New Car/Lemon

5500

Hi Guy's
Looking to get some other take's on an issue a neighbour is having with a new car.

Purchased a new Kia in May, after a week the dash began lighting up like a christmas tree with warning's, so back to main dealer. They couldn't find the problem at first and had the car for a week, eventually said it was a fault to do with an abs module, all sorted and away he went.

A few week's later while hoovering the car, he noticed the carpet was wet in the back, off to the dealer again, they came back with a leak in the seal on the windscreen, replaced carpet, resealed and away he went.

He complained at this point and was offered first service free for his trouble to date.

A month later, the same problem happens with the dash, warnings galore showing so back to the dealer. This time it's put down to an issue with the "Engine brain" kept the car for a week, replaced part and said that's it should have no more problems and off he went.

Following week same problem pops up again, he goes back to dealer and they say they will need the car for the week. At this point he told them he no longer trusts or want's the car, with 4 issue's in 5 months, he wants a replacement.

Dealer is having none of it, say's that the car has been repaired each time and is satisfied with that.

Looking at the sale of good's act, it states a repair must be permanent, which is this case it's not, although it seem's as if the dealer is pointing out its a different issue each time so the repairs are/were permanent. If that's the case then how many time's is he supposed to be back with the car before it's deemed too many?

So is a solicitor his best port of call at this point to do the fighting, or are there any other options open to him?

Toyotafanboi

5500 wrote: »

Looking at the sale of good's act, it states a repair must be permanent, which is this case it's not, although it seem's as if the dealer is pointing out its a different issue each time so the repairs are/were permanent. If that's the case then how many time's is he supposed to be back with the car before it's deemed too many?

"Lights on the dash" is the warning, not the actual fault as you rightly say, so you can't say it's been back more than once for the same issue because it hasn't.

The general rule is an allowance of 3x attempts to fix the same fault, in fairness to the dealer it sounds like they have been dealing with and rectifying the faults.

Handing back a car is a rare occurance and i'd say the chances of that are so slim I wouldn't waste my time chasing it. That's not to say it wouldn't happen, but it sounds like the dealer has played a strong hand back, particularly if they've been providing a courtesy car (you don't mention).

The car has had some teething problems, certainly more teething problems than would be considered normal or desirable but they have been repaired, which is what the warranty is there for. It's very unlikely that the car will continue to throw random problems with such frequency for the rest of it's life, it's just been an unfortunate run of events.

It's acceptable to say that your friends are probably aggrieved at the situation thus far but honestly if the repairs have held good and the dealer has offered to cover the cost of the first service, that's a reasonable goodwill contribution given the inconvenience to the customer.

What is their desired course of action? A refund? Another new car? I'd be surprised if you get that kind of recourse from Hyundai/ Kia, maybe you might if you are dealing with a particularly good dealer but as a general rule it'd take a lot more than what you've been through.

kyote00

Its not clear in the original post where the water leak was ..... water found in the back but windscreen seal replaced ?

Water leaks around the dash - if left - are a recipe for lots of long term issues...
Electric and electronic connectors corrode, oxidize and can short or glitch months after car has dried out...

5500 wrote: »

Hi Guy's
.... they came back with a leak in the seal on the windscreen, replaced carpet, resealed and away he went.

Toyotafanboi

Well the water will settle at the lowest point which sounds like the rear footwells.

In fairness the car is only 4 months old max so the leak hasn't been festering and there is 7 years warranty in the unlikely event something further shows up.

mickdw

If it was my car, id be getting record of the actual fault codes.
If tge same fault code is occuring, you have the arguement that the repairs are not permanent.
If varying codes each time, it might be possible to link them to the water leak.
If that link could be made, they should look for nothing other than a replacment.
Water damage and modern cars are not a good receipe so much so that flood damaged cars are automatically written off.

alan partridge aha

Toyotafanboi wrote: »

Well the water will settle at the lowest point which sounds like the rear footwells.

In fairness the car is only 4 months old max so the leak hasn't been festering and there is 7 years warranty in the unlikely event something further shows up.

I'd say they are guaranteed it will go wrong again.

Toyotafanboi

alan partridge aha wrote: »

I'd say they are guaranteed it will go wrong again.

I'll take that bet.

Cee-Jay-Cee

Was the comment 'lighting up like a Christmas tree' a slight exaggeration? The engine check light comes on when there is a fault not all the lights. If all the lights are coming in then that's a different problem and possibly a bad earth or a short which could well have been caused by the leaking windscreen.

5500

I didn't see the lights myself but he said it was multiple systems showing error flashing up not just a check engine light, Specific Error codes weren't mentioned to him, just the system it effected, first was abs, second ecu, and not sure yet this time.

As for the leak, they told him the water travelled down the A pillar and along the sill resting behind the passenger seat, Courtesy car has been provided although he said it costs him each time for a temp transfer with his company, and dealer is out of county so there's a bit of effort involved in getting the car down and collecting ect.

He's not discounting the dealer trying to sort it, hes more concerned they don't know what the problem is and the faults will keep on coming and it's just gonna be trouble no matter what, ideally would like a replacement car as opposed to a refund.

I think as Mick said if he can link the issues to the leak it may be the avenue to pursue, but initially I'll tell him to find out what the codes were that they pulled on each occasion to try and pinpoint exactly what's gone on.

kyote00

That is just nonsense - water will settle in nooks and crannies, the edges of rolled panels, it will settle in curves on plastic trim, on the sound deadening foam.....

4 months is very long time for water to be around.

As a mod, you really need to let the discussion happen and not takes "SIMI POV" every time...... ****ing sick of the BS here

OP: Good luck with investigations. As others say, find out the codes registered, ask them where the water was entering the car. Just keep asking 'what, where and why' until you are happy.....

Toyotafanboi wrote: »

Well the water will settle at the lowest point which sounds like the rear footwells.

In fairness the car is only 4 months old max so the leak hasn't been festering and there is 7 years warranty in the unlikely event something further shows up.

punisher5112

He could request them collecting the car and leaving him the temp car.

TallGlass

Sorry OP, but am I the only one who thought this thread was going to be about Little Trees, 'New Car' and 'Lemon' scented air fresheners !

Toyotafanboi

kyote00 wrote: »

That is just nonsense - water will settle in nooks and crannies, the edges of rolled panels, it will settle in curves on plastic trim, on the sound deadening foam.....

4 months is very long time for water to be around.

As a mod, you really need to let the discussion happen and not takes "SIMI POV" every time...... ****ing sick of the BS here

OP: Good luck with investigations. As others say, find out the codes registered, ask them where the water was entering the car. Just keep asking 'what, where and why' until you are happy.....

I'm just trying to give some sense and balance to the discussion rather than take the sensationalist view, that's all. I'm not trying to resist or alter the flow of discussion, just giving my own thoughts on the matter.

"Vehicle from low tier manufacturer needs several issues fixed under warranty, which have been fixed successfully" wouldn't make an exciting thread title though, in fairness i'll give you that.

If we are to be pedantic the car hasn't necessarily been damp for 4 months, they have owned the car for 4 months and the ingress has been fixed at some point already, at the moment we have nothing to tie the water leak into any of the other issues bar speculation and the OPs friend has already been told where the leak had been discovered.

The car had a number of issues, that were fixed correctly in a timely fashion, the customer was provided alternative transport while their car was off the road. The owner is dissatisfied that their brand new car has had a number of issues very early on it's life, don't get me wrong, that would taint a new car for anyone and it's inconvenient at best. The dealer has offered to pay for the first service as a goodwill gesture based on that.

Is there really a steady footing here to reject the car? IMO, no, there isn't. Maybe there is, I could be wrong.

Isambard

it seems to me that water leaking throught he windscreen seal and then down behind the dash could be the cause of the electrical problems.

rex-x

Toyotafanboi wrote: »

"Lights on the dash" is the warning, not the actual fault as you rightly say, so you can't say it's been back more than once for the same issue because it hasn't.

The general rule is an allowance of 3x attempts to fix the same fault, in fairness to the dealer it sounds like they have been dealing with and rectifying the faults.

Handing back a car is a rare occurance and i'd say the chances of that are so slim I wouldn't waste my time chasing it. That's not to say it wouldn't happen, but it sounds like the dealer has played a strong hand back, particularly if they've been providing a courtesy car (you don't mention).

The car has had some teething problems, certainly more teething problems than would be considered normal or desirable but they have been repaired, which is what the warranty is there for. It's very unlikely that the car will continue to throw random problems with such frequency for the rest of it's life, it's just been an unfortunate run of events.

It's acceptable to say that your friends are probably aggrieved at the situation thus far but honestly if the repairs have held good and the dealer has offered to cover the cost of the first service, that's a reasonable goodwill contribution given the inconvenience to the customer.

What is their desired course of action? A refund? Another new car? I'd be surprised if you get that kind of recourse from Hyundai/ Kia, maybe you might if you are dealing with a particularly good dealer but as a general rule it'd take a lot more than what you've been through.

But legally the dealer only has one attempt, the three attempts thing is something they invented out of lack of knowledge and to be awkward

elperello

"Vehicle from low tier manufacturer needs several issues fixed under warranty, which have been fixed successfully" wouldn't make an exciting thread title though, in fairness i'll give you that".

Are KIA really a low tier manufacturer?

rex-x

elperello wrote: »

"Vehicle from low tier manufacturer needs several issues fixed under warranty, which have been fixed successfully" wouldn't make an exciting thread title though, in fairness i'll give you that".

Are KIA really a low tier manufacturer?

very much so, although far better than they used to be

colm_mcm

What does low tier mean?

I get that they're not competing with Mercedes or BMW. Is that what it means?

tomwaterford

colm_mcm wrote: »

What does low tier mean?

I get that they're not competing with Mercedes or BMW. Is that what it means?

I'd hazard a guess and say yes!



I known someone what had a kia same issue with dashes and electronic faults,it turned out to be a bad earth


Any car can leak/take in water,that just happens...I have heard if it happening with 4 different brands of new car/vans last year (have lot of friends what work in different dealerships etc)

JohnBoy26

colm_mcm wrote: »

What does low tier mean?

I get that they're not competing with Mercedes or BMW. Is that what it means?

Low tier is not the best way to describe them tbh. They are higher up than that. Id consider the likes of dacia low tier.

elperello

JohnBoy26 wrote: »

Low tier is not the best way to describe them tbh. They are higher up than that. Id consider the likes of dacia low tier.

Yes I would have thought that.

Lately I've been seduced by the lines of the Optima and they cost about 35k for a nice one. Sorentos can be specced up to more than 50k.

I'm not so sure now.

bucketybuck

Going by what was posted in the OP my opinion is that the dealer has acted appropriately each time, there is no evidence that the car is not fit for purpose and that the chance of a buy back happening is next to zero.

I have every sympathy for the owner, more than anything what people want is just a reliable car, but what was described isn't even close to being as bad as the horror stories that come with a real lemon.

The best advise I could give the owner right now is to recognise that the dealer is acting appropriately and to work with them instead of starting fights. Should the car continue to give trouble there may be action to be taken further down the line, but no matter what happens the owner will only benefit from having a good relationship with the dealer.

cml387

You don't say what model, but a colleague at work had similar electrical problems with a Sportage. It was traced to a faulty earth I believe, she's had no problems since.

5500

Just to give an update on this as I'd only caught up with the neighbour yesterday. They got the car back last week, problem fixed and away they went, untill yesterday when the same problem started again!

So to sum up, first return was for an abs and srs module replaced, second was a leak at the windscreen, third was the ecu replaced, fourth was front facing camera/sensors which were replaced for new, and now this will be the fifth time back with the same error's ( All dash warning lights come and stay on constantly, which has been consistent except for with the leak when it was noticed the floor was wet )

He said he has a list of the code's and work for each time, and all appear to be different, but where do you draw the line? He's made an appointment to see his solicitor to see what he think's, but also was saying he had thought about getting an independent inspection done.

Seen as all the problems look to be electrical I'm wondering if something got fried with the leak before it was detected, he said the technician told him that the srs was related to the drivers side curtain airbag, so possibly the dot's can be joined to point to it originating from that

Henry Ford III

I'd put a catalog of the faults and failed fixes together with supporting documents in writing and submit it to the dealer and state that if another similar orcrelated fault happens again I'd reject the car and want a refund or replacement.

5500

Final update on this one as it may help someone else down the line. My neighbour ended up going to his solicitor, the solicitor organised for an assessor to check the car over, and they were of the opinion that it should have been replaced already at that stage with the problems still persisting and no permanent fix.

The solicitor put the assessors report to the dealer requesting a replacement or see you in court and lo and behold they agreed, they picked up their new car over the weekend. It worked out in their favour that the dealer dragged their feet as they ended up getting a 181 so should save them a bit on depreciation for the chasing they had to do.

One other point to note though, an additional leak in the boot came about after the assessor had checked it over. They told the dealer but they weren't too concerned and said the car would be going back to Kia, either way's I think they are both glad to see the back of it.

mickdw

Excellent result.

DaveyDave

To be fair it's not like something being unfixable is a new thing. No matter how hard you try and despite being brand new there's some things out there you just can't fix.

Same happened to me with a brand new laptop I picked up for the GF. I was setting it up and it just wasn't working right. Despite maybe 6 hours of extensive testing and trouble shooting I couldn't fix it. The components weren't necessarily showing any faults either so it looked fine, it just didn't work. It was fortunately returned.

Good to hear it got sorted anyway, hopefully that's the last of the hassle for them!

Good to hear OP, well done neighbour and thank you for closing the loop with update.

elperello

Thanks for the update, good result.

Just one more thing......
What's going to happen to the 171 lemon?

endacl

elperello wrote: »

Thanks for the update, good result.

Just one more thing......
What's going to happen to the 171 lemon?

181 lemonade?

liam7831

Didn't realise Kia were such a heap of junk

exaisle

liam7831 wrote: »

Didn't realise Kia were such a heap of junk

It wouldn't fill me with confidence about Kias, but it would about their dealers.

liam7831

LIGHTNING wrote:

ah yes judge an entire brand because of one owners feedback

Are you saying the story is lies ?

Brian Scan

liam7831 wrote: »

Are you saying the story is lies ?

Is he not saying that one bad example of a car doesn't mean that the whole brand is sub-standard?

punisher5112

liam7831 wrote: »

Are you saying the story is lies ?

It's like for example I've had many a Skoda no issue but my neighbour had one and broke his heart.....

elperello

endacl wrote: »

181 lemonade?

Good one!
But seriously does anyone know what happens to dud cars?
Do they sell them cheap to staff or clean them up and sell them on to some unsuspecting civilian?

rex-x

elperello wrote: »

Good one!
But seriously does anyone know what happens to dud cars?
Do they sell them cheap to staff or clean them up and sell them on to some unsuspecting civilian?

It will be for sale on the forecourt no doubt

delly

An unlucky experience for the OP's neighbour, but glad they got a result in the end.

Just to give some balance back to the Kia brand, I had a 141 Cee'd from new and traded it for the exact same model as a 171. 125k on the clock when trading it in and it had 45% depreciation based on the numbers. I think it goes without saying that I wouldn't have gone for the same car if I had not thought it was a good one.

I work in IT and have had systems last 15 years and been unlucky to have new components fail in a matter of days. I wouldn't judge a brand based on one failure, but if a pattern builds then you can discount it.

vintagecosmos

friend of mine had 115k S Class Mercedes electronics failure not long after buying. Same car had a transmission failure not long after that. Lemons exist everywhere.

Henry Ford III

delly wrote: »

An unlucky experience for the OP's neighbour, but glad they got a result in the end.

Just to give some balance back to the Kia brand, I had a 141 Cee'd from new and traded it for the exact same model as a 171. 125k on the clock when trading it in and it had 45% depreciation based on the numbers. I think it goes without saying that I wouldn't have gone for the same car if I had not thought it was a good one.

I work in IT and have had systems last 15 years and been unlucky to have new components fail in a matter of days. I wouldn't judge a brand based on one failure, but if a pattern builds then you can discount it.

Is the 45% overstated on account of the loss of a straight deal discount because you're trading in?

5500

I don't think he was tarring the brand himself either, he liked the car, and just wanted what you'd expect with a brand new one otherwise he probably would have pushed for a refund and looked at a different manufacturer.

I think it's also worth noting the experience you have with the dealer throughout any problems that come up aswell, he said he felt they were fair in the end and it wouldn't put him off returning there again, so probably still a win win as they'll recoup any loss in future from him on a trade in.

Personally we had a colt from new in the family many moons ago that was riddled witg issues, it got dragged on for over a year and the dealer experience was terrible. Whilst I wouldnt tar the whole brand, I'd tar the dealer instead and still do to this day. Ironically they are a Kia dealer now and it was one of the first places I told the neighbour to avoid when they were originally purchasing!

knipex

Toyotafanboi wrote: »

"Vehicle from low tier manufacturer "

Ohhhhhhhhhhhhhhh..

delly

Henry Ford III wrote: »

Is the 45% overstated on account of the loss of a straight deal discount because you're trading in?

That's based on the first purchase price discount. List price was €25k, paid €22k. Trade in with above average mileage was €12.5k on paper, against the same list price of €25k undiscounted second time around.

Kat1170

Friday evening - Monday morning cars have been around since cars were invented. Both high and low tier.