[ScottyDug]

Hi there, 1st post so be kind! Looking for advice/opinions.

I've had my 147 TS for about 6 months. It's a 53 plate and just done 49k.
Bought 2nd from a garage (not a dealer) and the timing belt has just snapped.

At the time I took out a warranty from a third party and it states they'll pay out if the belt changes were made at the correct intervals. I know the belt was checked at 36k but not replaced, I have no other paperwork.

What are the chances of the warranty crowd paying for it getting repaired? I've read that Alfa changed the change interval to 36k a couple of years ago.

 

[Nev]

Doubtful. It should have been changed at 36K so there is their get-out right there.

 

[ScottyDug]

I'm kind of expecting that, there is a slim chance that it was changed and I just don;t have paperwork for it. The service book is still in the car at the garage.

 

[davealfa11]

doesnt service book state that is an check/inspect at 36k

 

[divadiva]

A petrol engine Alfa should have been done at 36k. If you say the timing belt was checked at this time then the paperwork would surely be there if it had been replaced.

 

[ScottyDug]

I think it was checked (but not replaced) at 36k but that was before they changed the intervals from 72k down to 36k -that make sense?

 

[davealfa11]

A petrol engine Alfa should have been done at 36k. If you say the timing belt was checked at this time then the paperwork would surely be there if it had been replaced.

alfa changed intervals but was originally 36k
Alfa Romeo Servicing
was it main dealer that did this service inspect on belt,worth a try for recompense

 

[davealfa11]

I think it was checked (but not replaced) at 36k but that was before they changed the intervals from 72k down to 36k -that make sense?

its worth atry to get alfa to cough if thats the case is it in an alfa garage at moment?

 

[Mitch916]

It's 36K or 3 years, it was 72K or 5 years, either way it should have been changed by now and hasn't. Can't see the warrenty paying out.

 

[tlracing]

What was the mileage on the car when you bought it?

I would be inclined to ask the warranty company to pay on the basis that:

1) At the time you bought the vehicle the manufacturer's interval for belt change was 36k miles
2) The mileage at the time of purchase was XXk miles (fill in the blanks, as per the question above)
3) The selling garage has an obligation under the Sale of Goods Act 1979 to ensure the car was fit for purpose

You can argue that they - as the seller - should have ensured the necessary work had been carried out and clearly hadn't done so.

There is a limit on the time period, which is 6 months, during which they have to rectify the faults. Outside that time they are not obliged to act, so you may find they will refuse or may make a 'part payment' offer.

They may also suggest that you should have checked the paperwork when you bought it, to assure yourself all necessary work had been done. However, you appear to have relied on their information in good faith, so that isn't a strong defence.

Be prepared for a bit of a fight, but good luck and keep going!

 

[Mitch916]

^^^ your points are valid, but only against the supplying garage, not the warrenty company. You may well have a case that the garage should pay though.

 

[ScottyDug]

Trust me, trying to get a claim from the garage I bought it would be a pointless exercise. I had enough hassle just after I bought it when the battery kept draining (there was a short from the stereo).

Anyway, I'm going to contact the 1 and only previous owner to see if they replaced the belt at any point. Failing that I'm up the proverbial creek sans paddle.

Anyone want to buy a kidney?

 

[tlracing]

^^^ your points are valid, but only against the supplying garage, not the warrenty company. You may well have a case that the garage should pay though.

I read it as the warranty was a third-party warranty that was associated with ScottyDug's purchase of the car, ie. a non-manufacturer warranty as it wasn't a franchised dealer.

In that case, surely the warranty is designed to cover any claim arising, providing it can be shown the garage failed to provide a 'satisfactory' item, ie. the car.

ScottyDug - can you give any more detail on the warranty that could help here?

Also, you could have the car inspected by a suitable engineer and sue the garage if the report indicates the cambelt snapping was a result of their failure to ensure it was sound in accordance with the manufacturer's extant advice, ie. mileage/age.

 

[ScottT1974]

Anyone want to buy a kidney?

Kidney transplant for an engine transplant. I can see a TV programme emerging from this!

 

[kevjtd]

...

 

[kevjtd]

I've had my 147 TS for about 6 months. It's a 53 plate and just done 49k.

What was the mileage on the car when you bought it?

I would be inclined to ask the warranty company to pay on the basis that:

1) At the time you bought the vehicle the manufacturer's interval for belt change was 36k miles

when he bought the car the interval had been changed to the 36k/3 years change not check , can that help in a claim

 

[tlracing]

when he bought the car the interval had been changed to the 36k/3 years change not check , can that help in a claim

I believe it may, yes.

The seller is a garage, which would suggest they know (or should know) about the vehicles they sell - it's their job, after all. Thus they should have been aware the interval was 36k, not, 72k, and ensured that the cambelt was changed, not simply checked.

In this case, they sold a car that hadn't had the cambelt changed at the manufacturer's designated interval. Their specialist business is to know about cars, so they should have ensured that this had been done and, as such, that the vehicle was of satisfactory quality and fit for the purpose for which was sold (ie. driving).

According to the Sale of Goods Act 1979, where an item is sold there is an obligation upon the seller to ensure that it is in the condition described above. Any faults that arise in the first six months are considered legally to have been present at the time of sale and, thus, that the seller is liable for them. As such they are required to rectify the faults.

 

[seymour beaver]

Unless a garage says it has a full service history in accordance with main dealer service intervals i would be suprised if the seller is liable.They only have to say we have just done a pre delivery service but not the cambelt and it would be a difficult issue to prove in the small claims court.

 

[tlracing]

I agree it wouldn't be easy, not least as the car was bought around 6 months ago so is at the limit of seller liability.

Nevertheless, I believe there is an issue of the garage not ensuring the belt was within its specified life. As before, they are required to ensure the vehicle is fit for the purpose and, by not making sure it had been changed, that requirement was not fulfilled.

Whether this would then be covered by the warranty or whether ultimate financial responsibility remains with the garage is only something that can be determined by the terms of that document.

It is surely worth exploring and, if events require, taking the matter to the Small Claims Court. If there is a partial offer of redress, that would seem fair.

 

[scot360]

horse and stable door come to mind ,

its a shame you did not look on this site when you were looking at the car ie. just before you bought it.

your car is well over the old maximum time of 5 years , never mind the revised 3 year maximum.

sorry to say but OWNERS like you give alfa`s a bad name.