree the Law assists them.
My service book clearly has a requirement to check the bodywork MB deliberately avoiding this helps if you have to pursue them through the courts.

 

[LTD]

I offer no clouds for MB to hide behind rust is solely their fault.
Its just that the redress chain is not so simple, it could be though, MB just seek to avoid claims wherever possible and to some degree the Law assists them.
My service book clearly has a requirement to check the bodywork MB deliberately avoiding this helps if you have to pursue them through the courts.

Let's debate block exemption and a rusting MB.

The rust is not an issue as it is visible.

How can they deny the claim to fix ?

 

[Steve@Avantgarde]

My long-standing question remains unanswered:

Name ANY other auto manufacturer (regardless of market position or price) who in the last 10 - 15 years has made an inherently rusty car.

BMW, Audi, Vauxhall, VW there are a good few, my mate has a 8 year old 3 series, has more rust in it than my 12 year old W202 which are known for rusting!!!!

 

[Steve@Avantgarde]

... and the customer interface for this brand is who ?

... oh yes, an MB dealer. The same dealers that promoted the 30 year body corrosion warranty. In fact, they probably sold cars on that basis. Especially the high end models, like the w220.

Remind us all, please, where the legal charge on warranty rests to the customer. The supplier or the manufacturer ?

You buy a TV from Comet and it goes faulty. Do you get Comet to fix it or the company that made it ?

You seem to be confused on who is a MANUFACTURER and who is a RETAILER.

This is the issue you are confusing, you see the MB official slogan and assume that it is MB when it is not. They are a subsidary of MB not MB themselves. Your point regarding Comet is reasonable if the TV still had warranty, but if your TV broke down after 5 years and you thought a reasonable life for it would be 7 years, you cannot take it up with Comet as they didnt manufacture it, Sony, Phillips or whoever else did, Comet would point you in the direction of the manufacturer and that is only logical.

I bought a Ledlenser battery head torch not so long ago from my Snap On dealer, after a couple of weeks use I decided it wasnt as bright when fully charged. Who should I complain too? If it was defective the Snap On dealer, but it wasnt defective it was just not what I thought it would be, so I wrote to LedLenser and complained. Turns out they have had a few complaints about this torch and sent me an upgraded model FOC. Snap On would never have done that as they didnt make it. You see the point?

In this instance, the customer is pointing its finger at the RETAILER when in fact it should be pointed at the MANUFACTURER.

 

[television]

Let's debate block exemption and a rusting MB.

The rust is not an issue as it is visible.

How can they deny the claim to fix ?

We know that cars are never checked for any rust, in all my years on here I cannot recall any post where it was said that a car went for a service and MB dealer found rust and they want to rectify the situation. For a start the cars are only washed after a service, and once the car is in the washing yard, no one looks at it again. Rust can start off in the early stages as what we call spiders under the paint where the chemical reaction is taking place, if a customer points a spider out to the dealer the end result is that it was a stone chip, even in place where it is impossible to get one like in the top of recess in the boot for the number plate.

As LTD says it is the dealer who sold the car, and you rights are with them, so when the dealer tells the customer that he has to submit the claim to MB, that is very wrong as the dealer must seek redress from MB himself.

So at the end of the day the car being outside where it was bought is correct, as that dealer sold a car that has gone prematurely rusty.

 

[d215yq]

The point is he (presumably) wants to warn customers that if they buy an MB it will end up like this, so they don't buy a new one and give their money to another company. Given you can only buy a new one at a dealer and that is where the customers will be passing then good for him for choosing his location.

It's all well and good saying Stuttgart or MB world is fairer but these will only be seen by enthusiasts who probably know the problems anyway...in terms of educating the buying public the best place is by the dealer.

When any company loses sales there will be good employees inconvenienced, or good suppliers/other stakeholders who are faultless that suffer...but does that mean we should keep buying something with design flaws just for their sake?? The dealer will happily charge double the labour rate by associating themselves with MB and take the profit margin on each car sale, as well as the extra for their "approved used" sales, so they need to take the negative associations too...they are free to align themselves with another manufacturer if they choose.

I'm all for the public being educated. The age of the car will be obvious to the public from the reg so if they deem it reasonable to be rusty at that age then they can still buy a merc...simples.

 

[deejaybee]

Some interesting views here. Quite understandable why someone purchasing what they presumably thought was a premium marque is somewhat miffed that it is rusting away, but unless this practice becomes widespread I doubt that it will really have any real impact on MB?

The reality is that once the vehicle has reached 8-10 years old it is well outside of the dealer network for anything other than essential spare parts. From a strictly business perspective will MB sales be significantly affected by failures on their older cars?

I doubt many people who purchase new keep them for that long and the typical buyer of older cars probably isn't a prospective purchaser of a new car (certainly in the short - medium term). So does the perceived "lack of quality" of 10 year old MB cars worry buyers of current new models; almost certainly not in the vast majority of cases. Unless there is a catestrophic devaluation of older cars that ripples back through used car values to affect typical 2-4 year trade ins it is difficult to see there being much of a commercial driver for MB to really do much about this.

Maybe the real lesson from this is that buying older cars is becoming much more risky for a whole number of reasons and that the buying public will need to be much better informed of the possible problems to avoid lossing out?

 

[Steve@Avantgarde]

As LTD says it is the dealer who sold the car, and you rights are with them, so when the dealer tells the customer that he has to submit the claim to MB, that is very wrong as the dealer must seek redress from MB himself.

So at the end of the day the car being outside where it was bought is correct, as that dealer sold a car that has gone prematurely rusty.

Not often I disagree with you Malc but on this one I respectfully will!!

The dealer did not R n D, prototype, build or make any decisions on how its manufactured, so how can anyone say they are directly responsible for the rust issues effecting this, or any other MB on the road?? You cant, its illogical. Dealers are just a retail outlet for the brand controlled by the T&Cs of the manufacturers warranty. Even if they, the dealer, supplied the car it still doesnt make the dealer network responsible for any failure, mechanical or otherwise outside of its manufacturers warranty. Any form of warranty goodwill is at the manufacturers discretion based upon T&Cs set out by the manufacturer, not the retailer. They retailer may offer an additional warranty if it sees fit to cover the shortfall by the manufacturer but this is in no way legally required if the product is sold with a full term 3 year warranty.

I have a dislike for the dealers as much as the next man but even I can see that the finger is being pointed at the wrong person here.

 

[television]

Not often I disagree with you Malc but on this one I respectfully will!!

The dealer did not R n D, prototype, build or make any decisions on how its manufactured, so how can anyone say they are directly responsible for the rust issues effecting this, or any other MB on the road?? You cant, its illogical. Dealers are just a retail outlet for the brand controlled by the T&Cs of the manufacturers warranty. Even if they, the dealer, supplied the car it still doesnt make the dealer network responsible for any failure, mechanical or otherwise outside of its manufacturers warranty. Any form of warranty goodwill is at the manufacturers discretion based upon T&Cs set out by the manufacturer, not the retailer. They retailer may offer an additional warranty if it sees fit to cover the shortfall by the manufacturer but this is in no way legally required if the product is sold with a full term 3 year warranty.

I have a dislike for the dealers as much as the next man but even I can see that the finger is being pointed at the wrong person here.

Nothing more that the law as it stands in the UK, if you buy a car from a dealer, your rights are with that dealer, sure good firms will step in and back their dealer, but all rights if claiming anything are with the one that sold it, and not the one that made it.

 

[Steve@Avantgarde]

Nothing more that the law as it stands in the UK, if you buy a car from a dealer, your rights are with that dealer, sure good firms will step in and back their dealer, but all rights if claiming anything are with the one that sold it, and not the one that made it.

But only for a period of its manufacturers warranty, if there is a manufacturing defect outside of its warranty period and is subject to a goodwill claim then it is at the manufacturers discretion a decision that the retailer cannot influence in any way.

 

[television]

Yes it is a difficult area of the law

 

[Xtractorfan]

The MB dealer is the point of contact for MB manufacturing, to expect anyone to take the car to the 'Factory' is just not logical..
An MB dealer is a recognised outlet and indeed part of MB, so really it is the customer point of contact, and therefore is as good a place as any to display a car that does not come up to expectations...
I am sure that Head Office will be informed...good one for watchdog.

 

[Frontstep]

I don't think anyone seriously expects to take their ipad to China or their Mercedes to Stuttgart.
The car parked on the verge is I presume the subject of a rust claim through MOBILO as that is the only recourse for a vehicle of that age.
Perhaps the owner could fill us in ???????
So he's either missed his overpriced servicing with MB which negates his MOBILO or,
he's had the usual excuses for corrosion, from the outside, stone chips, Elvis did it or whatever the latest excuse is and he's blown a fuse.
Yes Mercedes made it but if he's bought it new and had the car serviced with Taunton you can see his point.
Legally he's in the wrong place to vent his spleen but as I have said before I don't blame him or her.
If he's got some interpretation of the Sale of Goods act with him then he has little hope.
Dealers put themselves in the firing line when they take on the Marque thats life he certainly won't be their first or last.