Discovering holes at my Skoda Yeti- and in my 729 Mapfre warranty
I bought a 2010 Skoda Yeti 4×4, with 31,680 miles about the clock, for 12,000 in March 2014. It was included with a three-year warranty from Available Cars in Castle Donington costing 729, which had been provided by Mapfre Abraxas.
In early January I noticed an oil patch for the drive. Despite seeing no further indication of any problems, I took the car to some local garage for extra investigation. To my horror I have been told the clutch pressure plate had broken which made an opening inside gearbox casing. I used to be quoted 6,500 for just a repair.
An engineer from the warranty company attributed the wear and tear to “fair wear and tear”. This, not surprisingly, meant I wasn’t covered.
The local garage issued a survey into the warranty company that this wasn’t the explanation, and this a faulty component C the stress plate C was in fact to blame. I produced a formal fascinate the warranty company, which again turned down my request.
I found numerous other incidents on the web who were much like my own, understanding that the reason why can be quite a fault inside materials used within the clutch cover plate.
Skoda hq has since wanted to pay 20% in the repair bill. I declined this as derisory. I can not spend the money for repair for the reason that car is merely worth 5,000 C if in good condition.
It is my belief that the automobile was fitted using a faulty part at build, which would not become evident until it achieves an acceptable mileage.
It appears to me that 3rd party warranties aren’t worthy of paper where they are written.
Another week and another unhappy Skoda customer, and yet another car warranty declare that has long been refused. The letter deliver to you by Mapfre, where it sets out why it’s got denied your claim, reveals who’s refused to receive a nearby garage’s report in the failure because, in their words, its author doesn’t hold “the relevant engineering qualifications”. It has informed you that it’s not entertain any advise that is because of usage, or anything it deems as being a manufacturing defect.
This stance must take care of most claims, leading this column to wonder with the information circumstance it’d pay an auto claim. We asked Mapfre what percentage of claims were paid, nevertheless it declined to produce the figure, citing commercial confidentiality.
It did declare that your car was independently examined and that the business was confident MO was treated fairly based on the terms of his policy. The situation is actually being considered because of the Financial Ombudsman Service.
Leaving aside the additional value or otherwise not on the policy, we feel you’d probably have been best bringing an incident contrary to the supplying dealer C Available Cars. This could seem unfair, though the Consumer Rights Act makes all the retailer, not the company, responsible.
The dealer told us that the problem you experienced is well-known inside motor trade as affecting VAG (Volkswagen group, which owns Skoda) cars. Younger crowd says that if this contacted you to see whether or not this may just be look for a cost-effective solution this is since sold your car, leaving you with a 4,000 loss.
Interestingly, Available Cars not offers Mapfre warranties, which perhaps says something. We can report the actual end result with the FOS investigation.