Damp Warranty Claim Rejection

[lonnie]

Good evening everyone,

I’d be really interested in understanding if anyone has had experience of damp claims under warranty. Specifically when neither the manufacturer or an approved workshop want to take responsibility!

I have a three year old C Class which I bought at 12 months old and transferred the warranty through the manufacturer. In early 2020 at it’s service, the manufacturer approved workshop reported elevated readings on various places on the floor (ranging from 25 to 35) and over the cab (20 & 25). They advised that I had them rechecked in a few months. Six weeks later I was back in for some unrelated work and they rechecked the levels. At this point, all had reduced with just three areas measuring over 20 (two at 21 and one at 25). I was told that no further action was required by the workshop.

Fast forward through the pandemic and I had my next service in July this year by a different NCC approved workshop (which the manufacturer accepted) and this time there were high readings in both NSF and OSF walls (30, 40 & 50). I was advised to make a warranty claim and contacted the manufacturer. They said I should have this checked by one of their approved workshop which I did and they subsequently submitted the claim – which was rejected!!

The reason given by the manufacturer was that a warranty consideration claim should have been submitted after the first check in 2020. I demonstrated that the claim was for areas that actually reported no more than 15 in 2020 but they have flatly refused – which pretty much makes my warranty redundant!

So, at the minute I’m a bit in limbo. The manufacturer say a claim should have been submitted, the workshop said not as the readings had gone down and even if they’d made a claim for the highest reading (25), it would have been rejected at that level. Plus, the damp is in different areas than 2020!

Discussions are still ongoing but I’d really like to know if anyone else had had claims accepted for damp readings of 25 or below.

Many thanks, Martin

 

[Jimbohorlicks]

I didn't not think any dealer would put a claim in for readings 25 and below.they would want to recheck after a few months as the original workshop advised .The subsequent higher readings warrant a repair and should be honoured by the dealer/manufacturer. You should name some names.

 

[Chris]

That seems bloody ridiculous.

I would contact a specialist lawyer if I were you - one who specialises in consumer law and warranty claims.

Check all your insurance policies first to see if you have legal expenses insurance and if you do then follow that route.

Good luck.

 

[Jim]

I doubt you will get full satisfation with this. They will claim the delay will have caused considerable further damage. At best they are lining you up for a 50-50 claim.

 

[lonnie]

I didn't not think any dealer would put a claim in for readings 25 and below.they would want to recheck after a few months as the original workshop advised .The subsequent higher readings warrant a repair and should be honoured by the dealer/manufacturer. You should name some names.

Thanks Jimbo. I didn't want to 'name names' just yet as I'm giving them the opportunity to resolve this. More than happy to share down the line

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[lonnie]

That seems bloody ridiculous.

I would contact a specialist lawyer if I were you - one who specialises in consumer law and warranty claims.

Check all your insurance policies first to see if you have legal expenses insurance and if you do then follow that route.

Good luck.

That's what I thought Chris.

And thanks for the reminder about legal expenses. I always tick the box so I might have the opportunity to use it now! But hopefully won’t have to

 

[lonnie]

I doubt you will get full satisfation with this. They will claim the delay will have caused considerable further damage. At best they are lining you up for a 50-50 claim.

Thanks Jim. if they spilt 50/50 with the workshop then I'll be happy

I know my ignorance is no defence but I'm pretty miffed at the workshop too. I'm failing to see how there aren't objective measures in the warranty (or the industry in general?) that explicitly says "with a reading > x, remedial work is required and a warranty claim made".

I notice the guidance has changed on the damp report form between 2020 and 2021!!

 

[GMLS]

Interested to hear how this ended

 

[Conrad J]

I'm not a lawyer, but........strikes me that you were badly advised by the dealer, so I'd aim at them. I had trouble with damp, very useful to phone Citizens Advice Helpline, 08082231133.

 

[lonnie]

Interested to hear how this ended

I'm not a lawyer, but........strikes me that you were badly advised by the dealer, so I'd aim at them. I had trouble with damp, very useful to phone Citizens Advice Helpline, 08082231133.

The latest is the manufacturer has asked for 'further evidence' on the cause and effect of the ingress - so another trip to the workshop last week

This does seem to be a bit of progress from their previous stance so fingers crossed. I will keep the thread posted but nothing happens quickly in 'warranty world' does it

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[Kozikot]

I understand if you P/Ex with a Dealer, if they find any areas above 25 they reduce the P/Ex value by £500 per Area...

 

[lonnie]

The latest is the manufacturer has asked for 'further evidence' on the cause and effect of the ingress - so another trip to the workshop last week

This does seem to be a bit of progress from their previous stance so fingers crossed. I will keep the thread posted but nothing happens quickly in 'warranty world' does it

Some good news at last!

I had a further inspection at the end of November and the AW submitted further evidence of the damp. The claim was rejected again in mid December and the reason this time..... the length of elapsed time between the original inspection by the AW and the submission of the original warranty claim!! You couldn't make it up!

So long story short, after a number of long phone calls and an email to both Elddis (whoops!) and the AW preparing for an NCC claim, I received email confirmation yesterday that the Warranty & Technical teams have reviewed my case and overturned the rejection. So the damp in three areas will be rectified. Just need to wait for the parts now

To say I'm pleased with the eventual outcome is an understatement!

 

[mikebeaches]

Some good news at last!

I had a further inspection at the end of November and the AW submitted further evidence of the damp. The claim was rejected again in mid December and the reason this time..... the length of elapsed time between the original inspection by the AW and the submission of the original warranty claim!! You couldn't make it up!

So long story short, after a number of long phone calls and an email to both Elddis (whoops!) and the AW preparing for an NCC claim, I received email confirmation yesterday that the Warranty & Technical teams have reviewed my case and overturned the rejection. So the damp in three areas will be rectified. Just need to wait for the parts now

To say I'm pleased with the eventual outcome is an understatement!

Good news - well done for your persistence!

Obviously, you shouldn't have suffered all the agro, but hope the matter can be satisfactorily and speedily resolved now.

Oh and thanks for the update.

 

[Live Life Now]

Years ago I commented on a similar issue and I still stand by what I said, "if you do not get satisfaction" " NAME AND SHAME", may save us all a lot of money and high blood pressure.

Motor homers do not need to be ripped off, we work/worked hard for our money