Main dealer - issues with car?

Silvera

What do you guys make of the situation my gf now finds herself in having purchased a 2010 car from a main dealership c.5 months ago... (complete with it's so-called "150 point safety/warranty check") ....

- On the drive home the left rear brakes were 'squeeling' so badly (intermittently) that I could hear it as I followed her in my own car.
The car had 25,000kms on the clock at that stage, it now has c.48,000kms.

- She contacted the dealer the next day and they arranged to take it back a few days later. They did so, returned the car, and told her it was "dust" in the brakes that caused the problem.

- She drove the car for the following months and told me last week that the squeeling continued to come-and-go intermittently ever since. However, it got really bad earlier this week. As she had a long drive ahead of her (c.2.5hrs) I said I would take off the wheels to have a look. To my shock I found that one of the left rear brake pads (not shoes!...i.e. no "dust" build-up really possible with discs and pads) had worn down to the metal!! The remaining rear pads also had very little friction material left on them.
I replaced all the pads, but took pics of the scored/half rust-covered disc...and kept the old pads.

The fact that she is a very careful driver (i.e. not hard on brakes) and that the 'squeeling' was present since the day she bought the car must mean that the (main?!) dealer let the car out with badly worn / dangerous rear pads?!

Other issues I have since discovered include -
Heavy cluth pedal (worn clutch plate/dual mass flywheel?)
Slight knocking from front suspension (worn bushes?)
Engine burns oil (at 48,000kms?)

Does this suggest a higher mileage than that on the clock to you guys?
Was it a dangerous defective vehicle for the dealer to release with such severly worn brake pads?

She is inclined to just let it slide, but I think it's just not right/good enough for a (main?!!...or any) dealership to sell her a car like this!
(Btw, is there a way to verify a car's mileage via the ECU?)

Jonty

So she drove the car for months, and somehow the garage is at fault?

Brakes and bushings are consumables.

DMFs are consumables. How do you know the car burns oil?

What kind of car is it?

What servicing is done to it?

clogher71

Silvera wrote: »

What do you guys make of the situation my gf now finds herself in having purchased a 2010 car from a main dealership c.5 months ago... (complete with it's so-called "150 point safety/warranty check") ....

- On the drive home the left rear brakes were 'squeeling' so badly (intermittently) that I could hear it as I followed her in my own car.


The car had 25,000kms on the clock at that stage, it now has c.48,000kms.

- She contacted the dealer the next day and they arranged to take it back a few days later. They did so, returned the car, and told her it was "dust" in the brakes that caused the problem.

- She drove the car for the following months and told me last week that the squeeling continued to come-and-go intermittently ever since. However, it got really bad earlier this week. As she had a long drive ahead of her (c.2.5hrs) I said I would take off the wheels to have a look. To my shock I found that one of the left rear brake pads (not shoes!...i.e. no "dust" build-up really possible with discs and pads) had worn down to the metal!! The remaining rear pads also had very little friction material left on them.
I replaced all the pads, but took pics of the scored/half rust-covered disc...and kept the old pads.

The fact that she is a very careful driver (i.e. not hard on brakes) and that the 'squeeling' was present since the day she bought the car must mean that the (main?!) dealer let the car out with badly worn / dangerous rear pads?!



Other issues I have since discovered include -
Heavy cluth pedal (worn clutch plate/dual mass flywheel?)
Slight knocking from front suspension (worn bushes?)
Engine burns oil (at 48,000kms?)

Does this suggest a higher mileage than that on the clock to you guys?
Was it a dangerous defective vehicle for the dealer to release with such severly worn brake pads?

She is inclined to just let it slide, but I think it's just not right/good enough for a (main?!!...or any) dealership to sell her a car like this!
(Btw, is there a way to verify a car's mileage via the ECU?)

How long does your GF have the car?
What warranty was given with the car at time of purchase?
Make/model etc

Might help the more knowledgeable people on here to help, some cars 'burn' oil by nature, not necessarily high mileage, a service history? Pads can wear at 15k, depends on car/driver etc, one caliper could be sticking slightly, any chance the car is from the VAG family?

mickdw

What make model is it?
Pads nearing the wear limit are not a safety issue given that they will still be functional so they may well be perfectly adequate when sold.
Still though, for a car with tiny mileage, all does not seem well and there is likely a partially sized brake.
I'd do a bit of digging if I was you but brake squeel in itself does not mean there is an issue.

Silvera

Jonty wrote: »

So she drove the car for months, and somehow the garage is at fault?

Brakes and bushings are consumables.

DMFs are consumables. How do you know the car burns oil?

What kind of car is it?

What servicing is done to it?

I'm aware that brakes and dmf/clutches are consumables. However..

- should such issues be arising at such low mileage (i.e. problems were present at "25,000k" when she purchased it)?
- the noisy brakes were present from day one
- the oil level has dropped since it was last serviced (no oil leaks present)
- it has a stamped service book from the same main dealer ...however it took weeks to finally get the book, and tbh I'm skeptical about entries in same.
Opel Astra J. Owned by her since August 2014.

mickdw

Silvera wrote: »

I'm aware that brakes and dmf/clutches are consumables. However..

- should such issues be arising at such low mileage (i.e. problems were present at "25,000k" when she purchased it)?
- the noisy brakes were present from day one
- the oil level has dropped since it was last serviced (no oil leaks present)
- it has a stamped service book from the same main dealer ...however it took weeks to finally get the book, and tbh I'm skeptical about entries in same.
I dont want to mention make/model as yet.

If it's a vw, you should be easily able to get the mileage record from the ecu.

Jonty

Silvera wrote: »

I'm aware that brakes and dmf/clutches are consumables. However..

- should such issues be arising at such low mileage (i.e. problems were present at "25,000k" when she purchased it)?
- the noisy brakes were present from day one
- the oil level has dropped since it was last serviced (no oil leaks present)
- it has a stamped service book from the same main dealer ...however it took weeks to finally get the book, and tbh I'm skeptical about entries in same.
I dont want to mention make/model as yet.

Noisy brakes could also be a symptom of a partially seized caliper.
Oil consumption could be related to type of car. VAG cars use a wee drop.
Thing is, in 25000km, how much service history can a car generate? 3 oil changes? Just assuming clocks are correct.

MuppetCheck

Does it have an electronic handbrake? If so they are known to wear the rear pads pretty quickly, even in some cases quicker as front pads. Even the hill hold in them is pretty abrupt and they can take a hard throttle to get it moving. Calipers do stick too though.

They also can use a little oil between services, particularly when the engine is tight. I had to top mine up from time to time and that only had about 30k km when I sold it.

Silvera

Jonty wrote: »

Noisy brakes could also be a symptom of a partially seized caliper.
Oil consumption could be related to type of car. VAG cars use a wee drop.
Thing is, in 25000km, how much service history can a car generate? 3 oil changes? Just assuming clocks are correct.

- The pad was virtually worn down to the metal (just a sliver of friction material left on half of it).
- I dont have the service book to hand, iirc it has two or three stamps in it.
- Manual handbrake.
- There were two other issues (i.e. basic consumable parts not replaced upon collection) which makes me wonder about the mileage and so-called "150 point vehicle check"?!

Jonty

Ignoring all the problems, the 1st thing would be to verify the mileage and take it from there.

Other than that it's tough to go back to a garage after 5 months and 20Kms for wear and tear items that would be otherwise outside a warranty agreement.

pablo128

Has she had it serviced at all in the 20k she has owned it? If she has, did the mechanic not comment on the state of the rear pads?

mickdw

MuppetCheck wrote: »

Even the hill hold in them is pretty abrupt and they can take a hard throttle to get it moving.

In many audis, The hill hold is separate to the electronic handbrake function in that the hill hold operates via the hydraulic brake circuit and on all 4 wheels. Much cleaner solution than making the electric motors open and close for each hill hold required.

porsche boy

shes nearly doubled the mileage in 5 months and you are looking for warranty on items that are designed to be consumable like brake, clutch and bushings? you warranty will cover engine, drivetrain and electrics most likely and the rest is your problem.
Also brake dust can collect on pad/disc set up so i wouldnt be jumping on that as an issue.

In the 23000klm your gf drove was the car due a service? usually service intervals are every 15000klm or 12 months, which ever is sooner. if you arrived into a garage where i worked thats the first question I'd ask and if you havent followed the service intervals then warranty is vold.

MuppetCheck

mickdw wrote: »

In many audis, The hill hold is separate to the electronic handbrake function in that the hill hold operates via the hydraulic brake circuit and on all 4 wheels. Much cleaner solution than making the electric motors open and close for each hill hold required.

Yeah, I had a manual handbrake in my Astra and it was silent compared to the motor noise from the electronic handbrakes.

That's a much more efficient solution, means a quicker release and less resistance.

Bigus

Low miles cars can cause unusual issues due to lack of movement in parts and also not reaching optimum operating temperature , low usage possibly caused sticky brake calliper, this would subsequently cause excessive wear on pads,

oil burning needs to be quantified , but could also be caused by gunge or varnish build up on rings due to lack of use/never reaching operating temp before cooling again.

Theres a good chance this car was never serviced until it was sold to your gf at such low miles.

However I'd say the dealer is in the clear as regards his responsibilities at this stage as the car is going on 5 years old !

George Dalton

OP to be honest the main thing that sticks out to me having read the thread is that your gf has a shocking attitude to car maintenance, especially for someone who does such high mileage. She is doing well over 1000km per week and yet drove around the place for months with the rear brakes making noise and didn't do anything about it except casually mention it to you the week before Christmas? Someone doing that kind of mileage really needs to be more pro-active about looking after their car.

Silvera

I agree with you George, on the face of it it reads like that anyway.

However, in her defence it was an intermittent squeak and she was told by the so-called 'main dealer' that it was "only dust in the brakes, nothing to worry about". She is a very cautious driver and would always alert me (or previously her dad) if she felt anything was wrong with the car. She had no idea that the pads were so low (as it turns out from the day she purchased the car!). She felt re-assured that everything was spot-on having purchased it from a long-established main dealership.

Added to that the fact that the vehicle had undergone a so-called "150 point safety check" she did not expect (nor did I ...and I have many years experience in the motor trade) that the rear brake pads would be worn so badly from the day the car was handed over to her ...after she had paid a 5-figure sum for the vehicle. In my experience this is the stuff of a 'fly-by-night' operator, not what a person would expect of a main dealer. As I previously mentioned, there were other consumables which were not replaced prior to sale, e.g. the wiper blades were almost falling apart, and as a result caused several fine scratches to the windscreen.

I have now looked at the service book and can confirm that it states the car was "serviced" at 25,000kms. There is 38,000kms on it now - not the 48,000kms I had originally thought/posted. (She was away visiting her folks up the country when I started the thread. Apologies for not getting the details right from the start).

My main priority now is to confirm if the mileage is correct. Where can I get the ECU checked to confirm if the kms on the clock are accurate?

George Dalton

I don't know if you can get the ECU checked, on the whole I doubt you can. You are probably reading too much into these issues and jumping to a slightly paranoid conclusion in any case.

The fact that she only put 13,000km on the car rather than 23,000km does put a slightly different complexion on the matter but I still think that you are making a big fuss about parts which at the end of the day are consumable items. The time and place for highlighting these issues was a few months ago directly to the dealer. Not 5 months down the line here on Boards after you have changed the parts yourself.

Silvera

George Dalton wrote: »

I don't know if you can get the ECU checked, on the whole I doubt you can. You are probably reading too much into these issues and jumping to a slightly paranoid conclusion in any case.

The fact that she only put 13,000km on the car rather than 23,000km does put a slightly different complexion on the matter but I still think that you are making a big fuss about parts which at the end of the day are consumable items. The time and place for highlighting these issues was a few months ago directly to the dealer. Not 5 months down the line here on Boards after you have changed the parts yourself.

The issue would have been raised with the dealer ages ago had we had we known or suspected that the pads were so worn, thats my point - the dealer released the car with severly worn pads, lied that it was a "dust problem" when the noise was highlighted to him ...and then released the car a second time with the same worn pads in place. Add to that - a heavy clutch pedal, worn wiper blades, cracked perished tyres (replaced asap) and noises coming from the suspension when driving over slightly rough surfaces. Not what you would expect of a vehicle supplied by a main dealer - with a supposed 25,000kms on the clock?!

Should the mileage prove to be correct we will accept it.
But should these problems be showing at such low mileage? ... that is my question.
(Plus where can I get the mileage verified electronically?)

In comparison, I drive a 2008 car which has none of these problems.
(Even my last car - a 2003 Astra with 110,000mls - didnt have such problems. And I averaged 30,000 mls from brake pads).

George Dalton

Why didn't you go back with the car when the noise didn't go away? Seems like the logical thing to do. You have basically let them off the hook on this and you are (understandably) annoyed. But really the person you should be most annoyed with is yourself.

Cracked/perished tyres would tend to support the low mileage btw. It would be totally expected for a 4 year old car with 25,000km on it to be on its original tyres which would be showing signs of age.

Silvera

George Dalton wrote: »

Why didn't you go back with the car when the noise didn't go away? Seems like the logical thing to do. You have basically let them off the hook on this and you are (understandably) annoyed. But really the person you should be most annoyed with is yourself.

Cracked/perished tyres would tend to support the low mileage btw. It would be totally expected for a 4 year old car with 25,000km on it to be on its original tyres which would be showing signs of age.

As I stated earlier George, the noise was intermittent, and was only highlighted to me when it became constant last week. I am somewhat annoyed with myself, but mainly with them, that is why I wish to verify the mileage. Should suspension be 'knocking' at such mileage?

Casati

Should brake wear indicators not squeal to warn you that they are worn?

mickdw

Suspension noises make me very wary of the recorded mileage.

Silvera

The pad with the wear indicator has a few mill of friction material left on it, the other side has virtually nothing left on it - that is the side that started making metal-to-metal contact last week (it only made the bare minium of contact at the top of the pad / top of the disc). Thats what alerted us to the problem.

Even my 80 yr old father (who worked on various machinery/cars all his life) was shocked at the condition of the pads and stated that the garage must have known the pads were severely worn when they released the vehicle to us (twice).

Stheno

Silvera wrote: »

The pad with the wear indicator has a few mill of friction material left on it, the other side has virtually nothing left on it - that is the side that started making metal-to-metal contact last week (it only made the bare minium of contact at the top of the pad / top of the disc). Thats what alerted us to the problem.

Even my 80 yr old father (who worked on various machinery/cars all his life) was shocked at the condition of the pads and stated that the garage must have known the pads were severely worn when they released the vehicle to us (twice).

Haven't you put 13000 kms on the car since you got it with the original 25k on it? That's another 1/3 of wear on the brake pads since tbh

ninty9er

I would expect approaching 50k that you'd be looking at pads, not at 25k. Is it a standard or electronic parking brake model? Those electronic ones are harsh enough on the pads.

To be honest if the discs don't need replacing the pads have just worn down over the time she's had it. These things are a function of mileage, not time or age. You say you averages 30k miles on pads, that's 50k kms or your GFs current mileage give or take.

I know people who get their cars serviced 4/5 times a year because of the mileage they do and recommended intervals. IIRC the interval on the Astra is 30k or 12 months. At 30k the oil is a bit mank in most of the ones I've come across. The manufacturer interval is a bit high IMO.

Looking for faults based on mileage is irrelevant. Depending on how a cars driven it can need complete reconditioning from the tyres up by 15k kms.

mickdw

ninty9er wrote: »

Depending on how a cars driven it can need complete reconditioning from the tyres up by 15k kms.

A car that needed significant recon at 15k km is not one I would be hoping to pick up at the local main dealer.

ml100

George Dalton wrote: »

Cracked/perished tyres would tend to support the low mileage btw. It would be totally expected for a 4 year old car with 25,000km on it to be on its original tyres which would be showing signs of age.

My 2011 VW golf has 48K km (I've owned it from new) and the original continental tyres are cracking, I will be getting new ones on it soon!

ninty9er

mickdw wrote: »

A car that needed significant recon at 15k km is not one I would be hoping to pick up at the local main dealer.

But any garage can easily make that argument if you come back with the mileage doubled in 5 months.

mickdw

ninty9er wrote: »

But any garage can easily make that argument if you come back with the mileage doubled in 5 months.

Yes. Now is not the time to be querying this.
I just think the car is not what it should be having only 25k km on it.

Damien360

Could the car be an ex rental ? You know the saying "the fastest car on the road is a rental" or something to that effect.

Mileage could be right but maybe it was driven very hard and never serviced before resale to you. You mentioned a 50 point check but that is a check and not a service.

The car is an Astra but was it sold to you at an Opel dealer ? I know anyone can service them but costs might have dictated little or nothing done.