Demanding a replacement car or refund

[d_train]

A precedence perhaps - was posted on another forum:

Peacock v ACM Liverpool Pty Ltd, Volkswagen Group Aust (Motor Vehicle) [2012] NSWCTTT 447 (1 November 2012)

BTW, depending on the situation, you can get a refund on a car. I personally did with a MK5 Golf that I had bought second hand, which the dealer couldn't resolve a CEL issue during the statutory 3 month warranty period. In short, I got my money back including pro rated on road costs. I did have to raise a case with Fair Trading but did not have to go through tribunal.

Key thing is being transparent about everything, all comms, paperwork. A bit of overhead, but if you want to be taken seriously, you need to be able to back yourself up 100%. And from a dealer perspective, they need to be given a reasonable chance of looking after you and the car. This is a tough pill to swallow sometimes, but you need to provide them with the opportunity.

[gavs]

If they don't play ball, try here...

Contact Us - Today Tonight - Yahoo!7 News

I think you will find A LOT of disgruntled Polo GTI owners out there that will back you up.... I'm one of them.

[prcurrie]

Me too! Love a bit of Today Tonight action

I tested the waters with VW and enacting my rights under the Australian Consumer Law. Basically they told me that my problems were not 'major' (a faulty DSG which is replaced is not a major problem).

I took it with a grain of salt and it just proves that they aren't willing to help.....

[ill0gitech]

From the one side of the story that is constantly plastered on VAG Australia's Facebook, there was a woman in an EOS with a leaking windscreen, that flooded her dash, electronics, and rest of the car that was also not deemed "major".

I take that story with a grain of salt given some of her statements though

[Hail22]

If they don't play ball, try here...

Contact Us - Today Tonight - Yahoo!7 News

I think you will find A LOT of disgruntled Polo GTI owners out there that will back you up.... I'm one of them.

Very effective and would ding VWAG's PR pretty bloody hard.

[brad]

Good luck getting a new car out of it. Rarely happens.

But it does happen

All of these problems can be fixed.

Yes but if the dealer / distributor is given sufficient opportunity to fix the problem & is unable to then the consumer can seek redress.

Oil consumption can be rectified by known repairs to the engine. Oil in spark plug tube (from topping up oil?), and subsequent coil failure seem to be related.

See above. If the dealer isn't capable of carrying out the repair instructions then the owner can seek redress.

Window tinting is not a Volkswagen problem if it's aftermarket tint. Which it would be, if the car hasn't got tint in the glass itself.

If the consumer paid the money to the dealer then the dealer is the selling agent & responsible for the warranty of the aftermarket tint. If the dealer or their sub-contractor thought that the vehicle wasn't suitable for tinting additional to the factory tint then they shouldn't have accepted the contract from the purchaser to carry out the work.

Doors creaking can be fixed with known remedies (Correct lubrication of door seals, and locking mechanisms, etc).

See above. The dealer appears to have been given the opportunity to resolve the issue & has not done so. Providing a temporary fix such as baby powder or silicone spray on the rubbers that has to be re-applied on a frequent & regular basis is not a fix.

Exhaust soot is common. Not sure what the solution is there. As fair as I'm concerned, all cars get it to varying degrees.

Just because it's common doesn't make it right.

To the OP: I would suggest you have a good read of the ACCC website & contact them. Also the NSW Office of Fair Trading.

A mate of mine just had his Volvo replaced & when the replacement proved to be faulty they refunded his money. It does happen.

[Transporter]

I see only 1 or 2 real problems there, the others are just the creaking and some noises, then the window tint, IMO, it's not a reason to get the refund or the car replacement, giving that he has the car for less than 6 months. Yes I know the OP was waiting the 18 months for it but it is not related/it's irelevant and bringing it up when complaining just showing that there are a lot of emotions involved, which will not help to push the case.

Some people have much bigger problems and they didn't get the refund. But, sure he can try, you never know.

[Zakarados]

Just an Update:

NRMA came and towed car to VW. I wrote out the list of issues and left it inside the Polo.

My cousin who works for the dealership is now talking to the service manager and see what can be done for us. We were offered a loan car as the car will be in for an extended period. Unfortunately they offered the loan car after the tow truck left, which sucks as I have no easy way to get to the service center.

I will find out what the service manager will offer us later this week after examination of the issues. I am hoping for an engine rebuild at the very least and not some lame band-aid fix and the car coming back within days.

The bigger the list of repairs, the better the chances for a replacement/refund.

[anthony]

VW wont even be interested,in my dealings with them ,I found head office to be arrigant and threatening...

[gavs]

Demanding a replacement car or refund

I agree. VGA are deplorable when it comes to customer service.

If VGA and it representative dealerships have been given an opportunity to fix the car and have failed on multiple occasions then there is a fair chance that the OP would actually win this dispute. Zakarados, I also recommend getting an independent report done, specifically looking at the emissions out of the car.

IN FACT ALL owners of GTI polos with oil consumption issues should get this done because after Mr Peacocks court hearing report was posted, I did a bit of digging and there is a fair chance that this is further grounds to reject the vehicle and claim a refund/replacement because it does not comply with road worthiness laws, EPA laws and is not "as described by the retailer" because it is not Euro V compliant, as advertised.

[Lemonskin]

I agree. VGA are deplorable when it comes to customer service.

If VGA and it representative dealerships have been given an opportunity to fix the car and have failed on multiple occasions then there is a fair chance that the OP would actually win this dispute. Zakarados, I also recommend getting an independent report done, specifically looking at the emissions out of the car.

IN FACT ALL owners of GTI polos with oil consumption issues should get this done because after Mr Peacocks court hearing report was posted, I did a bit of digging and there is a fair chance that this is further grounds to reject the vehicle and claim a refund/replacement because it does not comply with road worthiness laws, EPA laws and is not "as described by the retailer" because it is not Euro V compliant, as advertised.

I hope Steve sees this! I've been on two cruises with him and he had to top up both times!

[Zakarados]

Update:

Just got in contact with VW service, and they advised the spark plug had failed AGAIN, they replaced it, and it working as normal.

How on earth can 3 spark plugs fail in the SAME cylinder within one month.There is obviously an underlying issue, that they are not looking into.

I am getting in contact with their customer service division now.

[fastlane]

Update:

Just got in contact with VW service, and they advised the spark plug had failed AGAIN, they replaced it, and it working as normal.

How on earth can 3 spark plugs fail in the SAME cylinder within one month.There is obviously an underlying issue, that they are not looking into.

I am getting in contact with their customer service division now.

Jesus, ask to have the plugs back. Oil contamination?!

[Transporter]

Jesus, ask to have the plugs back. Oil contamination?!

They don't have to give the faulty part back, it's covered by the warranty, the customer didn't pay for it.

[Melon Head]

IN FACT ALL owners of GTI polos with oil consumption issues should get this done because after Mr Peacocks court hearing report was posted, I did a bit of digging and there is a fair chance that this is further grounds to reject the vehicle and claim a refund/replacement because it does not comply with road worthiness laws, EPA laws and is not "as described by the retailer" because it is not Euro V compliant, as advertised.

This is exactly what I have been saying for quite a while.
There are a lot of people complaining but very few are doing anything constructive.
Get 10 people together with independant reports and then go straight to the media.
These arrogant arseholes need to be taught a lesson.