Friday, Jun 03, 2016 at 09:51
Yes, what comes out of the Nissan court cases, as regards major defects and the resulting warranty claims, is precisely the same corporate stance every time - as I mentioned in the other thread.
1. The standard tired old line - "You're the only one having this problem! Every other vehicle we've ever sold is just fine!"
Then when you do a little research, you can find dozens of others suffering similar problems.
Getting the other owners of those other failures to either come forward, or supply details, adds serious weight to your case.
It's interesting to note that copies of discussions from websites where other owners complained about and detailed their problems, were allowed as court evidence.
2. The standard tired old line - "The damage has been caused by the owner/operator. It wasn't a manufacturing/assembly defect".
This one's a classic, and often difficult to prove.
You can prove you weren't at fault by providing evidence of proper servicing, evidence of your vehicle use being within acceptable limits - and by being completely honest with your evidence-giving.
Then you need to provide as much evidence as possible from other qualified people as to the precise cause of the failure. This is where the independent engineers assessment is crucial.
3. The standard tired old line - "The vehicle is out of warranty, we have no obligation whatsoever to supply anything".
This is a complete furphy, as Consumer Law has already proven via many court cases, that defective manufacturing or assembly is still covered, beyond the statutory warranty period, if the item fails long before what would normally be expected, as a proper or normal life span of the item.
4. The standard tired old line - "The evidence of other failures supplied by the complainant, refers to products that are obsolete, not sold in this country, or have different specifications - so the evidence is not relevant."
Nissan have a problem with their QC - that much is evident. If Nissan have holes in their QC programmes, faulty items such as porous engine blocks, and porous cylinder heads, slip through.
The chief engineer of Nissan admitted that Nissan has had QC problems with the previous Navara - this was in the new Navara ute review, that I linked to.
With this evidence, you then have a court-admissable evidence claim, that the company has a record of regular QC failures - admitted by the Nissan chief engineer himself.
QC failures are common within companies - but they will always refuse to officially admit it.
To do so, would produce an avalanche of warranty claims, that they can otherwise
bluff, bluster, and lie their way out of, on a regular basis.
The corporate culture is to lie constantly to protect the corporations profits, and to protect the "good name and image" of the corporation.
Customers are at the bottom of the list when it comes to admitting corporate fault, and supplying compensation accordingly.
These lying corporations need to be exposed and taken to task over their attitude that the customer is always wrong.
Unfortunately, as with so many unjust things in this world, you need to fight, have a strong determination that you are in the right, and have patience and persistence, to ensure that you win against their constant rejection of just and rightful claims.
Cheers, Ron.
FollowupID:
870253