2007 Citroen relay problem

[Derek Uzzell]

I’ve deleted the last few posts at Mark’s request - Derek Uzzell

[Mark Wilkes]

Thank you Derek.

[Brian Kirby]

Mark

 

You have a PM.

[Brian Kirby]

As a rider to the above I asked a friend with extensive knowledge of the mechanicals of these vans to give me his reaction to Marks problem. His reply is as follows.

 

"I think that the RAC report is a good idea to add weight to a legal case and to hopefully find out once and for all, what is actually the problem!

 

It is difficult to diagnose these things without actually hearing and seeing them, but once the brakes have been ruled out and the driveshafts have been rotated; with particular attention to the hanger and bearing on the driver's side shaft; I would have assumed that the wheel bearing is the culprit.

 

The cartridge bearings used nowadays are not so likely to show movement by pulling and pushing on the wheel as was the method of diagnosis in the past. Replacing the bearing requires the stub axle (or hub) to be removed and the old bearing pressed out.

 

This can require 50 tons or more of pressure and sometimes they have to be cut out. It is not a job for the faint of heart or inexperienced.

 

If the steering wheel is not being turned, none of the suspension components will be capable of producing a grinding noise. The fact that these parts have allegedly been changed is alarming.

 

Finally, I would add that IF there had been a problem with a suspension strut, top mount or bearing; I would not automatically replace the same components on the other side. These parts are big, tough and heavy duty. The early failures that do occur are due to the nearside wheel being bounced up kerbs, driven through pot-holes and excessive quantities of dirt. They will always fail before the off-side parts."

 

FWIW, after having looked at the premises of the firm concerned via Google earth and Street View, I don't think there is a cat in hell's chance that the firm concerned has a 50 tonne press at their disposal, and am somewhat dubious that they will even have a vehicle lift of suitable capacity to accommodate a Relay van.

 

This is pure speculation, but I'm drawn, from what I can see, to the view that this is in large part where the problem lies. They haven't the resources necessary to conduct a comprehensive investigation, or the equipment (in common with many garages) to replace a friction fit wheel bearing if that is what has failed. But, as said, that is speculation.

[John52]

Brian Kirby

I would have assumed that the wheel bearing is the culprit.

 

The cartridge bearings used nowadays are not so likely to show movement by pulling and pushing on the wheel as was the method of diagnosis in the past. Replacing the bearing requires the stub axle (or hub) to be removed and the old bearing pressed out.

 

This can require 50 tons or more of pressure ...

 

Thats exactly what I found so took the hub to a garage to have the old bearing pressed out and the new one pressed in. Usually a 5 minute job with a press, and no doubt there will be a few in Bolton.

Apparently the job can be done with a big hammer, but I wouldn't want to risk damaging the bearing and it failing again.

 

I'm wondering if the garage has assumed the bearing is OK because there is no discernable play in it. Like there was when the old type bearings became noisy.

[Mark Wilkes]

The saga continues as we have contacted C.A.B and sent the garage a letter saying that we want all of our money back due to the sale of goods act 2005. Its now 2 weeks on and surprisingly they haven't replied so I am ringing C.A.B again tomorrow and seeing what the next move is. The van is now making such a noise when steering that my wife and I are scared to use it other than for necessary very local journeys.

[teflon2]

Mark Wilkes - 2021-11-21 10:34 AM

 

The saga continues as we have contacted C.A.B and sent the garage a letter saying that we want all of our money back due to the sale of goods act 2005. Its now 2 weeks on and surprisingly they haven't replied so I am ringing C.A.B again tomorrow and seeing what the next move is. The van is now making such a noise when steering that my wife and I are scared to use it other than for necessary very local journeys.

 

Mark check to see if the garage is a member of the motoring ombudsman organisation if they are the org. may well take up your complaint. It takes time but there is no cost to you.

[Mark Wilkes]

Hi teflon2. Thank you for the information but how do I check if they are a member. Thanks.

[Derek Uzzell]

There's a 'finder' application for "The Motor Ombudsman" here

 

https://www.themotorombudsman.org/garage-finder

 

Trustpilot reviews here

 

https://uk.trustpilot.com/review/www.themotorombudsman.org

 

 

[mikefitz]

Mark, sorry to hear that you are getting no response from the garage that may have carried out unnecessary work.

 

There may be a serious fault with your vehicle that is a danger to you and other road users.

 

You must go to another garage, one that carries out MOT inspections, and ask then to inspect the van and carry out a MOT test.

 

At the most a MOT costs £55 and many test centres charge even less. This will identify the cause of your noise and allow you to make the decision to have the repair carried out. It will also provide evidence that the previous work carried out may have been unnecessary.

 

Although it would be a positive result to be compensated by the garage I expect that this will not happen and you may have to accept the financial loss and move on. It will be almost impossible for you to prove that the parts changed already were not faulty and needed changing, ( even though there is a high probability they were OK).

 

Mike

 

 

[Mark Wilkes]

Hi Mike, we have spoken to C.A.B again and they have said send another letter saying that they have another week to respond and then we are to contact trading standards and the small claims court. We have sound recordings of the noise before and after the top joint and the suspension were changed and there is no difference in the recordings so we can prove that the work made no difference. We have also been advised that we need it to be independently looked at so we were going to get the R.A.C. to come and look. We are only doing local journeys as its our only transport and my wife needs her wheelchair when we are out but we would prefer not to use it if we could but we don't have that option.

[Brian Kirby]

Mark, don't know if the CAB have already advised this, but my instinct would be to first send the 7 day letter, then allow time for the reply (10 days?) and only then engage the RAC. When you get the RAC report send a copy to the garage (first taking advice from TS or CAB on the wording of this letter), inviting the garage (assuming the RAC verdict is clear) to review it's stance and reimburse your costs.

 

The point is that if this progresses to court you will benefit from having a paper trail that demonstrates reasonableness, fairness, and willingness on your part to allow the garage to make good your present losses. In short, that you have given them every chance to redeem themselves and have conducted yourself in exemplary fashion. The next stage would be a "letter before action", that will also need to be worded "just so".

 

But, at a point before you incur any legal costs, I'd also suggest having a look at the garage on the "Companies House" website, as my untutored impression is that they are a bit of a paper bag operation and may lack the resources to return your money. If you aren't an accountant, but know some one who is, it might be worth asking for a favour and getting them to give you an opinion on your chances.

 

If you haven't already done this, do check your insurances and RAC to see if any provide legal cover, and to what extent. If they do, it might be instructive to asking them to outline the extent of assistance that they offer and, while talking to them, to ask where you would stand if, when served that letter before action, the garage suddenly declare themselves bankrupt or cease trading. I'm not suggesting this is likely, but it seems a possible ploy to evade their liabilities. They are bound to have other creditors - all businesses have.

 

Finally, keep records, including dates, of all expenses you incur, even down to postage costs, because if you do have to sue, you are entitled to sue for all your losses including all those you incur in bringing your case against them.

 

Unfortunately, I think this will be liable to drag on, so if the RAC report is clear as to cause, and in view of your circumstances, it may well pay to get the fault remedied at a Citroen commercial garage and ask for any parts removed to be returned to you (for evidence). It will, or course, incur additional expense, but at least that will get your van back on the road and restore your, and your wife's, mobility. But take CAB/TS advice before doing this.

 

I wish you the best of luck, whatever you decide. Remember, always talk soft, but carry a big stick! :-)

[Mark Wilkes]

Thanks Brian, The latest on the garage is that we are going for a section 75 to claim the money back from them as we have been told from the R.A.C solicitors that we would have to say for the court costs even if we won the case. They didn't reply to the letters so we rang them and they said that there is nothing they can do as there is no chance of booking the van in again and then put the phone down on us. We have booked the van into another garage and hopefully they can fix it but we can't get it in till the 21St.

[Brian Kirby]

Hi mark. FWIW, I still think that RAC engineers report may be worth having, as unbiased evidence of what the current fault actually is. Getting the repair carried out by another (preferably Citroen) garage, will get a list of what was repaired/replaced, and you may even be able to get a bit of a report on what they found, and whether the work claimed to have been done, was actually done. But it won't carry the weight of an independent engineer's report.

 

The firm who failed to fix the problem will be likely to argue (if asked) that all the work they did was absolutely necessary, and that as a consequence of their work eliminating all the other problems, garage 2 could easily fix the problem as it was "the last man standing". I think only an engineers report can give the lie to that.

 

I suspect you'll still need sound evidence for a section 75 claim against your card company - otherwise it is more or less on your word and the circumstantial evidence that garage 1 tried three times and failed, and garage 2 succeeded. In effect, you are claiming against the card company in lieu of claiming against the garage, so I imagine the card company will require evidence that the garage is, actually, at fault, before assuming liability on their behalf. Maybe worth having another word with TS or CA? Good luck with whatever you decide.

[Mark Wilkes]

Hi Brian, thank you for your reply. We have dated recordings of the sound that we asked to be sorted both before and after the work that was done and there is no change in the sound. I understand about getting a written report but we can't do that as its catch 22, we could do with the report but we need the money to help pay for the work from the new garage and we can't claim the extra money back from the first garage according to the R.A.C legal team. I think we will get some of the money back according to what the credit card company have said but only time will tell.

[Mark Wilkes]

following on from this saga, we went down the route of claiming part of the money back from our credit card under section 75. We thought as long as we could get some of the money back then its better than nothing. However when the credit card company looked into it then it turns out that the garage have there payment system set up that its through another company and as this is the case then you can't claim back the money.I said to the person on the phone " so if I took a vehicle in to the garage with a puncture in the front wheel and they changed the back wheel then once I had paid then there is nothing I can do " and his answer was "that's the law we know its wrong but its the law". I couldn't believe it.

[John52]

Thanks for the updare Mark

Did you find out what the noise was?

[Mark Wilkes]

Hi John. We still don't know what the noise is and our new garage has said if the noise gets worse then take it to them so they can hear it. Other than that he said the van is safe to drive having checked everything he could.