After the work was done the Jack seemed to be more responsive...
After some close inspection of the work however some faults were found. I've posted the ensuing emails in the public interest. The first one was actually the last sent...
ACT Fair Trading.
Attn: Motor vehicle complaints section
Dear Sir/Madam
I have just had my car repaired because of a factory recall.
At the time of picking up my vehicle I was advised, in writing, that a part, the air intake duct needed replacing because it was "is all bent". There were other problems that I did not discover until I got home & have subsequently rectified. This was tightening of the retaining clamp for the Air duct and finding a rubber grommet that had also not been replaced.
I sent an email to the dealership and received a response by phone that was totally unproductive, rather than "bring the vehicle back & we will fix the problems" I got a long list of excuses and somehow the problem was due to poor service procedures in the past.
I got really annoyed and told the man, Tony that I was getting really upset & annoyed at the way he was handling the matter & said good bye.
After I cooled down a bit (I'm a veteran with PTSD & my temper tends to flair when involved in this type of conflict) I sent another email and apologised for my rudeness & told him I would bring the car up for him to look at.
At 1:00pm I took the car to the dealer & Tony & the workshop foreman looked at it & said it was a
well documented problem that the Air duct is "blown off the Turbo intake under some boost conditions" & that it is also
well documented that the stud that holds the air intake also breaks off. Now I do know a little about these cars, in fact I have an email from Holden saying that because of my qualifications I can service the vehicle without loosing warranty & I know enough to say that if air is blown out the intake of a turbo charger I'm in more strife than needing a new duct. They agreed that it was sloppy workmanship to leave the retaining clamp loose & agreed to replace the missing grommet on the Air intake duct.
To cut a very long story short, I feel that the practise of telling someone that a part needs replacing when it is perfectly serviceable is to say the least dodgy, if in fact not fraudulent. Had I not been diligent and had a look myself I would have just paid for the part and the labour when in fact it is not necessary. I am really sick & tired of people pulling stunts like this, as if the costs of owning a car are not high enough without people having to resort to this sort of thing. When I asked why the part needed replacing I was told it was up to me whether I replaced it or not they were only telling me it was faulty...They argued that the Air intake duct was indeed "bent and distorted". I had an independent mechanic that serviced the car in the past had a look at it and confirmed my suspicions that it is not faulty.
I'm not really happy with the result but I guess there is little I can do but I would like my complaint put on record because otherwise the whole affair gets put under the carpet & next time they pick a less diligent motorist to get a few extra dollars out of.
Below are copies of my emails, they refuse to answer my questions in writing. The problems are really trivial & would take no more than 30 mins to fix, but there is a principal here isn't there?
Sincerely
xxxxxxxxxxxxx
----- Original Message -----
From: xxxxxxxxxxxxx
To: cmotors@commotors.com.au
Sent: Thursday, July 27, 2006 2:59 PM
Subject: Holden Jackeroo 4XJ1 Injector recall
Hi,
Today I picked up my Jackeroo, VIN JACUBS73G27103663, after being worked on re the recall.
I was advised that the Air Intake would need replacing as it was "is all bent". Having spoken to the person who has serviced the vehicle he assures me that & no time did he ever need, or have occasion to remove, the Air Intake at previous
services. I have at no time ever had the need to remove it either. There is evidence of fresh minor damage to the intercooler which suggest that the damage was done during the recall. I have also had to tighten the clip which holds the Air Intake onto the Turbo housing as this was loose.
I don't believe that there is any distortion to the Air Intake & I don't believe that I should have to cover the replacement at my own expense. I also have in my possession the rubber grommet that was torn & jammed into the retaining fitting. if I buy a new part & compare it to the part on the vehicle and there is no distortion what would that prove?
I have attached a picture showing the alleged distortion and the damage to the intercooler.
Your suggestions please.
sincerely
xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Good morning,
Many thanks for your phone call this morning, I am sorry if I was rude. I do feel however that your reasoning and excuses for the problem with my car were both ineffectual & I found them actually offensive.
The Valve clearances were checked at the 80,000 km service, that was over 12 months ago.
I will bring the vehicle to you this afternoon at around 1:00pm you may inspect it then. Your answers in our phone conversation this morning did not resolve the following problems & an explanation will at some time be required.
After I picked up the car the following were found to be points of concern:
1 The clip securing the air intake to the turbo intake was very loose & could not possibly have undone itself on the drive home.
2. The rubber grommet that secures the air intake under the intercooler was found loose down at the front of the cover with the recall stickers on it, there would be some doubt that this would have remained there for over 20,000km. Also it would only have been able to have been taken off, it can't obviously come off accidentally as one side of it is intact.
3 There is, as I said to you, fresh damage to the intercooler where it is obvious that someone has been trying to reaffix the air intake with the intercooler in situ, this damage also could not have occurred over 20,000km ago as there is no oxidisation of the aluminium.
4 I have been advised to replace a part, the air intake duct, which in fact does not need replacing.
Should you choose after you have inspected the vehicle to not do the job correctly then I will have no choice to take the matter further, via the resources of the NRMA, The Office of Fair Trading and of course publicity via the numerous sites on the internet.
Many thanks
xxxxxxxxxxxxxx